Step 1: Tear down a bill floated by high school kids.
So Lloyd Memorial High School in Erlanger has two bills in the house this year; one mandates that schools offer information on voting, finding a polling place, etc to seniors (BRILLIANT, and OVERDUE come to mind). The other is a bill to change how Kentucky allocates electoral votes, from a winner-take-all system to a system that gives electoral votes in the same fashion they’re calculated: one for each congressional district, and two for the state.
The students, like me, are frustrated at the fact that candidates habitually ignore Kentucky in Presedential campaigns. That said, I think they’ve picked a horrible way to rectify the situation. Kentucky is a state that gets passed over because the primaries fall late (no reason to build up infrastructure, like in Iowa) and because it has a reputation as being overwhelmingly socially conservative. That said, it’s important to note that it’s been a long, long time since Kentucky hasn’t voted for the winner of the Presedential election– despite not mirroring the demographics or result of the national vote, Kentucky has managed to serve as a reliable bellwether since 1960, when we picked Nixon over JFK. We may not appear to be in play, but we are. Winning states like Kentucky might be easier for the current crop of Republican candidates (pushing the war, religion, self-determination), but it’s ESSENITAL for the Democrats.
So why is this bill, designed to draw candidates into the state, bad? Because it chooses to solve the problem by essentially creating six separate states. Some of which will NEVER be in play (looking at you, 4th district). This isn’t a solution, it’s change for the sake of change, and instead of an actual increase in the amount of campaign time and money spent here, we would have Wolf Blitzer mention Kentucky one more time than he normally does on election night–just like he does with Nebraska and Maine.
To beat a dead horse, imagine you’re the campaign manager for Democratic candidate X. You’re looking at a map of Kentucky, trying to decide if it’s worth going to under this new system. Because we’re in the era of polarizing national campaigns, districts 1, 2, 4, and 5 are going to go Republican, no matter what. The most you can hope for is to win the 3rd (Louisville) and 6th (Lexington), and win those by such a margin that the remaining electors–from the popular vote–go to you anyway. But that’s no mulligan, thanks to the population and demographic of the 4th district in Northern Kentucky, and even if you wanted to deal with it, you would have to GO TO Louisville and GO TO Lexington to make it happen. Campaigning in Kentucky, as hard as you can, for an electoral split.
Would you invest the resources there? Or would you turn Kentucky into a drive-by state, even more than it already is? Would you spend the money elsewhere and let the grassroots take over? The Gore and Kerry campaigns chose that approach, and that was under the old approach, where hitting the population centers would have been an acceptable tactic. Under this plan, that’s out the window. Obviously Kentucky does have an exposure problem, but the way to fix it isn’t to minimize our value as a bellwether–it’s to capitalize on it. Move the primaries.