A better primary plan.

Byline: The Register-Guard

While President Bush can meander to the Republican presidential nomination on his own terms next year, the multicandidate Democratic field faces a new - and much improved - primary election schedule.

In 2000, the primary schedule didn't make much sense. After the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary - the traditional openers of the presidential election season - there was a five-week gap before the next round of primaries. When that next round came, it featured a whopping 16 primaries on a single date. Although Al Gore had more or less sealed the Democratic nomination after Iowa and New Hampshire, while Bush was still battling John McCain on the Republican side, the schedule was a political mishmash. Trying to campaign in 16 states at once is impossible to begin with, so the schedule neither benefited the candidates nor the voters.

The 2004 schedule begins earlier - Iowa and New Hampshire will vote in January - and a dozen states will follow in February. While the process will begin excessively early, voters and candidates alike will benefit from a more spread-out primary calendar. Moreover, the schedule doesn't seem to favor any of the Democrats in the race (Bush has no worry about winning renomination). In fact, the new lineup could allow a candidate who lost Iowa or New Hampshire, or even both, to regroup in the ensuing primaries.

Of particular note is the fact that the new primary calendar will send candidates into every region of the country. That's a huge plus for the American political system.

Oregon experimented with a March presidential primary in hopes of giving the state more influence in the selection of presidential nominees. But other states also moved their primaries ahead, so Oregon gained little - except confusion among voters familiar with the state's traditional May primary. Wisely, the state's presidential primary was moved back to May, where it belongs.

For the bevy of Democrats now in the 2004 race for the White House, the new schedule offers more than the chance of redemption after an early loss. It should provide the eventual nominee with widespread exposure around the country and a chance to expound on how his or her views differ from those of the incumbent president.

Presidential election years are always galvanizing because of the powerful position the victor will occupy. Next year's election promises to be even more competitive on the Democratic side, leading to what could and should be a dandy fall face-off between the sitting president and his would-be successor. And that will be a healthy thing for the democratic process.