Arizona’s Presidential Caucus Race?

Pressure has been building since the 2004 cycle for more early contests to prevent two fairly unrepresentative states (NH and IA) from so over-determining the nomination process. Several ideas have been floated, including a Western ‘Super’ Primary, but what seems likely to actually occur is that the DNC may (they aren’t committed to action yet) add one or two caucuses between IA and NH, and one or two primaries between NH and the ‘window’ (the date when states other than NH and IA may begin their delegate selection process under party rules). States were invited to submit proposals for these potential slots and 10 states plus DC did so.

The DNC’s Rules and Bylaw’s Committee will soon be considering Arizona’s application [Download az2008proposal.pdf]

for an early Presidential caucus. The Committee will be teleconferencing on this topic on June 22 and meeting again formally on July 22-23. We will likely get a decision, or at least a narrowing of the field, at that time.

Arizona’s application is angling for one of the early caucus slots between the IA caucus and the NH primary. Our real competition for the possible two slots are Colorado, Nebraska, Nevada, West Virgina, and DC. Based on little other than deduction I would guess that Nebraska (too small and rural), and DC (not a state and too overwhelmingly Democratic to be representative), are unlikely to be selected. Colorado and Nevada seem to me to be the most direct competition as they are both much more similar to Arizona each other than WV. If there are to be two new caucuses, my guess is that one will go to WV (or possibly DC) and the other to a western state.

Of the three comparable states, I think Arizona stands a very good chance at being selected. It is the largest of the three by population. Nevada has a more concentrated population for ease of campaigning and caucusing, but Arizona comes a close second in that department. To my mind our sheer size advantage over Nevada narrows the contest pretty effectively to Arizona and Colorado

Arizona has a statewide Democratic leadership in Napolitano and Goddard. Unfortunately, while we have two excellent Democratic Congressional Representatives (and hopefully more soon), we are nowhere near controlling either chamber of the state legislature. In this respect, both Nevada and Colorado have us beat. While both states have Republican executive leadership, they both also have Democrats well-represented in their federal delegation (including a Senator in both states – one being Harry Reid, the Minority Leader). Moreover, in Nevada the Democrats control the Assembly, while in Colorado (in what was termed the Colorado Miracle) Democrats took control of both the state House and state Senate. In terms of the relative strength of the Democratic party, Colorado and Arizona again look like the strongest candidates, with Colorado possibly having an edge by dint of control of the state legislature, which is much harder to dislodge than an executive.

Demographically, as one might expect, the three states are fairly similar, the major difference being that Arizona has a much larger Native American population (the third largest in the nation). There are significant and growing Hispanic populations in all three states, so while this is an important factor, it can be eliminated for the purpose of comparing these states.

In terms of population, demographics and Democratic party development, I would bet that Nevada will be eliminated and the slot will go to either Arizona or Colorado. Due to its larger population, slightly better population concentrations, the size of the Native American contingent (who form swing populations is many western states), and our statewide Democratic executive leadership, I think there are sufficient reasons to prefer Arizona to Colorado. But there are, of course, many reasons to prefer Colorado, as well.

I hope the Committee thinks Arizona is the best choice. I’m really looking forward to participating in an early Presidential caucus.