PERSPECTIVE
The party's over; it
didn't pay off
by HOWARD M. BERLIN
4/11/2004
What if they held a party and
nobody came? Well, back on Feb. 3, just about nobody came. Of the nine
Democratic presidential candidates on the ballot, only three bothered to
personally show up to campaign. Furthermore, 85 percent, or approximately six
out of seven of the state's Democrats sat home or went elsewhere rather than to
the polls.
Party and election officials like to put on a positive spin on this
disappointment, pointing out this turnout was three times better than the sham
of 2000, when the Democratic presidential primary was a beauty contest and no
delegates were chosen. Back then, Democrats could only muster 5 percent
participation.
The state's Republicans held their primary three days later and, to their
credit, underwrote the costs of staging the event which produced committed
delegates.
OK, the participation rate among Democrats improved this year but it comes
nowhere near the 67 percent participation in New Hampshire.
 . |
News Journal file |
Election
Commissioner Frank Calio was optimistic, saying, "This is the first time
we've done this and it will only get better." For the 2000 primary, an
estimated $400,000 to $500,000 of taxpayer money was spent. I have seen no
mention of what the primary cost the state this year, but it is not
unreasonable to expect four years later the amount is higher
Last summer state employees were told there would be no salary increases.
Hiring freezes were implemented. Agency budgets were frozen or reduced. Yet in
a fiscal crisis, the Legislature mandated that the state pay for presidential
primaries. Last year Kansas, Colorado and Utah decided to cancel their
presidential primaries. Utah's Democrats decided to conduct one anyway and bear
the cost.
Of Delaware's 23 Democrat delegates at stake, eight are super
delegates—party muckity-mucks—leaving only 15 delegates up for grabs
by commoners. Nationally, Delaware has to struggle hard to register a blip and
is deep down in the noise with other states like North and South Dakota, and
Alaska.
Several possible causes are given for the dismal turnout. One was bad weather.
Well, February weather here is normally cold and inclement. New Hampshire's
weather is even more inhospitable but at least those in the Granite State have
learned how to deal with it.
Another excuse was the Delaware primary's second-tier status. Fair enough, but
the concentrated schedule of primary dates was the brainchild of Democratic
National Committee Chairman Terry McCauliffe. A few years ago, Delaware was
trying to position itself with legislation so that our primary would be close
enough to New Hampshire's without getting burned by the DNC. McCauliffe and
Company made Delaware share the stage with six other states, three of which had
more importance to candidates than puny Delaware.
Goes to show you
Now that the nine dwarfs have come and gone, what did the state get for its
effort? Nothing, other than the 2004 Delaware Primary would be known as Joe
Lieberman's Waterloo. The state's image didn't change one iota. Democrat
bigwigs such as U.S. Sen. Tom Carper, Lt. Gov. John Carney and State Treasurer
Jack Markell backed Lieberman, which shows how much their endorsements meant.
Were there any economic benefits to the state? With the money the state spent,
it was probably a loser. There was no real advertising on TV, nor were herds of
reporters or candidates filling hotel rooms. The Department of Elections ran
full-page ads in the News Journal for several days before the Feb. 3 election.
Except on primary day, national news organizations made virtually no mention of
Delaware.
The state Legislature originally intended to move the primary to the Saturday
after New Hampshire's, but ran into opposition from Delaware's Jewish
community, more than 85 percent of whom are Democrats. Saturday is the Jewish
Sabbath. Most of Delaware's Jews are not Sabbath observant so voting would not
be a problem, and observant Jews could cast absentee ballots.
However, the same problem came up in 2002 when the September state primary fell
not just on any Saturday but one of the holiest of Jewish holidays, Rosh
Hashanah.
Why aren't elections held on Sunday, as is done in Europe? No one can convince
me the reason we rule out Sunday elections is because of Christian church
services. Then why are there sporting events, movies, liquor sales and shopping
on Sunday? It's hypocrisy.
Bluntly stated, primaries should not be the responsibility of the state
government. Primaries are party affairs; how they choose their delegates is up
to them and should not be mandated by government. Voters who are not registered
with any particular party cannot vote in the primary and are intentionally
disenfranchised from the process.
South Carolina doesn't pay for either party's primary. Its Democrats decided to
hold one Feb. 3 and struggled to raise the estimated $500,000 to pay for it. If
Democrats, Republicans, Greens or any other party want to hold a primary, then
they should pay for it themselves. If they don't have the money, perhaps they
should disband that party or beg their respective national organization to help
fund it.
Delaware's presidential primary program is between the proverbial rock and a
hard place. It is positioned as close as anyone would dare to New Hampshire's
primary and stuck on a crowded primary day with six other states. Three of
these states, Arizona, Missouri and South Carolina, are the first primary
locales that can boast their voters represent a cross-section of the American
population with significant number of convention delegates on the line. Even
though Delaware touts its racial makeup as better than New Hampshire, which is
96 percent white, no one was listening.
The late comedian W.C. Fields probably had it right when he proclaimed,
"If at first you don't succeed, try again. Then quit. No use being a damn
fool about it." Delaware has tried twice and the only thing it had
succeeded at was spending taxpayer money.
Howard Berlin lives in Wilmington