Back in December the Nebraska Democratic Party voted to once again select delegates to the national convention through a caucuses/convention system in 2016. Now that the party released its draft delegate selection plan for public comment on March 31, it is clearer when that process will commence next year.1 At this point, the party plans to initiate its delegate selection process with March 5 caucuses in 2016.
The Nebraska Democratic Party broke with the tradition of filtering its presidential nomination process through the Cornhusker state's May primary after the 2004 cycle. The party traded in that late primary in 2004 for earlier caucuses in 2008 as a means of falling at a point on the calendar where the nomination was unlikely to have been decided. Like 2008, the 2016 Nebraska Democratic caucuses would fall the weekend following the earliest date the parties allow non-carve-out states to conduct primary or caucus elections. The difference is that, in 2016, that would be month later on the primary calendar than was the case in 2008. Whereas the national parties allowed February contests in the 2008 cycle, that practice is now taboo for states other than Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina.
That national party prohibition on February contests began during the 2012 cycle. With a Democratic incumbent seeking reelection, and thus a noncompetitive nomination race, Nebraska Democrats opted to maintain the caucuses system but to begin the process in April. An open seat Democratic nomination race in 2016 has Nebraska Democrats eyeing an earlier position for its caucuses. After a one cycle hiatus, then, the party has returned to a date for its caucuses on the heels of Super Tuesday/SEC primary on March 1.
NOTE: FHQ will pencil these dates in on the 2016 presidential primary calendar, but please note that the plans are not finalized and are still subject to change. With very few exceptions, though, the dates in the 2012 draft plans for caucuses states did not change.
--
1 The above link is to the plan on the Nebraska Democratic Party site. FHQ will also keep a version of the plan here.
Sunday, April 5, 2015
Saturday, April 4, 2015
Arizona Presidential Primary Challenge to Iowa Dies as 2015 Session Closes
The Arizona state legislature finished up the business of the 2015 legislative session in the early morning hours of Friday, April 3. Adjourning the session sine die killed all the remaining bills that had not moved through the legislature and on to the governor. Among the group of bills that did not survive was HB 2015, the bill that would have pushed the Arizona presidential primary in front of the Iowa caucuses (or any other contest that ended up first on the primary calendar).
The bill dying at the end of the session does not come as all that much of a surprise. Similar legislation met the same fate two years ago following some RNC pressure. Additionally, the legislature repositioned the Arizona presidential primary during the 2014 session. That move did not preclude the 2015 legislature from considering and passing another move, but states shifting primary calendar positions more than once in a presidential election cycle remains a rare occurrence. Furthermore, part of the change in 2014 was about bringing the presidential primary in the Grand Canyon state back into compliance with the national party rules (with regard to the timing of delegate selection events). Passing HB 2015 would have meant crossing back over that barrier, making Arizona delegations from both parties vulnerable to national party penalties.
Arizona does not allow legislation proposed in one session to carry over to the next session. That means this bill is dead and Arizona is more than likely locked into a March 22 primary in 2016.
Friday, April 3, 2015
Bill to Fund Presidential Primary Moving Quickly Through Idaho Legislature
Now that both chambers of the Idaho legislature have passed SB 1066, the measure to establish a stand-alone presidential primary in March -- the body needs to move on legislation to actually appropriate funds in order to conduct the election. To that end, the state Senate earlier this week quickly proposed and passed legislation to allot $2 million to the secretary of state budget for the purpose of funding the new presidential primary election (assuming Governor Otter signs the SB 1066).
SB 1178 was introduced on Monday, March 30, made a quick stop in the Senate State Affairs Committee (garnering a do pass recommendation) on Tuesday and had passed the chamber by a 21-11 vote by Wednesday. The legislation has been transmitted to the House where, if the Senate vote is any indication, it will move quickly next week and the vote will largely resemble the original vote in the chamber(s) on SB 1066, the bill .
SB 1178 was introduced on Monday, March 30, made a quick stop in the Senate State Affairs Committee (garnering a do pass recommendation) on Tuesday and had passed the chamber by a 21-11 vote by Wednesday. The legislation has been transmitted to the House where, if the Senate vote is any indication, it will move quickly next week and the vote will largely resemble the original vote in the chamber(s) on SB 1066, the bill .
For 2016, Wyoming Democrats Eye April 9 Caucuses
On March 23, the Wyoming Democratic Party released the initial draft of their 2016 delegate selection plan.1 While it is subject to revision -- having to go before the public for a 30 day comment period before being sent off to the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee before May 4 for approval -- this does provide a rough guide to how Democrats in the Equality state will select and allocate delegates to the national convention in 2016.
Part of that plan includes the tentative date of the state party's delegate selection event. As of now, it looks like Wyoming Democrats are keying in on an April 9 date for the caucuses that will kick off a delegate selection process that will culminate with at the state convention. That calendar position is consistent with the second Saturday in April calendar spot the party used for caucuses in 2012. That is a month later than when the Wyoming Democratic caucuses were held in 2008.
NOTE: FHQ will pencil these dates in on the 2016 presidential primary calendar, but please note that the plans are not finalized and are still subject to change. With very few exceptions, though, the 2012 draft plans for caucuses states did not change.
--
1 The above link is to the plan on the Wyoming Democratic Party site. FHQ will also keep a version of the plan here.
Part of that plan includes the tentative date of the state party's delegate selection event. As of now, it looks like Wyoming Democrats are keying in on an April 9 date for the caucuses that will kick off a delegate selection process that will culminate with at the state convention. That calendar position is consistent with the second Saturday in April calendar spot the party used for caucuses in 2012. That is a month later than when the Wyoming Democratic caucuses were held in 2008.
NOTE: FHQ will pencil these dates in on the 2016 presidential primary calendar, but please note that the plans are not finalized and are still subject to change. With very few exceptions, though, the 2012 draft plans for caucuses states did not change.
--
1 The above link is to the plan on the Wyoming Democratic Party site. FHQ will also keep a version of the plan here.
Thursday, April 2, 2015
Nevada Presidential Primary Bill Gets Chilly Reception in Senate Committee
The Nevada Senate Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections convened a meeting to hold the initial hearing on SB 421 on Wednesday, April 1.
The bill, like its counterpart in the state Assembly, proposes shifting the mode of national convention delegate selection in the Silver state from caucuses to a primary and consolidating that new presidential primary in January with the primaries for other offices in the state (now scheduled for June). However, also like the Assembly version, the state Senate sponsor, Sen. James Settlemeyer (R-17th, Minden) indicated in his introduction of the bill before the committee that the true intent of the bill a February date, not the January date in the original draft of the legislation.1
The targeted third Tuesday in February date -- though not included in the bill at this time -- better fits the scheduling restrictions in the national party delegate selection rules. Settlemeyer touted that as well as the potential for increased turnout in a switch from a caucuses/convention system to a presidential primary.
Yet, the changes gave committee members, elections officials and other members of the public who spoke in response to the bill pause. All seemingly liked the notion that trading in the caucuses would promote more participation in the presidential nomination process. Committee members balked at the potential move mostly based on the grounds that it is a (state) party decision as to how it selects and allocates delegates to a national convention. Furthermore, Democrats on the panel wondered about the conflict such a change would present given that the Democratic National Committee rules specify Nevada caucuses in the early calendar protections that are afforded the state.2
That is the main issue that does not bode well for this legislation: the reluctance of the state parties to actually participate in a presidential primary (if the state law is changed to provide for such an election). James Hindle, chairman of the Storey County Republican Party, spoke on behalf of the Nevada Republican Party and came out against the bill. More damaging to the bill's prospects was that Hindle indicated that the Nevada Republican Central Committee had debated the primary or caucuses issue at its spring meeting during the weekend of March 28 and settled on caucuses for 2016.
No one from the Nevada Democratic Party spoke other than the handful of Democratic members on the committee. Regardless, without state party buy-in on the primary concept, SB 421 faces a steep climb to emerge from committee in either chamber.
--
UPDATE 4/9/15: Third Tuesday in February primary bill passed Senate committee
UPDATE 4/10/15: Amended Assembly bill for February primary option clears committee
--
1 Settlemeyer introduced similar legislation calling for a January presidential primary during the 2013 legislative session.
2 Others who spoke out against the bill were more concerned about the provision in the bill moving the state and local primaries up to February from June and the problems that would present. Unlike bill sponsors in the hearing on the Assembly version, Settlemeyer was supportive of the cost savings associated with a consolidated primary and did not waver on moving the June primaries to February.
The bill, like its counterpart in the state Assembly, proposes shifting the mode of national convention delegate selection in the Silver state from caucuses to a primary and consolidating that new presidential primary in January with the primaries for other offices in the state (now scheduled for June). However, also like the Assembly version, the state Senate sponsor, Sen. James Settlemeyer (R-17th, Minden) indicated in his introduction of the bill before the committee that the true intent of the bill a February date, not the January date in the original draft of the legislation.1
The targeted third Tuesday in February date -- though not included in the bill at this time -- better fits the scheduling restrictions in the national party delegate selection rules. Settlemeyer touted that as well as the potential for increased turnout in a switch from a caucuses/convention system to a presidential primary.
Yet, the changes gave committee members, elections officials and other members of the public who spoke in response to the bill pause. All seemingly liked the notion that trading in the caucuses would promote more participation in the presidential nomination process. Committee members balked at the potential move mostly based on the grounds that it is a (state) party decision as to how it selects and allocates delegates to a national convention. Furthermore, Democrats on the panel wondered about the conflict such a change would present given that the Democratic National Committee rules specify Nevada caucuses in the early calendar protections that are afforded the state.2
That is the main issue that does not bode well for this legislation: the reluctance of the state parties to actually participate in a presidential primary (if the state law is changed to provide for such an election). James Hindle, chairman of the Storey County Republican Party, spoke on behalf of the Nevada Republican Party and came out against the bill. More damaging to the bill's prospects was that Hindle indicated that the Nevada Republican Central Committee had debated the primary or caucuses issue at its spring meeting during the weekend of March 28 and settled on caucuses for 2016.
No one from the Nevada Democratic Party spoke other than the handful of Democratic members on the committee. Regardless, without state party buy-in on the primary concept, SB 421 faces a steep climb to emerge from committee in either chamber.
--
UPDATE 4/9/15: Third Tuesday in February primary bill passed Senate committee
UPDATE 4/10/15: Amended Assembly bill for February primary option clears committee
--
1 Settlemeyer introduced similar legislation calling for a January presidential primary during the 2013 legislative session.
2 Others who spoke out against the bill were more concerned about the provision in the bill moving the state and local primaries up to February from June and the problems that would present. Unlike bill sponsors in the hearing on the Assembly version, Settlemeyer was supportive of the cost savings associated with a consolidated primary and did not waver on moving the June primaries to February.
Wednesday, April 1, 2015
Alabama SEC Primary Bill Favorably Reported from Committee
The Alabama state Senate Constitution, Ethics and Elections Committee on Wednesday, April 1 briefly considered SB 240. The legislation would bump the Alabama presidential primary (and those for other offices) up a week to the first Tuesday in March. That would align the Alabama primary with those of other southern states aiming for a proposed SEC primary on that date.
Bill sponsor, Sen. Quinton Ross (D-26th, Montgomery) in introducing the measure called it an "economic stimulus" bill and one that both the Democratic and Republican parties in the state agree on. The plan to move the primary up in order to gain candidate attention (if not visits and campaign dollars being spent in the state) was greeted without dissent from the members of the committee and favorably reported for consideration on the floor of the upper chamber.
--
Neighboring Mississippi attempted to move a similar one week presidential primary shift through its legislature during the 2015 legislative session and saw that effort die earlier this week. It, too started off quickly with great support. The situation is slightly different in Alabama though. The Mississippi presidential primary has been rooted to its second Tuesday in March date since the 1988 cycle. Alabama only just arrived at that point for 2012 after having spent much of the same time period -- since 1988 -- in a June position on the calendar. A one week move could break less with the traditional rhythms of elections in Alabama than in Mississippi.
Time will tell.
Bill sponsor, Sen. Quinton Ross (D-26th, Montgomery) in introducing the measure called it an "economic stimulus" bill and one that both the Democratic and Republican parties in the state agree on. The plan to move the primary up in order to gain candidate attention (if not visits and campaign dollars being spent in the state) was greeted without dissent from the members of the committee and favorably reported for consideration on the floor of the upper chamber.
--
Neighboring Mississippi attempted to move a similar one week presidential primary shift through its legislature during the 2015 legislative session and saw that effort die earlier this week. It, too started off quickly with great support. The situation is slightly different in Alabama though. The Mississippi presidential primary has been rooted to its second Tuesday in March date since the 1988 cycle. Alabama only just arrived at that point for 2012 after having spent much of the same time period -- since 1988 -- in a June position on the calendar. A one week move could break less with the traditional rhythms of elections in Alabama than in Mississippi.
Time will tell.
North Carolina Bill to Untether Presidential Primary from South Carolina's Introduced
North Carolina state Rep. David Lewis (R-53rd, Harnett) and two other House Republicans on Wednesday, April 1 filed H 457 in the North Carolina General Assembly. The bill would in some ways reverse the changes made to the scheduling of the North Carolina presidential primary in an omnibus elections bill in 2013.
As it stands now, the law anchors the North Carolina presidential primary to the presidential primary in neighboring South Carolina. The primary, according to the law, would fall on the Tuesday after the South Carolina primary. Enacting that law was a problematic maneuver from the start. South Carolina has had its first in the South status codified at the national party level over the last couple of presidential election cycles and prefers to have both a Saturday primary and one that is at least seven days earlier than the next earliest southern state presidential primary. The North Carolina law conflicts with all of that. Not only would a primary on the Tuesday after South Carolina fall within that seven day buffer South Carolina prefers, but the position of the South Carolina primary would likely draw the North Carolina primary to a point on the calendar -- in February -- that would violate the new, stricter Republican National Committee rule prohibiting primaries and caucuses (other than the four carve-out state) before March 1.
The specter of that super penalty looms large over the North Carolina presidential primary situation. That reality likely contributed to Lewis -- the Republican National Committeeman from North Carolina -- to introduce this legislation. And again, it somewhat reverses the changes made in 2013. H 457 would pull the North Carolina presidential primary back to a solid position on March 8, but would maintain the May date for the other primaries. Throughout much of the post-reform era, North Carolina has conducted its presidential primaries in concert with those for state and local offices on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in May. The 2013 law split off the presidential primary part and tethered that election to the date of the primary in South Carolina. The remaining primaries were left on the May date.
The proposed change would move just the presidential primary to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in March; March 8 during the 2016 cycle. That would not coincide with the SEC primary -- a collection of other southern state presidential primaries -- on March 1. Instead, it would have North Carolina sharing a date with contests across the country in Michigan, Mississippi and Ohio and likely Idaho as well. Such a shift would also put North Carolina Republicans in the heart of the proportionality window. North Carolina law requires a proportional allocation of delegates, but RNC rules supersede those requirements when in conflict. For North Carolina, though, the RNC would require some form of proportional allocation before March 15.
Other notes:
As it stands now, the law anchors the North Carolina presidential primary to the presidential primary in neighboring South Carolina. The primary, according to the law, would fall on the Tuesday after the South Carolina primary. Enacting that law was a problematic maneuver from the start. South Carolina has had its first in the South status codified at the national party level over the last couple of presidential election cycles and prefers to have both a Saturday primary and one that is at least seven days earlier than the next earliest southern state presidential primary. The North Carolina law conflicts with all of that. Not only would a primary on the Tuesday after South Carolina fall within that seven day buffer South Carolina prefers, but the position of the South Carolina primary would likely draw the North Carolina primary to a point on the calendar -- in February -- that would violate the new, stricter Republican National Committee rule prohibiting primaries and caucuses (other than the four carve-out state) before March 1.
The specter of that super penalty looms large over the North Carolina presidential primary situation. That reality likely contributed to Lewis -- the Republican National Committeeman from North Carolina -- to introduce this legislation. And again, it somewhat reverses the changes made in 2013. H 457 would pull the North Carolina presidential primary back to a solid position on March 8, but would maintain the May date for the other primaries. Throughout much of the post-reform era, North Carolina has conducted its presidential primaries in concert with those for state and local offices on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in May. The 2013 law split off the presidential primary part and tethered that election to the date of the primary in South Carolina. The remaining primaries were left on the May date.
The proposed change would move just the presidential primary to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in March; March 8 during the 2016 cycle. That would not coincide with the SEC primary -- a collection of other southern state presidential primaries -- on March 1. Instead, it would have North Carolina sharing a date with contests across the country in Michigan, Mississippi and Ohio and likely Idaho as well. Such a shift would also put North Carolina Republicans in the heart of the proportionality window. North Carolina law requires a proportional allocation of delegates, but RNC rules supersede those requirements when in conflict. For North Carolina, though, the RNC would require some form of proportional allocation before March 15.
Other notes:
- This proposed shift is consistent with the resolution that has made the rounds at Republican County Conventions and other organization meetings recently. That resolution called on a later primary date that would not affect (the numbers in) the North Carolina Republican delegation to the national convention. It furthermore urged the North Carolina General Assembly to consider consolidating all the primaries in North Carolina on that later date (as has been the past practice in the Old North state, albeit in May). However, that resolution has opened the door to discussions across the state about whether it might be better for North Carolina Republicans to maximize the voice of the voters through a winner-take-all contests. The resolution does not call for a March 15 or later date, but that idea is out there. A March 8 primary would not allow such an allocation plan.
- The bigger thing here is that this move has been expected for a while now. The shoe has finally dropped in the state House as expected. There is legislation to move the North Carolina primary to a firmer and permanent date, but as has been detailed in this space, a move of this sort is not something with which the state Senate seems to be onboard. The chambers have been at odds on this issue to some degree since the state Senate added, passed and forced on the state House an amendment affecting the presidential primary date on the last day of a special legislative session with the clock ticking. Overcoming two chambers at odds with each other over the scheduling of the presidential primary is still a significant roadblock to the North Carolina primary coming back into compliance with the national party delegate selection rules.
Oklahoma House Committee Defeats Bill to Move Presidential Primary Away from March 1
By a 5-2 vote, the Oklahoma House Committee on Elections and Ethics for the moment killed the bill that would have shifted the presidential primary in the Sooner state from back a month to the first Tuesday in April. SB 233 will stay in committee, but given the opposition voiced at the hearing and reflected in the vote, it will likely stay there.
The impact of the decision is that the Oklahoma presidential primary is very likely to remain where it is on the calendar, March 1. That keeps Oklahoma on what committee members and those speaking for and against the bill at the hearing called Super Tuesday. Typically, the earliest date on which the national parties have allowed states other than the four carve-out states to conduct primary and caucus elections has invited a significant amount of other states to cluster on that date. But for the 2016 cycle, a group of southern states have attempted to stake a claim to that date on the calendar and rebrand it the SEC primary. Oklahoma would stand pat with neighboring Texas on March 1 plus the SEC primary states, Tennessee definitely and likely Georgia and Alabama as well. That group and Virginia would tip the overall balance for March 1 toward the South. Massachusetts, Minnesota and Vermont are also currently slated to hold primaries on that date.
For Oklahoma Republicans, staying on March 1 would mean having to maintain some semblance of the proportional delegate allocation plan they were forced to install (based in RNC rules) for 2012. Part of the motivation for SB 233 was to allow Sooner state Republicans to return to the winner-take-all (by congressional district) plan the state party had operated under prior to 2012.
The Oklahoma Republican Party is set to meet for its state convention on April 11, where this presidential primary date-related proportional versus winner-take-all discussion may extend.
The impact of the decision is that the Oklahoma presidential primary is very likely to remain where it is on the calendar, March 1. That keeps Oklahoma on what committee members and those speaking for and against the bill at the hearing called Super Tuesday. Typically, the earliest date on which the national parties have allowed states other than the four carve-out states to conduct primary and caucus elections has invited a significant amount of other states to cluster on that date. But for the 2016 cycle, a group of southern states have attempted to stake a claim to that date on the calendar and rebrand it the SEC primary. Oklahoma would stand pat with neighboring Texas on March 1 plus the SEC primary states, Tennessee definitely and likely Georgia and Alabama as well. That group and Virginia would tip the overall balance for March 1 toward the South. Massachusetts, Minnesota and Vermont are also currently slated to hold primaries on that date.
For Oklahoma Republicans, staying on March 1 would mean having to maintain some semblance of the proportional delegate allocation plan they were forced to install (based in RNC rules) for 2012. Part of the motivation for SB 233 was to allow Sooner state Republicans to return to the winner-take-all (by congressional district) plan the state party had operated under prior to 2012.
The Oklahoma Republican Party is set to meet for its state convention on April 11, where this presidential primary date-related proportional versus winner-take-all discussion may extend.
Tuesday, March 31, 2015
Idaho Presidential Primary Bill Passes State House, Off to Governor Otter
The Idaho state House passed SB 1066 on Tuesday, March 31. The measure to reestablish a presidential primary and schedule it as a free-standing election on the second Tuesday in March navigated the lower chamber with only minority party Democrats and a handful of Republicans in opposition. The 50-19 vote now sends the bill off to Governor Butch Otter for his consideration.
If the governor signs the legislation that would clear the way for Idaho Republicans to switch back to a primary as its means of allocating delegates to the Republican National Convention from the caucuses/convention the party used in 2012. The Idaho Republican Party passed a resolution at its 2015 winter meeting stipulating that it would opt for a presidential primary if the state legislature passed legislation to bring the 2012-repealed primary back at an earlier date.1
An Idaho presidential primary on March 8 would align it with primaries in Michigan, Mississippi, Ohio and Republican caucuses in Hawaii. A primary on that date is also under consideration in neighboring Washington state.
--
1 The Idaho GOP did call for a consolidated primary election in that resolution. What the legislature has provided is not that, though the presidential primary may run concurrently with school elections held at that point in March. That may require additional action from the state party in order to fully switch back to a primary.
If the governor signs the legislation that would clear the way for Idaho Republicans to switch back to a primary as its means of allocating delegates to the Republican National Convention from the caucuses/convention the party used in 2012. The Idaho Republican Party passed a resolution at its 2015 winter meeting stipulating that it would opt for a presidential primary if the state legislature passed legislation to bring the 2012-repealed primary back at an earlier date.1
An Idaho presidential primary on March 8 would align it with primaries in Michigan, Mississippi, Ohio and Republican caucuses in Hawaii. A primary on that date is also under consideration in neighboring Washington state.
--
1 The Idaho GOP did call for a consolidated primary election in that resolution. What the legislature has provided is not that, though the presidential primary may run concurrently with school elections held at that point in March. That may require additional action from the state party in order to fully switch back to a primary.
Monday, March 30, 2015
Mississippi SEC Primary Bill Derailed in Conference
With the end of the 2015 legislative session in sight, time was running out on the Mississippi legislation to bump the Magnolia state presidential primary up a week to March 1.
Was.
SB 2531 breezed through the state Senate last month and was later unanimously passed by the state House with what seemed like a small amendment. That amendment and the division over it between the two chambers proved to be the undoing of the bill in conference. Standing in the way of Mississippi joining the proposed SEC primary was a dispute over whether to sunset the primary move. The House preferred making the presidential primary date change -- to the first Tuesday in March -- permanent while the Senate version would have had the primary revert to the second Tuesday in March date the state has occupied on the presidential primary calendar since 1988.
That gap between the two chambers' version could not be bridged in conference on Monday, March 30. That kills the bill and Mississippi's last chance to move up a week into the proposed SEC primary position. Instead, Mississippi will presumably compete with Michigan, Ohio, Hawaii Republicans and perhaps Idaho as well for attention on March 8.
Ultimately, this is a strange end for a bill that by all indications was a slam dunk even before the legislature convened in January. Everyone was apparently not on board.
Was.
SB 2531 breezed through the state Senate last month and was later unanimously passed by the state House with what seemed like a small amendment. That amendment and the division over it between the two chambers proved to be the undoing of the bill in conference. Standing in the way of Mississippi joining the proposed SEC primary was a dispute over whether to sunset the primary move. The House preferred making the presidential primary date change -- to the first Tuesday in March -- permanent while the Senate version would have had the primary revert to the second Tuesday in March date the state has occupied on the presidential primary calendar since 1988.
That gap between the two chambers' version could not be bridged in conference on Monday, March 30. That kills the bill and Mississippi's last chance to move up a week into the proposed SEC primary position. Instead, Mississippi will presumably compete with Michigan, Ohio, Hawaii Republicans and perhaps Idaho as well for attention on March 8.
Ultimately, this is a strange end for a bill that by all indications was a slam dunk even before the legislature convened in January. Everyone was apparently not on board.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)