RNC Rules Committee Passes "Ohio Plan"

I'll have more on this tomorrow, but know, for now, that the Republican National Committee's rules committee has passed the "Ohio Plan," which is the first step in changing the party's calendar for 2012.

The calendar revision process is just beginning, though. The full RNC, in August, will mark up the Ohio plan and amend it or reject it. They might pass it, in which case the rules committee of the convention gets to mark it up and then, if it passes a vote, it goes to the full RNC for a vote.

Despite the Ohio in the "Ohio Plan," big states don't like it. The plan would carve out exemptions for Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina. It would allow 15 additional states -- small states -- to hold contests in February... and then in March, there'd be a rotating series of big states.

Here's a PFD of the Ohio Plan.

Comments

So, this is sorta like the regional primaries idea, but using size as the determining factor? Better than the current situation, to be sure, though I think that the regional primary idea is better--in a region like the South, you're going to have smaller states that are conducive to retail politics, like Mississippi and South Carolina, as well as bigger states that are more conducive to wholesale politics, like Florida, all at the same time. A candidate that can play in both arenas--that can win the small, retail states while also winning big states with fundraising and ad buys--would be formidable, and I would think that both parties would want a process that generates candidates like that.

Posted by Lev | April 2, 2008 4:54 PM

I never understood--and no one has ever adequately been able to explain--why we don't just rotate the primaries every cycle. Or how we became historically entrenched in this cycle. Or how it makes sense at all.

"It's tradition" does not count as an argument, and don't get me started on those states who believe their voters are "more qualified" or "more representative" than others.

Posted by Also Geoff | April 2, 2008 5:03 PM

http://www.kxmb.com/News/224840.asp

Off topic, but Obama just landed another one...

Posted by ghost of zorro | April 2, 2008 5:33 PM

They call them "Rotating Pods"?

Posted by Josh E. | April 2, 2008 9:17 PM

These "Pods" are weird. Why do the Republicans want Nevada to go early? Didn't the Democrats just drag them along this time? Nevada won't caucus again, so we know NH will demand to go at least a week before both NV and SC... the calendar on this pdf doesn't work. There's no way to get Iowa and NH both to stay in February.

Posted by Byron | April 2, 2008 11:21 PM

Traditionally, the states set their own election calendars.

If the parties get on board with pushing the rotating primaries, each state will have to amend its election laws to accomodate it (the presidential primary is frequently, if not generally, held as a part of the state's regular primary process for many other offices).

Posted by km | April 4, 2008 10:57 AM