- Current Primary Date: February 7, 2012
- Legislature Convened: January 5, 2011
- Deadline to Introduce Legislation: January 24, 2011
- Legislature Adjourns: June 8, 2011
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
The Clock is Ticking on States to Change 2012 Primary Dates: Connecticut
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Oklahoma Senate Passes Bill to Move Presidential Primary to March
The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (3/1/11)
- Several caucus states have yet to select a date for the first step of their delegate selection processes in 2012. Until a decision is made by state parties in those states, they will appear in gray on the map.
- The states where legislation to move the presidential primary is active are two-toned. One color indicates the timing of the primary according to the current law whereas the second color is meant to highlight the most likely month to which the primary could be moved. [With the exception of Texas, the proposed movement is backward.] This is clear in most states, but in others -- Maryland and Tennessee -- where multiple timing options are being considered, the most likely date is used. Here that is defined as a bill -- or date change -- with the most institutional support. In both cases, the majority party leadership is sponsoring one change over another (February to March in Tennessee and February to April in Maryland). That option is given more weight on the map.
- Finally, Kentucky is unique because the legislation there calls for shifting the primary from May to August. As August is not included in the color coding, white designates that potential move with the May shade of blue.
- Caucus states are italicized while primary states are not. Several caucus states are missing from the list because they have not formalized the date on which their contests will be held in 2012. Colorado appears because the caucuses dates there are set by the state, whereas a state like Alaska has caucuses run by the state parties and as such do not have their dates codified in state law.
- States that have changed dates appear twice (or more) on the calendar; once by the old date and once by the new date. The old date will be struck through while the new date will be color-coded with the amount of movement (in days) in parentheses. States in green are states that have moved to earlier dates on the calendar and states in red are those that have moved to later dates. Arkansas, for example, has moved its 2012 primary and moved it back 104 days from its 2008 position.
- The date of any primary or caucus moves that have taken place -- whether through gubernatorial signature or state party move -- also appear in parentheses following the state's/party's new entry on the calendar.
- States with active legislation have links to those bills included with their entries on the calendar. If there are multiple bills they are divided by chamber and/or numbered accordingly.
- Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina appear twice. The earlier entry corresponds with the latest possible date these states would have if Florida opts not to move their primary into compliance with the national party rules. The second, later entry for each of the non-exempt states reflects the position the national parties would prefer the earliest states to hold their delegate selection events.
Tuesday, January 24:
Saturday, January 28:
Saturday, February 11:
Tuesday, February 14:
Tuesday, February 21:
Tuesday, February 28:
South Carolina (based on national party rules)
Tuesday, March 13:
Tuesday, March 20:
Tuesday, May 15:
Tuesday, May 22:
1 New Hampshire law calls for the Granite state to hold a primary on the second Tuesday of March or seven days prior to any other similar election, whichever is earlier. Florida is first now, so New Hampshire would be a week earlier at the latest. Traditionally, Iowa has gone on the Monday a week prior to New Hampshire. For the time being we'll wedge South Carolina in on the Saturday between New Hampshire and Florida, but these are just guesses at the moment. Any rogue states could cause a shift.
3 In Arizona the governor can use his or her proclamation powers to move the state's primary to a date on which the event would have an impact on the nomination. In 2004 and 2008 the primary was moved to the first Tuesday in February.
4 Massachusetts and Michigan are the only states that passed a frontloading bill prior to 2008 that was not permanent. The Bay state reverts to its first Tuesday in March date in 2012 while Michigan will fall back to the fourth Tuesday in February.
5 The Colorado Democratic and Republican parties have the option to move their caucuses from the third Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in February.
6 The law in New Mexico allows the parties to decide when to hold their nominating contests. The Democrats have gone in early February in the last two cycles, but the GOP has held steady in June. They have the option of moving however.
Bill Emerges to Shift All Missouri Primaries to June
Alabama Bill to Eliminate Separate February Primary Introduced
FISCAL NOTE
House Bill 32 as introduced moves the presidential preference primary to June, beginning in 2012, which will result in one less election during 2012 and every fourth year thereafter. Having one less election will reduce election expenses paid from the State General Fund by an estimated $3,900,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2012, and by a similar amount every fourth fiscal year thereafter.
In addition, this bill deletes language that allows counties that recognize Mardi Gras as a holiday to be reimbursed for election expenses as a result of the day of the presidential preference primary being the same day as Mardi Gras. The deletion of this provision will further decrease the election expenses, paid from the State General Fund, by an estimated $250,000 for any fiscal year in which the presidential preference primary date is on the same day as Mardi Gras.
A Response to the Minnesota Calendar Discrepancy
- During the 2008 state legislative session and in the midst of the 2008 nomination process, the Minnesota legislature proposed, considered and passed HF 3066. That retroactively brought the state law in to line with the calendar position both state parties had chosen for their 2008 precinct caucuses in 2007. It also added the March 1 deadline for coordinated action between the two parties. Admittedly, FHQ was not following the development of the 2012 calendar at that point in 2008. To the extent that anything appeared on the site related to the 2012 cycle, it was a function of something having appeared in the news. I had not taken to combing through state legislative web sites at that point. Plus, I, like most everyone else, was following the developments of the 2008 nomination races.
- In May 2008, that bill was signed by Governor Tim Pawlenty and was to take effect on August 1, 2008. It did take effect on August 1, but it did not show up in the 2008 Minnesota statutes until they were posted online; presumably in anticipation of the calendar turning over to 2009. The thing about the Minnesota statutes is that the year affixed to them is one that describes not the year in which they are being used, but rather the year in which they were changed/established. Any changes that current 2011 legislature makes to the law, for example, is being made to the 2010 Minnesota statutes. Changes that were made in 2008, then, were being made to the 2007 statutes -- a version that would still have the first Tuesday in March as the date on which precinct caucuses were to have occurred.
- As far as I can tell -- and for once the Internet Archive - Wayback Machine is failing me -- the 2007 statutes were still online when I first put the 2012 primary calendar together in December 2008. The 2008 statutes did not post until the 2009 legislature convened and set to work to alter them. Having missed the change to the law in early 2008 caused me to miss being on the lookout for the change to take place heading into 2009 when FHQ began tracking the 2012 calendar in earnest. And since the only legislation to come forward in Minnesota regarding delegate selection events since that time concerned establishing a presidential primary, I was never cued to look again at the precinct caucuses statute.
2012 Presidential Primary Movement: The Week in Review (Feb. 21-27)
- Moving on up: With the stroke of his pen, Idaho Governor Butch Otter signed into law H 60 and in the process bumped the Gem state's presidential primary (and those for state and local offices as well) up a week to the third Tuesday in May. Idaho becomes the first state in 2011 to change the date on which its 2012 delegate selection event will occur. It joins Arkansas, Hawaii, Illinois, Nevada and the Montana Republicans as the only states (or state parties) to have changed their dates thus far. With two bills having passed the legislature to change the date of Virginia's primary, Idaho likely won' t be alone in that distinction for long, though they will remain the only state to have moved up.
- Pass it on: The Kansas Senate passed SB 128 this past week. The bill delays the next implementation of the state's presidential primary law to 2016, canceling the 2012 primary. Since the Sunflower state has gone without a presidential primary since 1992, this doesn't come as all that much of a surprise.
- "Do Pass": This week was also a week that saw a few bills emerge from committee with positive recommendations. In Oklahoma, both SB 808 and HB 1614 came out of committees in their respective chambers with "do pass" designations. Both bills would move the Sooner state's presidential primary from the first Tuesday in February to the first Tuesday in March. [There was a story on the bills' progress in The Oklahoman over the weekend. Thanks to Richard Winger at Ballot Access News for the link.]
In Washington, action on the bills to expressly cancel the state's 2012 presidential primary has seemingly slowed to a crawl. The bill with momentum is HB 1860. It does not directly cancel the primary, but it does tie its use to the decision of the two state parties to not only use the primary but to allocate all of their national convention delegates through that means. After having received a "do pass" from the House Committee on State Government and Tribal Affairs a week ago, HB 1860 got another one from the House Ways and Means Committee as well this past week.
- Introducing...: Finally, a late add is in order for a bill that was introduced in Massachusetts in January. HB 1972 would move not only the presidential primary from the first Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in June, but would shift the primaries for state and local offices from September to coincide with the presidential primary. Obviously, budget constraints have been cited by the secretary of state as a potential deterrent to the 2012 primary, but this is one way of circumventing that issue; by combining the two sets of primaries on the same date.
- As has been mentioned in this space several times, there are currently 18 states with presidential primaries scheduled for February 2012. That would put those 18 states in violation of both parties' delegate selection rules for 2012.
- Of those 18 primary states, 15 of them (California, Connecticut, Missouri, New York, Arizona, Georgia, Delaware, Tennessee, Wisconsin, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, Utah, Oklahoma and Virginia) have convened their 2011 state legislative sessions.
- Of those 15 states, 7 (California, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Maryland, Missouri, Tennessee and Virginia) have bills that have been introduced and are active within the state legislature to move their contests' dates back. Both California and New Jersey have bills that would eliminate an early and separate presidential primaries and position those events with the other primaries for state and local offices. That would mean June presidential primaries for both states if those bills pass and are signed into law. In the remaining states, the efforts are to simply shift the states' presidential primaries from dates in violation of the two major parties' rules to the earliest allowed date (the first Tuesday in March). There is also an active bill in Washington, DC to move the districts primary back to June.
- The Virginia legislature adjourned for the year last Saturday and Utah will follow suit next week on March 10.
- During this next week, the state legislature in Alabama will convene bringing the total of non-compliant states currently in legislative session to 15. Those 15 early states in conflict with the national parties' rules will be the ones to watch. But we are to a point in the cycle where there are still state legislatures yet to convene but also states that are wrapping up business and are thus unable to make changes to election laws past that point.
- How would all of this look if all these bills happened to be passed and signed into law? States with active bills to move their primaries are listed twice, once where law has them currently and once in bold and italicized for where active legislation could move them.
NOTE: THIS IS NOT THE CURRENT CALENDAR, ONLY WHAT IT COULD LOOK LIKE IF CURRENT LEGISLATION IS ENACTED.
Tuesday, February 7 (Super Tuesday): Alabama, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas and Utah
Saturday, February 11: Louisiana
Tuesday, February 14: Washington, DC, Maryland, Virginia
Tuesday, February 21: Hawaii Republican caucuses, Wisconsin
Tuesday, February 28: Arizona, Michigan
Tuesday, March 6: Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia
Tuesday, March 13: Mississippi
Tuesday, March 20: Colorado caucuses, Illinois
Tuesday, April 3: Kansas, Maryland
Tuesday, May 8: Indiana, North Carolina and West Virginia
Tuesday, May 15: Idaho, Nebraska, Oregon
Tuesday, May 22: Arkansas, Kentucky and Washington
Tuesday, June 5: California, Massachusetts, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico and South Dakota
Monday, February 28, 2011
Is This Deadline in Minnesota a Big Deal for the 2012 Primary Calendar?
Minnesota law establishes February 7, one day after Iowa, as the default date for that state's caucuses. The date can only be changed with the consent of both political parties. The parties must, according to the statute, agree to change the date "no later than March 1 of each odd-numbered year" -- that is, tomorrow.
Minnesota's Sutton said he was unfamiliar with other states' rules, but that he believed the state party didn't necessarily have to follow the timing set out in state law -- something that has soothed the nerves of some in the traditional early states. He also said he's not aiming to disrupt the process, and believes that despite the state law, he can move his party event's date at will if it becomes disruptive.
A Potential Florida Primary Compromise?
"I would not be averse to pulling the convention if Florida doesn't follow the parameter of the rules," said Karen Floyd, party chairman in South Carolina, one of four states approved by both parties to hold early primaries.
"There's nothing off the table," Floyd said.
Bitner said he hopes for a compromise in which Florida would get the fifth spot, immediately after the four early states.
Sunday, February 27, 2011
An Update on the 2012 Republican Delegate Selection Rules
- The Myth of Republican Presidential Primary Proportionality
- The Myth of Republican Presidential Primary Proportionality Revisited
- Republican Delegate Allocation Rules: 2012 vs. 2008
The real bonus in this is that it not only includes the rules on the timing of delegate selection events, but provides the clearest set of guidelines -- as well it should; it's coming from the party after all -- on the new proportionality requirements for contests that occur prior to April 1, 2012 (see page 3). The highlights:
- The RNC draws a distinction between at-large delegates and those allocated based on the congressional district vote. A state scheduled prior to April 1 is required to allocated at-large delegates proportionally, but has choice and can continue to allocate congressional district delegates on a winner-take-all basis (win the district, win all the delegates from that district).
- The vote share threshold for candidates receiving delegates can be no higher than 20%. In other words, if a state set that threshold at 20% a candidate would have to net at least that much support to receive any delegates.
- A candidate can still receive all the delegates from a state if that candidate surpasses a minimum threshold set by the state. That threshold can be no lower than 50%. A candidate could, then, clear the 50% mark statewide and take all the delegates. If Utah had operated under these rules in 2008, Mitt Romney, by virtue of having won 89% of the vote, could have taken all of the Beehive state's delegates despite the primary having been in February (assuming Utah used the threshold rule).