Under Biden’s Proposal, We’ll Have a Gerrymandered Presidential Primary

Under Biden’s Proposal, We’ll Have a Gerrymandered Presidential Primary

Under Biden’s Proposal, We’ll Have a Gerrymandered Presidential Primary

In a time when Democrats are losing Latino voters, Biden’s administration has come up with a plan that only diminishes their influence.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

As the Democratic Party wrestles with reforming the 2024 presidential primary schedule, President Biden is pushing a proposal that would put South Carolina, Nevada, New Hampshire, Michigan, and Georgia in the early contest window. Implementing this proposal faces challenges—in particular the need for Republican-controlled states like Georgia’s to go along with it, as well as the continued insistence by states like New Hampshire and Iowa that they go earlier regardless of what the party dictates.

Even assuming those hurdles can be overcome, the schedule put forward by the White House empirically and dramatically diminishes the influence of Latinos on the Democratic presidential nominating process. In doing so, this proposed gerrymander will give Republicans more fodder for convincing Latino voters that the Democratic Party is not a home for them. Given the erosion of Democratic Party support among the fastest-growing segment of the American population, that’s a problem.

The early-state portion of the Democratic nominating process has never been about accumulating the delegates needed to win the nomination. Providing smaller, less expensive states central focus in the early stages of the primary schedule ensures all the candidates—both front-runners and dark horses—can make their case to the various constituencies of the party before Super Tuesday and the bigger, more expensive, and more delegate-rich contests. In 2020, the delegates allocated collectively by the first four states equaled about 4 percent of the total delegates at the convention. Of those four states, only Nevada had a large Latino vote. Even so, Nevada’s delegates were about 25 percent of the delegates allocated in this early window.

Under the new proposal, more than twice as many delegates will be chosen in the early window period than in 2020—which not only erodes its purpose but also diminishes the role of Latino voters. Of the five states the president has proposed, Latino voters are still only heavily represented in Nevada. (The remaining four states have Latino populations of less than 10 percent. Because the Latino population is younger overall, the percentage of voting-age people is lower than other demographic groups.) Going from one contest in four to one in five means less focus on the aspirations and needs of the Latino community. In addition, with a larger delegate pool being chosen in the early window, Latinos will see their influence cut in half—from 25 percent of total delegates chosen in 2020 early window to only 12 percent in 2024.

Despite the president’s rhetoric, one group of people of color will see its influence in the Democratic nominating process diminished, not improved. This will be compounded by the fact that the contest in Nevada (and other smaller states) will suffer as more expensive early states—with far more delegates—consume candidates’ resources. In this new environment, the early state window becomes less about introducing the field of contenders to the voters and more about accumulating delegates. If, as proposed, Nevada gets scheduled the same day as New Hampshire, all these issues will be magnified, while the concerns of Latino families are pushed more and more to the back burner.

The future of the Democratic Party relies on bringing together a racially, regionally, and ideologically diverse coalition of voters. We do a disservice to our collective future when a critical constituency in that coalition—America’s Latino community—is disempowered in the choice of the party’s nominee.

Frankly, Latinos were better off under the 2020 schedule, which emphasized the importance of Nevada. Then, in places like Iowa, Senator Bernie Sanders organized heavily during the caucus to bring out Iowa’s Latino minority—a critical part of his winning popular vote coalition there.

For some, that’s a good reason to punish the Latino community, as this proposed plan does. For those of us who value Latino voices as well as their votes, it’s just plain wrong.

Support independent journalism that does not fall in line

Even before February 28, the reasons for Donald Trump’s imploding approval rating were abundantly clear: untrammeled corruption and personal enrichment to the tune of billions of dollars during an affordability crisis, a foreign policy guided only by his own derelict sense of morality, and the deployment of a murderous campaign of occupation, detention, and deportation on American streets. 

Now an undeclared, unauthorized, unpopular, and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iran has spread like wildfire through the region and into Europe. A new “forever war”—with an ever-increasing likelihood of American troops on the ground—may very well be upon us.  

As we’ve seen over and over, this administration uses lies, misdirection, and attempts to flood the zone to justify its abuses of power at home and abroad. Just as Trump, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth offer erratic and contradictory rationales for the attacks on Iran, the administration is also spreading the lie that the upcoming midterm elections are under threat from noncitizens on voter rolls. When these lies go unchecked, they become the basis for further authoritarian encroachment and war. 

In these dark times, independent journalism is uniquely able to uncover the falsehoods that threaten our republic—and civilians around the world—and shine a bright light on the truth. 

The Nation’s experienced team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers understands the scale of what we’re up against and the urgency with which we have to act. That’s why we’re publishing critical reporting and analysis of the war on Iran, ICE violence at home, new forms of voter suppression emerging in the courts, and much more. 

But this journalism is possible only with your support.

This March, The Nation needs to raise $50,000 to ensure that we have the resources for reporting and analysis that sets the record straight and empowers people of conscience to organize. Will you donate today?

Ad Policy
x