Presidential Primary Calendar

Political parties pick their candidates through a screwy delegate system that includes proportional representation based on the number of party voters in a district, primary elections, and caucuses. But here's my proposal for an updated primary calendar simplified as if parties picked candidates the same way the Electoral College picks presidents. This model of "1/8-1, 1/4-1, 1/2-1, all" cumulative progression could be extended to the delegate system.

The goals I used were to break up the calendar so candidates could get to as many states to campaign in person as possible, to give small states a head start, but to not settle the races before all states got a chance to vote.

The last goal means that with 538 total electoral votes, 270 are needed to win a majority.

First start with small states in the Northeast and West to get to 51 electoral votes (about 1/8 of total votes).

Region	State	Electoral Votes
Northeast	Vermont	3
Northeast	Rhode Island	4
Northeast	New Hampshire	4
Northeast	Maine	4
Northeast	Delaware	3
Northeast	DC	3
Northeast	Connecticut	7
West	Wyoming	3
West	South Dakota	3
West	North Dakota	3
West	Montana	3
West	Idaho	4
West	Hawaii	4
West	Alaska	3
Total	14	51

Then go to more small states in the Midwest, South, and West to add 80 more votes to get to 131 total electoral votes (about 1/4 of total votes).

Region	State	Electoral Votes
Midwest	West Virginia	5
Midwest	Oklahoma	7
Midwest	Kentucky	8
Midwest	Kansas	6
Midwest	Iowa	7
South	South Carolina	8
South	Mississippi	6
South	Arkansas	6
West	Utah	5
West	Oregon	7
West	New Mexico	5
West	Nevada	5
West	Nebraska	5
Total	13	80

Then continue with mid-size states to add 136 more votes to get to 267 total electoral votes (just under 1/2 of total votes):

Region	State	Electoral Votes
Midwest	Wisconsin	10
Midwest	Tennessee	11
Midwest	Missouri	11
Midwest	Minnesota	10
Midwest	Indiana	11
Northeast	Massachusetts	12
Northeast	Maryland	10
South	Virginia	13
South	Louisiana	9
South	Alabama	9
West	Washington	11
West	Colorado	9
West	Arizona	10
Total	13	136

Then finish in one big bang to allocate the last 271 needed electoral votes and pick the winner:

Region	State	Electoral Votes
Midwest	Ohio	20
Midwest	Michigan	17
Midwest	Illinois	21
Northeast	Pennsylvania	21
Northeast	New York	31
Northeast	New Jersey	15
South	Texas	34
South	North Carolina	15
South	Georgia	15
South	Florida	27
West	California	55
Total	11	271

On Election Financing

Election finance "reform" attempts to reduce the influence of special interests on elections. I'm all for that, but I also recognize that water will seek its level. Money will find a way. In addition, artificially controlling donations to any political candidate, campaign, party or cause is a clear infringement on the right to unfettered political speech guaranteed by the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution. I reproduce that Amendment in full here.

Amendment I: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

My proposal for election financing includes no artificial, anti-market controls and employs full transparency to enable political market forces to control who gives how much to whom.

1. Only eligible human voters may donate to candidates for election, political parties, or campaigns that attempt to influence public policy.

2. Donations may be in any amount, and made as frequently or seldom as the donor may wish.

3. No non-human entities (corporations, etc.) may donate any amount to any candidates for election, political party, or campaign that attempts to influence public policy.

4. All donations, no matter how small or frequent, will be reported in a public forum, such as the Internet, as they are received.

Item 1 excludes donations from foreign sources, or those who have not attained full citizenship, or have had their civil rights revoked (for committing a felony, as an example.) However, I am open to the idea that any law-abiding resident of this country, not just citizen voters, could legally donate.

Item 2 eliminates the need to shuffle money to employees or family members to increase a donor's total giving potential.

Item 3 addresses concerns about undue influence by lobbyists. However, a CEO, board members, or other officers and employees would still be able to donate any amount, somewhat limiting the benefits of this restriction. I am open to removing this rule.

Item 4 is the key to accountability for this whole scheme. It's based on the expectation that a candidate or party will research the opposition's donors and donations, bringing potentially embarrassing contributions to light. For example, a populist candidate running on the "little guy" platform could embarrass an opponent who takes large contributions from wealthy donors. A party that emphasizes cultural values could point to a preponderance of donations by Hollywood producers and celebs to the opposing party or candidates.

Unlimited donation amounts and full transparency are the keys to creating a public market for political finance.

Resources

Here are some web sites that already use FEC or public disclosures to help voters see who's getting money from whom:

• Change Congress - Lawrence Lessig, a professor at Stanford Law School


• Fundrace - Look up who your neighbors are donating to, from the liberal Huffinton Post site


• Opensecrets - Center for Responsive Politics' site