When I ran for the Legislature in 2010, 90 county delegates, all elected to represent their neighbors, met in convention and sent two of us to a primary. Ultimately I won there and again in the general election. That makes me an incumbent.

I recently telephoned a small sample of those same delegates. This cross section is about 55 percent female. From what I know, well over half hold mainstream Republican political views. A few advocate for positions to the left of the mainstream. Others are more conservative. They represent their communities well.

I couldn’t be more impressed with this group of community spokespeople. They are typical of thousands of delegates across our state. These elected leaders take their responsibilities seriously. After once serving as delegates, they will likely stay involved in their communities throughout their lives.

A friend of mine in Idaho ran for the state legislature the same time I did. His race started with a primary. Several months and $35,000 later, he learned that he didn’t make the first cut. He may not try that again.

In Utah, by contrast, House candidates often run successful campaigns to the delegates, even against incumbents, for $5,000 or less. Being eliminated at convention is a much less costly learning experience than losing an expensive primary.

I should know. In 2008 I lost in convention to Dan Liljenquist and lived to tell about it. Liljenquist outspent the other seven candidates combined. Ron Mortensen, on the other hand, spent very little. He didn’t even spring for a convention booth.

But Ron had built a solid reputation among party regulars. He worked hard to talk with 265 county delegates one on one. At the convention he led in all the early rounds and ended up a close second. But in the primary he couldn’t be competitive on his limited budget.

Dan Liljenquist went on to become an outstanding senator. There was much to be learned from how he got there. Many aspects of every campaign involve spending money, particularly during the primary election cycle here in Utah. But at the convention, a substantial money advantage for Liljenquist didn’t translate into a decisive victory.

Such a counterintuitive outcome is much less likely in primary elections. That is a key reason I favor our caucus-convention system. A straight primary system based on popular vote depends on just that — being popular. To win, you’ve got to be wealthy enough to build name ID or be famous already. You might come up with the needed funds from a special interest group. Or you could be an incumbent.

I know a woman who won a seat in the Colorado House of Representatives in 2008. Her campaign cost $100,000. She had to spend a big chunk of that right out of the chute in a primary.

If we scrap our unique system of choosing candidates here in Utah, campaigns will become more expensive on average. We’ll be less likely to find candidates with real grass-roots support. In the process, we may turn public office into an exclusive club for the wealthy and famous. We may increase the influence of special interest groups. And we’ll surely make it harder to defeat incumbents.

But the largest loss will be the missed opportunity for tens of thousands of Utah’s citizens to become elected neighborhood delegates every two years. As part of Utah’s grass-roots electoral process, they play a personal role in our own unique clinic on representative democracy — from which we all benefit.

Jim Nielson, R-Bountiful, has served as delegate or local precinct officer since 1992. He was elected to the Utah House in 2010.