EDITORIAL: Assembly’s primary bill bad for voters, challengers

Nevada already has a voter disengagement problem. Assembly Bill 302 would make it worse.

AB302, introduced last week, would establish presidential primary elections in Nevada starting in January 2016. Primaries are different from the caucus system currently used by Nevada’s political parties to declare support for presidential candidates. Caucuses require partisans to get together and determine delegates by voting in the open, often by a show of hands. Primaries are conducted via secret ballot — just like going to the polls on Election Day.

Rolling out the state’s voting machines and putting county election departments to work operating them isn’t cheap. So, to justify the cost of activating the state’s election machinery, AB302 would move Nevada’s biennial primary elections from June to coincide with the presidential primary.

In January. Yes, really.

Nothing says “Happy holidays!” like attack mailers mixed with Christmas cards, campaign signs decorated with lights, nasty TV ads during “Frosty the Snowman” and pollsters and robocalls constantly ringing home phone lines when family is visiting. Moving up primaries by five months — five months! — requires earlier candidate filing, too. Under AB302, candidates for partisan positions would file for office in October, and judicial candidates would file in August of odd-numbered years, about 15 months before the November general elections in even-numbered years.

Throw in Southern Nevada’s spring municipal ballots in odd-numbered years, and if AB302 becomes law, campaign season in Clark County will run all year, every year. Ho, ho, ho, indeed.

If we’ve learned anything from poor voter turnout in June primaries and dismal turnout in odd-year municipal elections, it’s that Southern Nevada’s electorate is engaged for just a short time every other year. And if voters aren’t paying attention, challengers to incumbents generally can’t expect to build the name recognition needed to mount viable campaigns. That’s why this newspaper has long advocated combining municipal elections with statewide ballots in even-numbered years.

Proponents of AB302 argue that attracting presidential hopefuls to Nevada for a first-in-the-West primary will energize voters. But that enthusiasm will come at the expense of every other candidate on the ballot. How can candidates for judgeships and the Legislature compete with national operations for public attention — during the holidays, no less?

AB302 aims to stage Nevada’s primaries on the Tuesday before the last Tuesday in January of even-numbered years, but that date could shift dramatically election to election. Every two years, states jockey to move their presidential primaries and caucuses to an earlier, more influential date in the nominating process. As such, AB302 allows Nevada to stage its primary election as early as Jan. 2 — when untold thousands of voters aren’t even in town. Yup, that will help turnout.

And what happens in midterm elections, when there is no presidential election and no presidential nominating process? Under AB302, Nevada’s primary would remain in January.

AB302, sponsored by Assembly Speaker John Hambrick, R-Las Vegas, and Assemblyman Stephen Silberkraus, R-Henderson, isn’t written for the benefit of voters. It’s written for the benefit of the major political parties and those already in office. It will spare the parties from the cost of holding caucuses, while discouraging primary challenges to incumbents. Who wants to knock on doors and campaign during the holidays?

AB302 is a lousy idea. Nevada’s presidential caucuses serve the state just fine. January primaries wouldn’t.