Fix this Cycle! Illinois's Too-Long Elections
No matter who they supported, most Americans could probably agree on one thing in the 2008 elections: they went on way too long. The huge surge in early voting reflected eagerness for change, but may also have been in part a referendum by a large, unpolled voting bloc that, exhausted, was way ready to get it over with. After nearly two years of rumors, fundraisers, debates, speeches, vetting, outing, leaks, attack ads, furors over non-issues from preachers to wardrobes, and the omnipresent red-blue electoral map, by mid-October even many of the most hardcore political junkies I know were secretly praying, "Please, make it stop."
If you agree that the 2008 marathon was too long, there was bad news: the next elections began almost immediately. Yes, that's right; almost simultaneous with the inaugurations, fundraising events sprouted up in January, 2009, and by August 2009, petitions began circulating for the 2010 primary.
"Wait," you ask, "how can that be? That's less than a year!" Exactly. The Illinois legislature, like other states, pushed back its already-early primary to the first week of February. The 2010 primary was on Groundhog Day, Feb. 2. This had two huge effects on the calendar. First, the general election became much longer -- 9 months. But, more damaging, the overall cycle was pushed back so much that fund-raising designed for one primary season began before the previous general election was even over.
This was no accident. In addition to being tiresome, extra-long elections are anti-democratic. The fact that Obama won in 2008 should not obscure this for fans of reform.
Long election cycles and early primaries were for years criticized in Illinois by good-government forces. A primary in blustery March, often just after St. Patrick's Day, was thought to depress turnout (except for those pumped up by Celtic pride), and put a premium on the ward operations that could get their patronage workers and "controlled" voters out in weather where ordinary voters would say "forget it" (and often did). A warm-weather and preferably weekend primary, argued reformers who'd studied voting in other states and countries, encourages greater civic participation. Apparently our legislature agreed, because no such proposal ever moved out of committee.
Finally, in 2007, our legislature changed the election calendar — by making it worse. Buying whole-hog into the war between the states for primary primacy, Illinois me-too moved its election date up, ostensibly to have more influence on the nomination and benefit Barack Obama. In so doing, Illinois did violence to a fundamental principle: that lawmaking should be for the long term, not the expedient, and for the many rather than the few (or the one). Changing the entire election machinery to benefit one man — even my man — was offensive. It also was a colossal flop: candidates largely wrote off our primary, the race was still a tossup months after Illinois, and late-voting jurisdictions such as Kentucky and Puerto Rico got a shot to be kingmakers.
Obama moved on to the White House, but Illinois went through 2010 with an election cycle even more wretched than what we suffered with for decades. For 2012, the primary has been moved back to March -- but we're no better off than we were for decades. Representatives inaugurated in January begin their year-long primary campaigns only 60 days later.
Long election cycles and early primaries were for years criticized in Illinois by good-government forces. A primary in blustery March, often just after St. Patrick's Day, was thought to depress turnout (except for those pumped up by Celtic pride), and put a premium on the ward operations that could get their patronage workers and "controlled" voters out in weather where ordinary voters would say "forget it" (and often did). A warm-weather and preferably weekend primary, argued reformers who'd studied voting in other states and countries, encourages greater civic participation. Apparently our legislature agreed, because no such proposal ever moved out of committee.
Finally, in 2007, our legislature changed the election calendar — by making it worse. Buying whole-hog into the war between the states for primary primacy, Illinois me-too moved its election date up, ostensibly to have more influence on the nomination and benefit Barack Obama. In so doing, Illinois did violence to a fundamental principle: that lawmaking should be for the long term, not the expedient, and for the many rather than the few (or the one). Changing the entire election machinery to benefit one man — even my man — was offensive. It also was a colossal flop: candidates largely wrote off our primary, the race was still a tossup months after Illinois, and late-voting jurisdictions such as Kentucky and Puerto Rico got a shot to be kingmakers.
Obama moved on to the White House, but Illinois went through 2010 with an election cycle even more wretched than what we suffered with for decades. For 2012, the primary has been moved back to March -- but we're no better off than we were for decades. Representatives inaugurated in January begin their year-long primary campaigns only 60 days later.
Long election cycles translate directly into extra-expensive campaigns, placing more of a premium on money, mailings, and media buys, and less on ideas and issues. Fundraising and campaigning, especially for those who face re-election every two years, is no longer seasonal, but perpetual. By definition this translates to less governing. It also tilts the process toward insiders and those whose obsession with elections the average voter would regard as pathological.
We need to fix the Illinois election cycle. This is one of many reforms some hoped to accomplish through a citizens' constitutional convention that was instead shouted down by politicians who claim change can happen through the existing system. The burden remains on self-styled do-gooders who opposed a con-con to pass some real election reform, starting with a move of the election from a bleak Tuesday in March to a weekend in the middle of May. That would give us all a well-deserved, less-wearying election in both the primary and general.
Adapted from an essay originally published on Gapers Block, Nov. 15, 2008
Back to Political Reform in Illinois
