Donna: I will admit right at the beginning of this discussion that there was a day not so many years ago when I had to learn about the caucus/convention system for Utah’s elections. As a journalist I was assigned to cover caucus night in my neighborhood and ventured out to find approximately eight people in a classroom, struggling to elect neighborhood representatives. I walked away a county delegate that night and have been serving as a delegate ever since. It was surprising to me that so few people understood the system we use to select candidates in Utah.

My experience last year was very different as 145 people came together to debate issues and stayed until nearly midnight to ensure the right people were representing them at the county and state conventions. There were pros and cons to attending this meeting. The poor former precinct chair and secretary were completely overwhelmed, which caused not a few organizational challenges. The advantage was that a more diverse group of delegates were selected. I felt we had a strong representation of our neighborhood. Active delegates were diligent in seeking out the best candidates for office and challenging their political views. Not everyone I supported was elected, but I felt the democratic process worked really well.

Now the caucus/convention system is coming under scrutiny and there are some who wonder if an open primary system wouldn’t work better. The advantages of the current system are many, but that doesn’t mean we can’t improve what we have. Generally, in this system those who are relatively unknown, but very experienced and educated, can run for office on a small shoestring budget and make a difference. It doesn’t cater to only political machines or special interest groups with large bank accounts and even larger agendas.

A clear disadvantage of the system is that many Utahns don’t know that in February or March of 2014 a few people from their neighborhood will be chosen to represent them all. They sit at home thinking they will just weigh in on election day and don’t realize how many decisions are being made before candidates ever reach a public ballot. Also if an extremist group of people take the delegate seats, then they can ram their agendas forward with little or no input from anyone else. Often the more moderate, contented population are not represented at all and a very popular candidate or incumbent, expected at the polls, may not make the cut at convention.

To preserve the caucus/convention system, all Utah residents will need to be educated on the system, especially new voters in the state. Secondly, the process for delegate elections will need to be modernized to save time and make it easier for as many people as possible to participate.

Val: The political caucus system in Utah is being challenged by a group of Republicans, including former Governors Mike Leavitt and Olene Walker, who believe the system promotes low voter turnout and has a number of flaws. This group requested that the state Republican Party adopt a few changes in the process in order to avoid a potential ballot initiative to modify the caucus system. Their main request was that candidates be required to secure 66 percent of the delegate vote at convention (as opposed to the current 60 percent) in order to avoid a primary election.

Donna and I are both state delegates and were at the convention listening to the debate about whether the party should adopt the proposed change. The end result was that the Party voted to reject the proposed change and keep the status quo.

I happen to believe that by voting to keep the status quo, the Republican Party may have doomed the caucus system as it currently is. Why? Because I believe those promoting the ballot initiative will be successful in gathering enough signatures to put the matter to the people. And I believe most people in this state would prefer to see more people, not less, participate in selecting candidates. Bottom line: I think the initiative will pass at the ballot box. I may be mistaken, but my guess is the Party cut off its nose to spite its face.

I, like about 70 percent of caucus-goers, believe that raising the threshold to 66 percent would have been a positive thing. Not that long ago, it was at 70 percent. The proposed change would have forced only a handful of races into a primary, so its impact would have been fairly minimal. Nevertheless, the delegates from throughout the state cast a vote for the status quo. Consequently, the caucus system is going to be on the defensive for the next year and a half.

• Val Hale is the president and CEO of the Utah Valley Chamber of Commerce. Donna Milakovic is Executive Vice President of the Utah Valley Chamber of Commerce.

Newsletter