Washington
By ROBERT MACKAY

FOR THE first time in years, Illinois Republicans have decided to hold a "blind" primary, one in which candidates for delegate to the national convention will appear on the election ballot without any indication of their presidential preference.

Top campaign officials for the Republican presidential candidates all believe the blind primary will most help former Texas Gov. John Connally. Connally's people say they don't care whether Illinois has an open or a blind primary.

But all of the GOP candidates point to Illinois as the place where former California Gov. Ronald Reagan must be stopped, if he hasn't been slowed down in the earlier contests. So, Illinois' blind primary figures prominently in the race for the GOP nomination.

"We think it's to our disadvantage," said Charlie Black, political director of the Reagan campaign. "I don't think there's any question it will be harder this way to elect Reagan delegate candidates. There's been some suggestion the people who proposed the law did for this reason."

Black, and most of the other officials in the other campaigns, agree the blind primary tends to favor those candidates who get big name Republicans in the state on the ballot as their delegates. Thus, voters may choose a state representative or senator merely because they know the name and without regard to the presidential candidate that that legislator represents.

"Although Reagan has been the perceived front-runner for some time, we don't have many big name Republicans on the ballot in Illinois," Black said. The "big names" have been grabbed off by Connally and former United Nations Ambassador George Bush, Black said. "So, the blind primary will tend to be to their benefit," he added.

Bush campaign official George Kangas laughed when told of Black's comments. "We don't have big names — no way. If it's anyone with big name people it's Reagan and Connally. Connally went into Illinois early, did a very good job . . . and pinched off a lot of the glamour people. Reagan already had some."

Kangas would prefer an Illinois delegation to the GOP national convention that is uncommitted or in "smorgasbord style," that is, a delegation whose members are committed to several different presidential candidates. "I feel Illinois ought to send a thinking delegation, which won't go down the tubes with one candidate in July. I'd hate to see Illinois go down the tubes with Reagan if he wasn't the obvious choice." Putting it more directly, Kangas said, "We cannot live with a Reagan-dominated Illinois delegation."

Kangas, of course, is hopeful it will be a close convention. He predicted only Bush, Reagan and Connally would be in the race by the time the action moved to Illinois this month and that Reagan and Bush would be running neck-and-neck into the convention. Given that scenario, the uncommitted delegates from Illinois and other states would then play a key role in deciding who would get the nomination. And Gov. James R. Thompson, who could use his influence to sway many of the delegates one way or another, would be holding high cards at the convention. But Reagan's aides have a simple response to all of this speculation: "We don't expect a close convention."

Kirk Walder, political director of the John Anderson campaign, said the blind primary system is "a bit more unrepresentative of the voters' sentiments. It winds up hurting individual voters and helping a candidate who can recruit big name delegate candidates, such as Reagan and Connally." In an apparent and somewhat hopeful reference to Anderson, Walder said, "It hurts someone who is emerging from the pack and who is popular himself but doesn't have those big names."

Jerry Harkins, campaign manager of Phil Crane's campaign, feels the blind primary gets candidates "more involved in political negotiating for delegates. For instance, we might go to the Reagan people and say we'll back your delegates and you back our delegates and we'll both win. It creates more of a political situation. It potentially could help one candidate in terms of dealing at the convention."

And on the subject of convention dealing, Harkins said that even if there is a large number of uncommitted delegates from Illinois, "I don't think Gov. Thompson has that strong control over the party organization" to be able to hand them to the candidate of his choice. "In some districts maybe he will have an influence. But he's not going to be able to tell W. Clement Stone how to vote, or the delegates from Danny Crane's district."

Andy Lawrence, Midwest coordinator for the campaign of Sen. Howard Baker, echoed the sentiments of the others that the candidate with the big name Republicans on his side will do the best in the Illinois delegate selection process.

So, while the Reagan people decry the blind primary in Illinois as a stop-Reagan campaign, all of the other candidates feel Reagan will still do well, if not win, in the delegate selection process. Reagan also held a commanding lead in popularity polls in the state and was expected to win the presidential preference primary, or "beauty contest," which is advisory only. But in January, Reagan lost to Bush in the

Continued on page 21

March 1980/Illinois Issues/31

Continued from page 31

Blind primaries

Iowa precinct caucuses which he was supposed to win.

Most of the candidates also agree the blind primary will help Connally the most in his attempt to catch the front-running Reagan. That is why the Reagan people suspect it was Connally supporters who pushed the blind primary law through in Illinois.

What does the Connally campaign think about all of this?

The blind primary "puts the responsibility on the campaigns to make sure the voters know who the delegates represent. I think it makes it more of a campaign, but then we'll take it either way [blind or open]," said Connally campaign official Harold Smith.

But what about this being an anti-Reagan move? Will the blind primary hurt Reagan more than an open primary?

"No comment," Smith responded. "I cannot comment on that matter."

March 1980/Illinois Issues/21