Editorial: Western primary euphoria

Thursday, Nov. 19, 1998 | 11:47 a.m.

Supporters of a Rocky Mountain primary in the year 2000 have the best of intentions: getting presidential candidates to pay attention to the long-ignored needs of this region. Delegates from Nevada joined representatives from seven other states -- Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming -- at a two-day conference in Salt Lake City this week, agreeing to recommend to their state legislatures that they each hold their presidential primaries on March 11.

At first glance the proposal makes sense. The presidential nominating process usually is over by the time Western states hold their primaries or caucuses, so moving up the dates of the election will benefit the West. In addition, by having eight states hold their primary on the same day it would give them the kind of clout that states in the South receive from their Super Tuesday primary.

"We see this as having profound importance on the development of the West because it's a means by which the voice of the West can be heard," Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt, the driving force of the proposal, said. Despite the political community's excitement over the plan, residents in these states, especially Nevada, should temper their enthusiasm.

Proponents of the primary note that collectively they have more delegates than even California, the state with the most electoral votes. Yet what backers of a regional primary fail to note is that the Rocky Mountain states don't have monolithic policies on key issues. For instance, Nevada and Arizona have two major metropolitan areas that give those states a heightened interest in urban issues as opposed to the predominantly rural concerns of Idaho and Montana. Also, even on policies that affect each state equally, there can be serious disagreement. Getting water to meet the needs of the thriving Rocky Mountain region is arguably the most important issue, but there are passionate divisions among those states using Colorado River water on the fairest way to allocate this most precious resource.

In addition, unlike some of the other Rocky Mountain states, Nevada already gets quite a bit of attention from the presidential candidates. Nearly all of this is owed to the gaming industry making huge donations to presidential candidates and the national political parties, so candidates pay attention to the needs of this state's No. 1 industry. So how would a regional primary help Nevada, other than possibly diluting the influence it already has?

The 1999 Nevada Legislature should look skeptically on joining the regional primary, especially considering the estimated $1.4 billion price tag for Nevada to hold a special election. An extra million might not sound like much in a multibillion-dollar state budget. But with the 1999 Nevada Legislature facing the prospect of a belt-tightening budget because of a drop-off in tax revenues, that money could help keep alive decent programs that affect the everyday quality of life for Nevadans.