Housekeeping: Minnesota Democratic Caucuses on March 6

A while back FHQ wondered aloud about the fate of the Minnesota Democratic Farm-Labor Party's efforts to hold a February 7 caucus vote to allocate Democratic convention delegates, but to release the results on March 6. That delegate selection plan faced an uncertain future before the Democratic Rules and Bylaws Committee as we attempted to point out then. Obviously, any vote from a non-exempt state prior to March 6 is a violation of the 2012 Democratic delegate selection rules and would thus make any state in violation vulnerable to sanction from the national party.

FHQ brings this up now because Minnesota was among the states that gained delegate selection plan approval from the Rules and Bylaws Committee yesterday. We were, then, understandably curious to find out if the earlier plan had passed muster with the committee or if changes had been made in the interim in order to win committee approval. The answer from the Minnesota DFL appears to be the latter. A revised plan noting the incorrect nature of the February 7 caucuses has subsequently been posted on the DFL website.¹ The original post on the site has also been tagged "corrected version".

Now, there is no record of the original plan,^{2 3} and there's no real way of knowing the sequence of this change. The revised plan is dated April 16, just a couple of days following the closing of the public comment period. Again, there is no real way of knowing whether someone brought this to the attention of the DFL and they made the change under the guise of a "corrected version" or if there were at least two plans under consideration -- one of which was the vote-now-release-results-later plan -- and the wrong one was posted at the opening of the public comment period.

In the end, it does not particularly matter. What does matter is that the Minnesota DFL will hold caucus meetings on March 6 and not the February 7 date on which their Republican counterparts will initiate their delegate selection process. That, in turn, creates a change in the 2012 presidential primary calendar.

...and map:

[Click to Enlarge]

--

¹ Here is that note from the Minnesota DFL:

The draft with a February 7, 2012 Caucus date that was posed on March 17th was an incorrect version of the MN Natonal Delegate Selection Plan. The correct version is now available by clicking the below link. This version contains a March 6th, 2012 Precinct Caucus date to comply with National Democratic Committee Delegate Selection Rules.

² I'm kicking myself in retrospect for not stripping out that language from Section III.A in the mistaken delegate selection plan and posting it verbatim in my earlier comments.

³ Fabulous person that he is, Tony Roza at The Green Papers read this post and sent FHQ a copy of the originally-posted Minnesota DFL delegate selection play. Here is the language from Section 1.B.1 & 2 :

1. Minnesota will use a proportional representation system based on the results of the presidential preference ballots cast at the precinct caucuses for apportioning delegates to the 2012 Democratic National Convention. These ballot results will be announced on March 6, 2012.

2. The “first determining step” of Minnesota‟s delegate election process will occur on February 7, 2012, with precinct caucuses.

Major hat tip to Tony.

Recent Posts:

May 8 Primary: Opposition Emerges & Quashes West Virginia Republicans' March 6 Presidential Convention Proposal

How Does Florida Respond to an Arizona Presidential Primary on January 31?

What a January 31 Arizona Primary Does to the 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Google+ and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

May 8 Primary: Opposition Emerges & Quashes West Virginia Republicans' March 6 Presidential Convention Proposal

The West Virginia Republican Executive Committee today decided the party will, unlike 2008, shun a caucus/convention system to allocate the majority of its presidential delegates in a May primary. Reports of a resolution to once again hold a Super Tuesday convention surfaced nearly two weeks ago, and in the time since at least a couple of county Republican Party chairs have voiced opposition to the state party repeating the delegate selection in a manner mostly consistent with 2008. Joselyn King at the Wheeling News Register aggregates some quotes from some among the anti-convention ranks:

"I am totally against the convention, and so is the Marshall County Executive Committee," Morris said. "I really believe it is the people's choice to select a president - not a person who is a delegate to the convention.

"I'm sure an awful lot of people feel differently," he added. "I got an awful lot of comments after from people who didn't like it. I didn't like it."

"It [May primary] may be too late - but then again, it may not," Morris continued. "It depends on where things fall. It may be a close election that goes later, and our vote will count. But what's the difference in having a convention to have an early voice if the people don't have a say? What's the difference?"

...and...

"I was at the convention before, and I felt uncomfortable about making a decision for the rest of the voters," she [Tyler County chairwoman, Rebecca Wells] noted. "It's not my place.

"It's nice to have candidates come into state and to hear them speak personally. But I wish more people in the state could have seen them," she added. "A convention is not in the best interest of the voters of West Virginia or of Tyler County."

The opposition case proved to be too strong and the resolution passed. The group of executive committee members was apparently sizable enough to threaten and take down the proposal. As such, the two county chairs (quoted above) out of 111 in attendance (or by proxy) and voting today were among those in the majority on the Executive Committee. The final vote was 77-25.

West Virginia will stay on May 8 on the 2012 presidential primary calendar. FHQ will have a link to any press release from the West Virginia Republican Party when and if it is made available.

Recent Posts:

How Does Florida Respond to an Arizona Presidential Primary on January 31?

What a January 31 Arizona Primary Does to the 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar

Arizona Governor Considering Moving Presidential Primary to at Least the Last Tuesday in December January

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

How Does Florida Respond to an Arizona Presidential Primary on January 31?

FHQ got a really good comment loaded with great questions in response to my "what impact will Arizona have on the calendar" post yesterday from regular reader, MysteryPolitico. What the questions and my response highlight is that Florida is still the one state to watch. The legislature, foreseeing this type of potential move from other states, gave the Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee the flexibility to absorb a threat such as Arizona to January 31 and still be able to go earlier. The likelihood, then, that Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina shift into December depends almost entirely on what Florida decides to do between now and October 1.

But before I get too far into that let's have a look at MysteryPolitico's comment:

I don't get the sense that Florida is looking to "break" the primary calendar, by which I mean, go so early that Iowa and/or NH are forced into December. Based on past public statements by the politicos in Florida, it seems like the important thing to them is that they go 5th, and they're willing to be "cooperative" on the exact timing.

Thus if Arizona (and possibly other states) move up to Jan. 31, then I figure Florida would probably aim for Jan. 24, but probably no earlier. You'd probably end up with something like this:

Jan. 5 IA
Jan. 10 NH
Jan. 21 NV, SC
Jan. 24 FL
Jan. 31 AZ (+maybe GA and/or MI?)

The scenario in which Iowa is forced into December is the one where Michigan goes earlier than Jan. 31. So I guess the relevant question is when will Michigan show its hand relative to when the other states have to decide? Brewer has to announce a primary date at least 150 days in advance (which means early September if she's aiming for Jan. 31), and Florida has to decide by Oct. 1. What's the likely timeframe for Michigan?

My response:

I'm generally sympathetic to the Florida argument. No, there is absolutely no evidence that anyone in Florida is seeking to move up any further than they have to. In other words, in the doomsday scenario, Florida is more likely to be later than earlier in that January 3-31 window. In fact, I've had a couple of off the record conversations with some well-positioned folks within the party that have indicated to me that there are some institutional/political factors involved that actually bolster this argument.¹ Florida is willing to slightly jostle the boat, but they don't seem to want to rock it. Unless some state, Michigan or Georgia, say, moves to January 10, Florida is not going to go on January 3, definitively pushing the early four states into December.

Now, I had that conversation before the Arizona revelation, but I think the same broad rules apply.

As to the alignment of the calendar, I'm at a point where I feel like a continuation of these sorts of moves is going to draw the ire of the RNC (again, see Rule 16.e.3). We are going to see some push back from the national party at some point. Actually, we may not "see" it since the RNC would very much like to handle this, in my opinion, in-house. To the extent that we hear about a push back from the national party, it seems to me that it will come from folks on the state party level.

That sounds ambiguous, so let me attempt to clear it up by laying out what the national party wants relative to what we're continuing to see from the handful of rogue states. In essence, we're entering a negotiations phase. When we see comments like this one:

"We are currently working with all states and state parties to abide by the rules of the Republican Party to ensure compliance," said Sean Spicer, communications director for the RNC.

...it increasingly, veiled though it may be, looks like two sides -- state parties and national parties -- trying to hammer out a deal. [And no, I don't think this hypothesis finds its root in the ongoing debt negotiations.] The RNC knows quite well that it is not going to get its desired calendar with Iowa kicking the process off on February 6. But the folks there also know that they don't have to sit idly by while a few states wreak havoc on the primary calendar. In fact, it has the means, as long as they ultimately enforce them, to decimate a state's delegation to the national convention. Of course, the RNC doesn't want to do that. The states know this, thus the apparent willingness to defy the rules.

That's why I say this is a negotiation. The RNC has the means to come down hard on the states, but doesn't want to use them. The states, recognizing this, are willing to slightly break the rules but not shatter them completely. The evidence is pretty clear here in both Florida and Michigan. The talk out of Florida lately has been about squeezing a technically non-compliant primary into a March 1-3 window. Similarly, Michigan's Republican Party has set a nearly equivalent, though slightly wider, February 28-March 6 window. Those are both, save the one compliant, March 6 date Michigan is considering, non-compliant, but only just so, relative to the RNC rules on delegate selection.

Obviously, Arizona has thrown a bit of a monkeywrench into the plans in Florida and Michigan much less at the RNC. But I'll go on record as saying that Arizona won't move up to January 31 and doesn't really want to. Why? It's a negotiation. Arizona is only trying to carve out its own spot early on the calendar, and has now submitted its initial offer to the RNC. Now arguably, Arizona already had its own spot early on the primary calendar on February 28. That week between February 28 and March 6, however, is beginning to look, tentatively mind you, compressed enough as to make most of the contests indistinguishable. From a candidate/media attention standpoint, all of those states within that window may as well go on the same date. That's not what Florida and Michigan and now Arizona want. No, they would rather have stand-alone primaries that give them the maximum attention.

It should be noted that the RNC, well, if I was there anyway, should want that too. That's why I think they are working toward this behind closed doors, but also waiting as long as they can -- to let the dust settle as much as possible -- before publicly "acting". If I was in a position at the RNC, and I'm not, the following is what I would be pushing:

Monday, January 9, 2012: Iowa

Tuesday, January 17: New Hampshire

Tuesday, January 24: South Carolina

Saturday, January 28: Nevada

Tuesday, January 31: Florida

Tuesday, February 7: Colorado

Tuesday, February 14: Arizona

Tuesday, February 21 or 28: Michigan

[Other states potentially likely to slip into February: Georgia, Wisconsin, Wyoming]²

Tuesday, March 6: Less-Super Tuesday

Not only does that give each one of the rogue states its own chance at the spotlight -- a week in nearly every case -- but it places on nearly every week a contest. That allows the RNC to avoid any gaps in the calendar like the likely February gap in the MysteryPolitico calendar above or similar to the gap that existed in the 2008 Democratic calendar between Mississippi on March 11 and Pennsylvania on April 22. That was a big hole in the calendar that, while it kept Democrats in the news, it also brought us the "clinging to guns and religion" tangent and the return of Jeremiah Wright. The RNC and the prospective candidates would rather have results in contests to talk about than idle time for opposition research fodder to emerge and dominate the news. That is especially true with an incumbent in the White House. The Republican National Committee doesn't want to afford Obama the opportunity to look and act presidential simultaneous with news being dug up about their own prospective candidates. Now, that is a fine line to tread since the field could be winnowed down to two rather quickly leading to a week-to-week, contest-to-contest sniping fest among the remaining candidates. Contest results, if there are any in that interim, would tend to trump any negative back and forth. At the very least contest results help to frame such exchanges better than in their absence.

As FHQ is apt to do, we have taken a series of questions, slightly answered them and proposed an alternative. The simple truth at this point is that we don't know what the calendar will ultimately look like. What we know is that no one wants the primary calendar to bleed over into 2011. We also know that the early four states and in addition Florida, Michigan, Arizona and maybe Colorado, Georgia, Wisconsin and Wyoming want a crack at early contests and still have the ability to move. Call it a hunch, but I'd bet the RNC also would like to retain some modicum of order to the process and not have a bunch of states compressed in January with a gap in February before March 6 opens the window in which non-exempt states should have been allowed to hold primaries and caucuses according to the rules. Finally, we also know that the RNC has the ability to stiffen the penalties on states if they go really rogue. Sure, that idealistic FHQ proposal above meets those criteria and might even make some sense. But we also know that that probably makes it much less likely that it will become a reality. As I said, if I was at the RNC that would be what I would be advocating now.

NOTE: FHQ began a post on the timeframe for the remaining states to decide on primary/caucus dates yesterday, but decided to wait and see how the events of today impact that before posting. Nonetheless, that post should answer the questions embedded in the final paragraph of MysteryPolitico's comment. Stay tuned. That should be up later today or sometime tomorrow.

--

¹ Directly from this conversation, this mainly consists of the idea that the RNC has a check on Florida. And believe it or not, it really doesn't have anything to do with the convention in Tampa. No, instead the national party has some sway in the Florida matter based on the fact that its co-chair, Sharon Day, is from Florida. Does Day have a significant say in where Florida ends up on the calendar? Yes and no. She will not necessarily be involved in the selection of a date for the Florida primary, but being that she aspires to move to positions other co-chair of the national party, Day would be, and indeed is, highly motivated to influence the decision-making there in an effort to save face. Again, this isn't a direct check. It is an indirect one based on someone who is connect to and in the Florida Republican Party political structure.

² Missouri is left off of this list. It will be very difficult for Republican legislators there to vote against a bill to move the primary to March 6 from the governor after already passing such a bill without risking further penalty from the RNC. Though some may like to stick to February 7, I think Missouri Republicans' hands are tied now.

Recent Posts:

What a January 31 Arizona Primary Does to the 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar

Arizona Governor Considering Moving Presidential Primary to at Least the Last Tuesday in December January

Members May Not Be Named to Florida Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee Until Late Summer/Early Fall

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

Missouri Governor to Add Presidential Primary Bill to Special Session

According to a press release from his office, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon (D) will include a "narrow" bill to address the timing of the Show Me state's presidential primary. The proposal would accomplish what the broader elections bill that included a provision to move the primary failed to after a gubernatorial veto: move the primary from the first Tuesday after the first Monday in February to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in March. The move would make the Missouri primary compliant with national party rules for delegate selection if passed and signed into law during the special session.

--

Nixon press release:

Gov. Nixon to include presidential primary legislation during special session

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- Gov. Jay Nixon today announced that he will ask the General Assembly to take up and pass a narrow bill specifically to move the date of Missouri's presidential preference primary to March 6 during a special legislative session in September.

During the regular session, the General Assembly passed legislation (Senate Bill 282) that would move the date of Missouri's presidential primary to comply with the rules of both the national Republican and Democratic parties. Gov. Nixon supported that change. However, the bill also contained provisions that would have eliminated write-in candidates in many municipal elections and would have imposed unnecessary costs for taxpayers to hold special elections. Because of those additional provisions, Gov. Nixon vetoed the bill.

The Governor's office has continued to communicate with legislative and party leaders about the importance of moving Missouri's presidential primary to March 6.

"I look forward to continuing to work with the General Assembly during the special session to pass narrow, bi-partisan legislation to make this important change," Gov. Nixon said.

Recent Posts:

What a January 31 Arizona Primary Does to the 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar

Arizona Governor Considering Moving Presidential Primary to at Least the Last Tuesday in December January

Members May Not Be Named to Florida Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee Until Late Summer/Early Fall

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

What a January 31 Arizona Primary Does to the 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar

The news last night out of Arizona is very likely to shake up the landscape on which the 2012 presidential primary calendar is forming. It is no real stretch to imagine how the various dominoes subsequently begin falling into place:

• Governor Jan Brewer moves the Arizona primary from February 28 (where the contest is currently positioned) to January 31.
• Florida takes going in the March 1-3 window off the table and begins looking more seriously at a primary on or before January 31 (in the January 3-31 window).
• Michigan becomes more of a question mark. The recent discussion out of the Wolverine state has centered in on a February 28 (where the contest is currently positioned) to March 6 timeframe for its presidential primary. That said, Michigan Republicans require some help from the Republican-controlled legislature to make anything other than the status quo (February 28) a reality. Currently, there is legislation active in the legislature to move the primary to, you guessed it, January 31.
• Missouri Republicans -- in the legislature and out -- seriously reconsider a veto override of the bill that would move the Show Me state's primary to March 6 and also the extent to which they will work in any special session to push a change that might move the state out of a prime February 7 position.
• Georgia remains a free agent throughout. The secretary of state has until December 31 to set a date for the Peach state primary.
• Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina wait it all out and go earlier than all the other states. But if Georgia remains a threat up until December 1, the four early states may be in a bind in terms of scheduling a primary/caucus and then having enough time to prepare for it.

With those guidelines laid out, let's look at some scenarios:

Scenario #1 (Doomsday):

Monday, December 5, 2011: Iowa

Tuesday, December 13: New Hampshire

Saturday, December 17: Nevada, South Carolina

January 3-31, 2012: Florida

Tuesday, January 31: Arizona, Michigan, Georgia (earliest date Georgia can hold a contest)

Tuesday, February 7: Missouri, Colorado

Tuesday, February 21: Wisconsin¹

Tuesday, March 6: Less-Super Tuesday

Analysis: This is that absolute worst case scenario -- well, unless some other states attempt to move into 2011 -- from the national parties' perspectives. I suspect, first of all, that the Democratic parties in any rogue states will hold later and compliant (post-March 5) caucuses should the above calendar become reality, and secondly, that the RNC would come down severely on any states taking part in the violation. According to the rules (Rule 16.e.3), the RNC Standing Committee on Rules can levy additional penalties on states found to be in violation of the delegate selection rules. And this may include the early four states as well. ...may.

Scenario #2 (Pragmatism):

Monday, January 16, 2012: Iowa

Tuesday, January 24: New Hampshire

Saturday, January 28: Nevada, South Carolina

Tuesday, January 31: Florida

Tuesday, February 7: Missouri

Tuesday, February 14: Arizona²

Tuesday, February 28: Michigan

Tuesday, March 6: Less-Super Tuesday

Free agent: Georgia

Analysis: This is what I call pragmatic for a couple of related reasons. No, it is not what the national parties want, but it doesn't stretch into 2011 either. For starters, this alignment is not as compressed overall. That's debatable, but allow me to explain. It is very compressed up front; probably more compressed than it would be in reality if Florida ends up on January 31. The early four states may shift up a week to combat that. Of course, Florida could follow them (all the way up to January 3). Overall, though, this allows most of these states to go not only early, but early and on their own. That combination is a recipe for having influence; just ask the group of states who moved up to February 5 in 2008 hoping to have some influence. Early and concurrent with other states -- especially bigger and more significant states -- is not how you gain influence over the nomination process, not directly anyway. If you can carve out a position for your state that is early and allows for a stand-alone contest, then you have provided your state with the greatest opportunity to have an impact on the nomination.

Certainly, I could come up with any number of permutations for how the calendar may end up given this Arizona news, but these two scenarios represent the two extremes that we're dealing with at this point in July 2011. Neither party, especially the RNC, is going to like it, but they can opt for "not what we want" or as I've heard it described "all hell breaking loose". Again, pragmatic will carry the day and is something that, while it does not follow the letter of the law, would be at least moderately palatable to the party.

As always, we shall see...

--

¹ The Wisconsin legislature is still deliberating on the date of the Badger state's primary. A plan to move the primary to April 3 has bipartisan support, but if there is a march to January and February by other states happens, Republicans in control of the legislature may reconsider their sponsorship of that legislation.

² This date is based on a rumor I have heard. Arizona celebrates its centennial on February 14, 2012 (exactly 100 years after the state gained statehood). Again, this is just a rumor. Staying on February 28 may end up being advantageous to Arizona as well

Recent Posts:

Arizona Governor Considering Moving Presidential Primary to at Least the Last Tuesday in December January

Members May Not Be Named to Florida Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee Until Late Summer/Early Fall

Conditional on Other States, Colorado GOP May Move Caucuses to February 7

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

Arizona Governor Considering Moving Presidential Primary to at Least the Last Tuesday in December January

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer is looking closely at the moving the Grand Canyon state's presidential primary from February 28 to at least the final Tuesday in December January according to a report from Howard Fischer of Capitol Media Services. The power of proclamation that was granted to the Arizona governor earlier in the 2000s was used by Brewer's predecessor, Janet Napolitano (D) in both 2004 and 2008 to move the state's presidential nominating contest up to the earliest date allowed by the two major parties, the first Tuesday in February. Brewer, however, is upping the ante significantly over that precedent. Said Brewer (via Fischer):

"Arizona is at the forefront of advancing solutions to national issues such as immigration and border security, Medicaid spending, and the financial crisis,'' Brewer said.

"It only makes sense that our state be positioned to have its voice heard loud and clear when it comes to the presidential nomination process,'' she continued. "Moving Arizona's presidential preference primary election into January would ensure that our citizens are major players in the 2012 campaign.''

The Arizona legislature failed to act to move the non-compliant primary during its session earlier this year. It is currently set for February 28. In essence, then, Arizona has nothing to lose. The state is already in violation of the rules and has no recourse. The proclamation power the governor has allows her to move the primary up but not back on the calendar.

Let the talk of November (or earlier) December caucuses and primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina begin! continue.

...in earnest.

Here's another item on the potential move in Arizona from Mary Jo Pitzl of the Arizona Republic.

Recent Posts:

Members May Not Be Named to Florida Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee Until Late Summer/Early Fall

Conditional on Other States, Colorado GOP May Move Caucuses to February 7

West Virginia Republican Chair Calls for Presidential Primary to be Moved Up

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

Members May Not Be Named to Florida Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee Until Late Summer/Early Fall

In a "Whatever happened to that presidential primary committee?" post, Kathleen Haughney of the Orlando Sentinel follows up with Florida Speaker of the House Dean Cannon's spokesperson, Katie Betta. Obviously, not much has been going on or news would have broken by now -- naming the committee members, setting a date, etc. -- on the Florida primary date front. But what Betta had to say about the time frame for the decision-making on the membership alone is fairly telling.

“We are currently monitoring the decisions made by other states with regard to their dates,” said Cannon spokeswoman Katie Betta. “Ultimately, Speaker Cannon supports choosing a date that will allow Florida to remain a relevant player in the process. For him, that requires selecting a date that is both early and unique to Florida. We will have a better picture of what that date might be as other states begin to make their decisions.”

No, that is not entirely newsworthy either. The reason the Florida legislature created the committee in the first place was to maximize the Sunshine state's powers-that-be the ability to set an advantageous (EARLY!) date. No, what was important was something else that came out of the discussion:

A spokeswoman for House Speaker Dean Cannon said the speaker would likely not name anyone to the committee until late summer or early fall.

If this is true, that the members of the committee will not be named until the late summer or early fall, then the committee is going to have to act pretty quickly. At the very latest, early fall is going to the last third of September; only a matter of days before the October 1 deadline by which the Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee to set a date. To me that says that the committee phase is more a formality than anything else -- that a decision has already been mostly made and can be made seemingly on the fly prior to October 1. FHQ has certainly been apt to play both sides of this Florida story -- to game the entire world of possibilities in terms of the overall primary calendar. But in my eyes, this lends at least some credence -- that as well as some recent conversations I've had -- to the idea that Florida will indeed try and squeeze a primary into the oft-talked about March 1-3 window. I still say that Arizona and Michigan and maybe even Missouri will have something to say about that.

But then again, that's why Florida is waiting it out until those other states decide. October 1 will likely be late enough for them to achieve that. Well, except for Georgia.

Recent Posts:

Conditional on Other States, Colorado GOP May Move Caucuses to February 7

West Virginia Republican Chair Calls for Presidential Primary to be Moved Up

Sigh: Cite Your Sources, CNN

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

Conditional on Other States, Colorado GOP May Move Caucuses to February 7

Ernest Luning of The Colorado Statesman is reporting that the Colorado Republican Party is entertaining the idea of moving up its presidential nominating caucuses to February 7 depending on how other states position themselves on the calendar. Said state Republican Party chair, Ryan Call:

“We’re waiting to see what Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada do,” Call said. “The law permits us to move up to the first Tuesday in February, and we might consider that if a number of other states depart and (Republican National Committee) rules permit us to do so.”

When FHQ described the Colorado legislature's successful attempts earlier this year to move the Centennial state's caucuses up two weeks to the first Tuesday in March from the third Tuesday in March, we failed to discuss the portion of the law Call mentioned. Mainly, that was a function of the fact that that particular passage in the law was not being altered in the legislation considered and ultimately passed. And Colorado, never a threat to go rogue in the past, further did not seem likely to defy national party rules by invoking that part of the law. All the while, though, the possibility was always there.

That segment was added ahead of the 2008 cycle, giving both parties in Colorado the option of moving up to what was -- in 2008 -- the earliest date the national parties were allowing non-exempt states to hold contests.

I have said many times in the past that there would not be a stampede of states to the front of the calendar, and while FHQ still maintains that that is the case now, there are a handful of caucus states that may decide to up the ante and move into February. And they may or may not be compliant with the RNC rules as a result. Much will depend on how those states decide to allocate delegates. If the precinct level is non-binding, then the contest will be compliant (see Iowa and Nevada on the GOP side in 2008). If delegates are allocated during the initial phase of the caucus/convention process (see Wyoming, 2008), those states would be in violation of the rules. In the case of the Colorado Republican Party, those delegates are left unpledged (or were in 2008).

All this means is that we are getting closer and closer to a January (if not December) start to the primary calendar.

Recent Posts:

West Virginia Republican Chair Calls for Presidential Primary to be Moved Up

Sigh: Cite Your Sources, CNN

Michigan Republicans Eye Late February/Early March Primary

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

West Virginia Republican Chair Calls for Presidential Primary to be Moved Up

In a press item released on the heels of West Virginia Republican Party chairman, Mike Stuart, detailing the plans for a caucus/convention system of allocating 2012 presidential delegates, he also called on the acting governor and legislature to act quickly and move the Mountain state's presidential primary to an earlier date. Said Stuart in the news release:

“It is time to move up the WV Presidential Primary to ensure that West Virginians have more say in picking the presidential nominees," said Mike Stuart, Chairman of the West Virginia Republican Party. “We owe it to our coal miners and West Virginia families to ensure that the issues that are critical and unique to the future of West Virginia are reflected in the selection of a President of the United States.”

...and...

“Today, Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada lead the process of picking the next President. Those states have little in common with the drivers of West Virginia’s economy,” said Stuart. “By the time West Virginia picks its nominee for president, the selection is generally irrelevant and West Virginia families and coal miners get left behind in the process.”

...and...

“[Acting Goveror Earl Ray] Tomblin and the Legislature can very easily change the WV Presidential Primary and make a bold statement to the nation that a candidate for President has to go through and to West Virginia before getting to the White House. West Virginia is too important to the nation for it to continue to be irrelevant in the selection of a President.”

Stuart invoking the ease with which the acting governor and legislature could act piqued my interest. It would have been helpful to have had the mechanism by which this change could be made included in the release. Beggars, however, cannot be choosers.

The bottom line is that there at least a couple of complicating factors. First off, the West Virginia legislature adjourned for the year on March 18. That fact does not preclude the legislature from acting on such a change in the state's elections law. The legislature does hold regular joint, interim meetings throughout the time the legislature is technically out of session, and the legislature can act on legislation in those settings. From the West Virginia legislature's web site:

Interim Committees
Approximately once a month during the period between regular sessions - the interim - the Legislature gathers in Charleston (or another location in the state) for three days of committee meetings.

The Interim Committees usually are joint committees, with members of both the Senate and House of Delegates working together as single groups. For example, the Joint Standing Committee on Government Organization is made up of members of both the Senate Government Organization Committee and the House of Delegates Goverment Organization Committee.

The interim committees’ primary purpose is to provide a forum for the continuing study of issues relevant to the future of the state. During each interim gathering, members discuss and hear public comment on issues which may be addressed during an upcoming regular session. The joint nature of these interim committees allows members of the Senate and House of Delegates to consider issues and legislation which may affect both bodies in a similar manner.

Many times, bills to be introduced during the next regular session are drafted, studied and rewritten long before the session begins. Also, bills that did not pass during the previous session may be revisited during the interim period for reworking.

Some bills previously rejected by the Legislature still need some fine-tuning before the Legislature passes them into law. Hence, the interims allow for reconsideration, reworking and possible reintroduction at the next formal gathering of the Legislature.

The interim meetings also allow the Legislature to monitor the effects of current and recently-passed legislation. For example, if a bill has passed which alters the state’s environmental policies, an interim committee may be assigned to study its continuing effects on the state’s economy, our citizens’ health, and other related issues.

If the governor and legislature are so inclined, then, they could introduce, consider, pass and sign into law a change in the primary date during one of the monthly interim sessions. But that leads to the second issue that may stand in the way of the move (presumably to March 6 or earlier): money. The Democratic-controlled legislature would obviously have to help out Republicans during a political season that will find Democrats on the sideline with Obama the likely Democratic nominee. That said, there are partisan concerns here, but legislators would have to decide on either creating an all-new and entirely separate presidential primary election or move up the federal, statewide and local primaries from May -- and the state has held a May or June primary throughout the post-reform era -- to an earlier date. The former is going to cost a significant amount during a time in which the economy is not in the best shape. This is something that has been confronted in other states with varying results, but is no less pertinent here. The alternative would be to move everything up which would have an effect on not only the traditional date West Virginia voters are used to, but could also impact the filing deadlines and cause problems with the federal mandates of the MOVE act.

In reality, Stuart is likely fine with the caucus/convention system from 2008 being used again in 2012. The true aim is very likely to get the legislature to consider a move in the future. ...for 2016 or beyond. FHQ may be off base here, but because of the partisan implications in West Virginia, I don't think I am.

Time will tell. And at least we now know the mechanism by which the elections law could be altered while the legislature is adjourned.

Recent Posts:

Sigh: Cite Your Sources, CNN

Michigan Republicans Eye Late February/Early March Primary

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (7/19/11)

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.

Sigh: Cite Your Sources, CNN

Now CNN is getting in on the act.

[Click to Enlarge]

Again, I don't want to bite the hand that sometimes feeds FHQ, but seriously, if you are going to stop by the site and then write a story, you could at least bother to say, "Hey, I read this somewhere else earlier today." And in CNN's case, they popped in with a specific "cuomo signs presidential primary bill" Google search at 12:45 this afternoon, and the CNN story on something that happened last week appeared at 5:21.

Strangely enough my initial post calling out CBS appeared immediately after the New York bill post. I don't particularly want to keep doing this, but as long this keeps happening, I have to stick to my word to continue calling out news outlets when they do this.

Recent Posts:

Michigan Republicans Eye Late February/Early March Primary

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (7/19/11)

Idaho Republicans Drop Presidential Primary in Favor of Super Tuesday Caucuses

Are you following FHQ on Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook? Click on the links to join in.