Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T13:42:03.650Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Incremental Approach to Presidential Nomination Reform

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 January 2009

William G. Mayer
William G. Mayer
Affiliation:
Northeastern University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In a book published four years ago, Andrew Busch and I divided proposals to reform the presidential nomination process into two categories, which we called comprehensive and incremental (see Mayer and Busch 2004, chapter 5). Like any attempt to classify a complex reality, this distinction blurs a bit at the edges, but the basic idea should be clear. Comprehensive proposals call for major, far-reaching changes in the basic operations of the presidential nomination process; incremental proposals make more limited, marginal changes in the rules, while retaining the fundamental structure of the existing system.

Type
Symposium
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 42 , Issue 1 , January 2009 , pp. 65 - 69
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ceaser, James W., and Busch, Andrew E.. 1997. Losing to Win: The 1996 Elections and American Politics. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Hagen, Michael G., and Mayer, William G.. 2000. “The Modern Politics of Presidential Selection: How Changing the Rules Really Did Change the Game.” In In Pursuit of the White House 2000: How We Choose Our Presidential Nominees, ed. Mayer, William G.. New York: Chatham House, 1–55.Google Scholar
Hallow, Ralph Z. 2008. “GOP Panel Rejects Proposal to Spread Out 2012 Primaries.” Washington Times, August 28, A12.Google Scholar
Mayer, William G., and Busch, Andrew E.. 2004. The Front-Loading Problem in Presidential Nominations. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Palmer, Niall A. 1997. The New Hampshire Primary and the American Electoral Process. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
USA Today. 2008. “For 2012, the Same Old Mess.” September 3, 14A.Google Scholar