Missing the Real Story on the New Hampshire Primary

Invisible Primary: Visible -- Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the goings on of the moment as 2024 approaches...

First, over at FHQ Plus...

• How does Iowa fit into the Republican National Committee delegate rules? A deeper dive on the history of Rule 16 and how Iowa Republicans have no real recourse if New Hampshire leapfrogs the Hawkeye state into the first slot on the 2024 calendar. All the details at FHQ Plus.

If you haven't checked out FHQ Plus yet, then what are you waiting for? Subscribe below for free and consider a paid subscription to support FHQ's work and unlock the full site.

In Invisible Primary: Visible today...

...

Another day, another story from out of one of the traditionally early primary calendar states. Yesterday, it was Iowa. Today, New Hampshire is on the docket. 

But folks, in their zeal to make a story out of something that probably will not be a much of a story in 2024, some outlets have missed the real story in the battle between New Hampshire Democrats and the Democratic National Committee over the primary calendar next year. Well, most have missed the true story in Iowa and thus miss the bigger picture story on the evolution of the beginning of the 2024 calendar. 

That bigger picture story? How much differently Democrats in Iowa and New Hampshire are approaching the threat of 2024 calendar rules that shift each from their traditional positions. Look, as FHQ noted yesterday, Iowa Democrats' draft delegate selection plan was a deescalatory document. Yes, the date of the more primary-like preference vote is still unknown, but the signals from out of the Hawkeye state are that Iowa Democrats are playing for a spot -- any spot -- in the early window on the Democratic primary calendar. In other words, they are not fighting for first. South Carolina already has that (official) distinction They are fighting for early. Iowa Democrats are demonstrating flexibility. They appear willing to play ball with the DNC.

New Hampshire Democrats do not. 

To this point, from the draft delegate selection plan to comment after comment from New Hampshire Democrats to state legislative actions that Democratic state legislators have supported, the picture is just the opposite of what is coming out of Iowa. It is all still shock and anger and disbelief. The pose New Hampshire Democrats have struck remains defiant. And the one good thing that the latest story from Politico by Holly Otterbein and Lisa Kashinsky does is showcase how very rigid and inflexible New Hampshire Democrats are being on this. 

A party-run primary as a possible alternative?

Meanwhile, Democrats in the state are shutting down the idea of a party-run primary before they’ve even formally been approached about it. Buckley said a party-run primary would be a logistical nightmare and extremely expensive, costing upwards of $7 million. 

“Absolutely impossible,” he said. “Where would I rent 2,000 voting machines? Hire 1,500 people to run the polls? Rent 300 accessible voting locations? Hire security? Print 500,000 ballots. Process 30,000 absentee ballots.”

Never mind that states equal in size or bigger than New Hampshire held first-time, vote-by-mail party-run primaries in 2020. ...during a pandemic. Democratic parties in both Hawaii and Kansas pulled that off in the last cycle. Any thought in New Hampshire of consulting with those state parties to discover best practices, potential problems, anything? Nope. Just overestimates on scale and costs and a complete inability to think even a little outside of the box. 

And that fig leaf that was a feeble attempt at passing no-excuse absentee voting in New Hampshire?

New Hampshire Democrats also argue they’ve made a good-faith effort to meet the second part of the party’s requirements to stay in the official early-state window — expanding voting access by pushing Soucy’s legislation to create no-excuse absentee voting in the state, albeit to no avail.

That just is not very likely to carry much if any weight with the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee. Is it a good-faith effort at a provable positive step toward the changes the national party requested of New Hampshire Democrats. It is! But it is also a very small step in the grand scheme of the plan the national party has put forth for the 2024 presidential nomination process. 

It is a half step at best. All the DNC wants in something like this is a willing partner to come to the table and work toward a compromise of some sort. New Hampshire Democrats' my way or the highway approach to all of this will put them in the same boat that Florida and Michigan Democrats found themselves in 2007-08. Democratic legislators (and governors in Michigan's case) supported those rogue primaries and when the DNC suggested alternative caucuses to comply with the national party rules, both state parties threw up their hands and balked at the prospect. That got each a full 100 percent reduction in their 2008 national convention delegations.¹ New Hampshire is likely looking at the same fate. 

And that is the story here. It is tale of two "aggrieved" states and how differently each is reacting to the threat of calendar rules changes for 2024. It is the rigidity of the New Hampshire Democratic Party compared to the flexibility of Iowa Democrats. What it is not is a "predicament ... of the president's own making." It just is not. That is like saying the Florida and Michigan ordeal was one of the DNC's own design. Those states broke the rules the DNC put in place for 2008. Those state parties refused to explore alternatives for delegate selection. Those parties paid a price. The 55 other states and territories followed the rules. 

In 2023, all signs point toward 56 states and territories following the DNC calendar rules. [There are other budding violations of other rules elsewhere.] Only one state, New Hampshire, is indicating that it not only will not but also will not doing anything to meet the national party even part of the way there. Folks, that is not the president's problem. It is not the DNC's problem. It is New Hampshire's problem and Democrats there are trying to blackmail the national party into caving because of the possible general election implications. That is not a new practice, but in 2024 that is a recipe for sanctions from the national party. 

[One option in New Hampshire that FHQ has suggested and still has not seen anywhere else is tying something -- party-run primary, alternative state-run primary -- to town meeting day in March. That is when the New Hampshire presidential primary is supposed to be anyway. Or would be if not for the law that says it will fall on town meeting day unless another similar election is before the primary in the Granite state. Town meeting day is going to happen after the January presidential primary regardless. It could be an option for the Democrats in New Hampshire. It could be, but again, the party so far has not been receptive to alternatives.]

...

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is going to announce a presidential run? If only there had been some signs that this was coming. Seriously though, DeSantis closed the deal on 99 Republican state legislative endorsements (out of 113) in the Sunshine state on Wednesday, May 16. The floodgates referred to in this space yesterday were opened up. And DeSantis has a more than reasonable endorsement primary counterweight to the Trump rollout of Florida congressional delegation endorsements in recent weeks.

...

FHQ could use the Landmark Communications poll in Georgia out yesterday to point out how poorly Governor Brian Kemp would do in a Republican presidential primary in his home state. But that is unnecessary -- Kemp is not running -- and would miss an opportunity to talk about delegate allocation in the Peach state next year anyway. Yet, that is something of a question mark. Georgia will have an earlier presidential primary in 2024 than it (initially) did in 2020, and Republicans in the state will have to change the delegate allocation system they used in the last go-round to something more proportional (as the RNC defines it). 

Also, it is worth noting that Trump will address Georgia Republicans at their state convention next month where delegate selection rules for the 2024 cycle may be on the agenda.

...

On this date...

...in 1976, California Governor Jerry Brown won the battle but lost the war in the Maryland Democratic primary. But since Brown had not filed a slate in the Old Line state, former Georgia Governor Jimmy Carter won the delegate fight and also won in the Michigan primary. On the Republican side, President Gerald Ford swept both the Maryland and Michigan primaries.

...in 1987, Illinois Senator Paul Simon formally entered the contest for the 1988 Democratic presidential nomination.

...in 2004, Massachusetts Senator John Kerry swept primaries in Arkansas, Kentucky and Oregon.

--

¹ Yes, both Florida and Michigan Democrats had half of their delegations restored by the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee during Memorial Day weekend in 2008 and full delegations from both were seated at the Denver convention with full voting rights after a concession from the Obama campaign. But the conditions will be different for New Hampshire in 2024. Team Biden and the DNC will potentially be less willing to show such leniency. The incumbent president will not be coming off a hard-fought nomination win in the primaries and needing to bring two sides of an evenly split party together. Instead, it will be two sides: one comprised of 56 states and territories and the other of one state delegation that wants to hold onto a first-in-the-nation relic that the president is trying to change in favor of a rotation system at the beginning of the calendar. Sure, there are general election implications here as well because of New Hampshire's status as a battleground state. But it is a battleground state with just four electoral votes.

--

Recent posts:

Chaos? What Chaos? Iowa Republicans signal January caucuses, but that has been clear for a while.

Trump and the 2024 Delegate Allocation Rules

DeSantis is not without Organizational Strengths in the Republican Nomination Race

Follow FHQ on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Mastodon and Post or subscribe by Email.

See more on our political/electoral consulting venture at FHQ Strategies. 

2020 Democratic Delegate Allocation: HAWAII

HAWAII

Election type: primary
Date: May 22
    [April 4 originally]
Number of delegates: 33 [6 at-large, 3 PLEOs, 15 congressional district, 9 automatic/superdelegates]
Allocation method: proportional statewide and at the congressional district level
Threshold to qualify for delegates: 15%
2016: proportional caucuses
Delegate selection plan (pre-coronavirus)


--
Changes since 2016
If one followed the 2016 series on the Republican process here at FHQ, then you may end up somewhat disappointed. The two national parties manage the presidential nomination process differently. The Republican National Committee is much less hands-on in regulating state and state party activity in the delegate selection process than the Democratic National Committee is. That leads to a lot of variation from state to state and from cycle to cycle on the Republican side. Meanwhile, the DNC is much more top down in its approach. Thresholds stay the same. It is a 15 percent barrier that candidates must cross in order to qualify for delegates. That is standard across all states. The allocation of delegates is roughly proportional. Again, that is applied to every state.

That does not mean there are no changes. The calendar has changed as have other facets of the process such as whether a state has a primary or a caucus.

Hawaii Democrats pretty substantially altered their delegate selection process for 2020. Although the state legislature failed in 2018 to create a state government-run presidential primary, the state party in 2019 made the move toward a party-run primary in the wake of new DNC encouragements for increased participation in the presidential nomination process. That party-run primary was to combine both in-person and mail-in voting and a ranked choice ballot.

However, the coronavirus, as in other states, disrupted the state party's initial plans. First, Hawaii Democrats chose to eliminate in-person voting in the originally scheduled April 4 primary. Then, days later, the party moved the date on which mail-in ballots were due to May 22 to allow a bit more time for additional voters to register and for a third round of ballot mailing to occur in early May.

All ballots are due to state party offices by Friday, May 22. That is received and not postmarked by May 22. Since the state party offices are closed due to the coronavirus, there is no option to drop off completed ballots. They must be mailed and received by May 22. No specific deadline time is given.

[Please see below for more on the post-coronavirus changes specifically to the delegate selection process.]

Overall, there were significant changes to the way in which Hawaii Democrats planned to run their delegate selection process for the 2020 cycle. Yet, the Democratic delegation in Hawaii changed by just one delegate from 2016 to 2020. The number of district delegates decreased by one and the other two two categories of pledged delegates stayed exactly the same. So, too, did the number of superdelegates in the Aloha state. The nature of the bonus Hawaii Democrats qualified for in 2020 changed. A 15 percent clustering bonus from 2016 was replaced by a 20 percent timing bonus in 2020. The increased bonus masks some small changes to the base delegation in Hawaii for 2020 from 2016.


Thresholds
The standard 15 percent qualifying threshold applies both statewide and on the congressional district level.


Delegate allocation (at-large and PLEO delegates)
To win any at-large or PLEO (pledged Party Leader and Elected Officials) delegates a candidate must win 15 percent of the statewide vote. Only the votes of those candidates above the threshold will count for the purposes of the separate allocation of these two pools of delegates.

See New Hampshire synopsis for an example of how the delegate allocation math works for all categories of delegates.


Delegate allocation (congressional district delegates)
Hawaii's 15 congressional district delegates are split across two congressional districts and have a variation of just one delegate across districts from the measure of Democratic strength Hawaii Democrats are using based on the results of the 2016 presidential election and the 2018 gubernatorial election in the state. That method apportions delegates as follows...
CD1 - 7 delegates*
CD2 - 8 delegates

*Bear in mind that districts with odd numbers of national convention delegates are potentially important to winners (and those above the qualifying threshold) within those districts. Rounding up for an extra delegate initially requires less in those districts than in districts with even numbers of delegates.


Delegate allocation (automatic delegates/superdelegates)
Superdelegates are free to align with a candidate of their choice at a time of their choosing. While their support may be a signal to voters in their state (if an endorsement is made before voting in that state), superdelegates will only vote on the first ballot at the national convention if half of the total number of delegates -- pledged plus superdelegates -- have been pledged to one candidate. Otherwise, superdelegates are locked out of the voting unless 1) the convention adopts rules that allow them to vote or 2) the voting process extends to a second ballot. But then all delegates, not just superdelegates will be free to vote for any candidate.

[NOTE: All Democratic delegates are pledged and not bound to their candidates. They are to vote in good conscience for the candidate to whom they have been pledged, but technically do not have to. But they tend to because the candidates and their campaigns are involved in vetting and selecting their delegates through the various selection processes on the state level. Well, the good campaigns are anyway.]


Selection
The 15 Hawaii district delegates will be selected by state convention delegates selected in March 4 precinct meetings. However, those state convention delegates will not make those selections at the state convention as planned. Instead, an online voting system will help facilitate a voting window from June 5-8. The state party will distribute voting instructions to delegates on June 5 and provide a deadline of June for their return. The Hawaii Democratic Party State Central Committee meeting at which PLEO and at-large delegates were to have been selected had been pushed to a video/teleconference call that will fall on June 13. In neither case has the group of selectors changed, but the date and meeting format have.

[Initially, before the coronavirus pandemic hit, Hawaii Democrats had planned to hold post-primary state convention on May 23 at which district delegates would have been selected. Likewise, a May 24 state central committee meeting was to have selected PLEO and at-large delegates. Both of those in-person gatherings were eliminated in a revised delegate selection plan that received approval from the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee on April 1.]


Importantly, if a candidate drops out of the race before the selection of statewide delegates, then any statewide delegates allocated to that candidate will be reallocated to the remaining candidates. If Candidate X is in the race in June when the Hawaii statewide delegate selection takes place but Candidate Y is not, then any statewide delegates allocated to Candidate Y in the May party-run primary would be reallocated to Candidate X. [This same feature is not something that applies to district delegates.] This reallocation only applies if a candidate has fully dropped out.  This is less likely to be a factor with just Biden left as the only viable candidate in the race, but Sanders could still gain statewide delegates by finishing with more than 15 percent statewide. Under a new deal struck between the Biden and Sanders camps, Biden will be allocated (or reallocated) all of the statewide delegates in a given state. However, during the selection process, the state party will select Sanders-aligned delegate candidates in proportion to the share of the qualified statewide vote.

2020 Democratic Delegate Allocation: KANSAS

KANSAS

Election type: primary (party-run)
Date: May 2
Number of delegates: 45 [9 at-large, 4 PLEOs, 26 congressional district, 6 automatic/superdelegates]
Allocation method: proportional statewide and at the congressional district level
Threshold to qualify for delegates: 15%
2016: proportional caucuses
Delegate selection plan


--
Changes since 2016
If one followed the 2016 series on the Republican process here at FHQ, then you may end up somewhat disappointed. The two national parties manage the presidential nomination process differently. The Republican National Committee is much less hands-on in regulating state and state party activity in the delegate selection process than the Democratic National Committee is. That leads to a lot of variation from state to state and from cycle to cycle on the Republican side. Meanwhile, the DNC is much more top down in its approach. Thresholds stay the same. It is a 15 percent barrier that candidates must cross in order to qualify for delegates. That is standard across all states. The allocation of delegates is roughly proportional. Again, that is applied to every state.

That does not mean there are no changes. The calendar has changed as have other facets of the process such as whether a state has a primary or a caucus.

Unlike some states where most of the changes from 2016 to 2020 occurred because of the coronavirus in 2020, Kansas Democrats saw changes to their delegate selection on both sides of the pandemic. The biggest pre-coronavirus changes instituted were in response to the Democratic National Committee rules changes encouraging increased participation in the delegate selection process. Kansas Democrats' original delegate selection plan called for a May 2 party-run primary that included both in-person and mail-in ranked choice voting. That May end point was eight weeks later than the weekend after Super Tuesday date on which the Kansas Democratic caucuses were in 2016.

Those are not changes without significance. Kansas Democrats, even days before May 2, was a success story for the DNC changes in Rule 2 calling for increased participation. Even then, turnout in the mail-in party-run primary was triple what it was in the 2016 caucuses.

After the coronavirus pandemic turned the 2020 presidential nomination process upside down, the Kansas Democratic Party's initial reaction was to continue as planned with the party's delegate selection plan. They planned to retain the in-person voting component but emphasize the vote-by-mail system the groundwork of which had been laid in the original plan. This emphasis included mailing ballots to all registered Democrats in the Sunflower state. Those registered by March 30 were to have been mailed ballot by the party by April 10. Additionally, Kansas Democrats could request ballots from the party until April 24. Less than two weeks later the party opted to nix in-person voting (just as Alaska, Hawaii and Wyoming have done in party-run contests).

All ballots are due to the state party by Saturday, May 2. That is received and not postmarked by May 2. 

[Please see below for more on the post-coronavirus changes specifically to the delegate selection process.]

Overall, the Democratic delegation changed by eight delegates from 2016 to 2020. The number of pledged delegates increased by six (four district delegates and two at-large delegates), and gained two superdelegates. The majority of the increase to the delegation was based on the decision of Kansas Democrats to switch to a later contest. That move from March in 2016 to May in 2020 qualified the state party for bonus delegates.


Thresholds
The standard 15 percent qualifying threshold applies both statewide and on the congressional district level.


Delegate allocation (at-large and PLEO delegates)
To win any at-large or PLEO (pledged Party Leader and Elected Officials) delegates a candidate must win 15 percent of the statewide vote. Only the votes of those candidates above the threshold will count for the purposes of the separate allocation of these two pools of delegates.

See New Hampshire synopsis for an example of how the delegate allocation math works for all categories of delegates.


Delegate allocation (congressional district delegates)
Kansas's 26 congressional district delegates are split across 4 congressional districts and have a variation of three delegates across districts from the measure of Democratic strength Kansas Democrats are using based on the results of the 2012 and 2016 presidential elections in the state. That method apportions delegates as follows...
CD1 - 5 delegates*
CD2 - 7 delegates*
CD3 - 8 delegates
CD4 - 6 delegates

*Bear in mind that districts with odd numbers of national convention delegates are potentially important to winners (and those above the qualifying threshold) within those districts. Rounding up for an extra delegate initially requires less in those districts than in districts with even numbers of delegates.


Delegate allocation (automatic delegates/superdelegates)
Superdelegates are free to align with a candidate of their choice at a time of their choosing. While their support may be a signal to voters in their state (if an endorsement is made before voting in that state), superdelegates will only vote on the first ballot at the national convention if half of the total number of delegates -- pledged plus superdelegates -- have been pledged to one candidate. Otherwise, superdelegates are locked out of the voting unless 1) the convention adopts rules that allow them to vote or 2) the voting process extends to a second ballot. But then all delegates, not just superdelegates will be free to vote for any candidate.

[NOTE: All Democratic delegates are pledged and not bound to their candidates. They are to vote in good conscience for the candidate to whom they have been pledged, but technically do not have to. But they tend to because the candidates and their campaigns are involved in vetting and selecting their delegates through the various selection processes on the state level. Well, the good campaigns are anyway.]


Selection
All 26 of the Kansas district delegates will be selected through online voting on May 29 and 30. Any registered Democrat can participate in the selection election by registering either with their congressional district chair or the state party by Monday, May 4. The PLEO and then at-large delegates will be selected on June 3-4 by the State Committee based on the statewide results in the primary. This selection will also take place virtually.

[The dates of selection have been modified for all pledged delegates because of the coronavirus. The district delegates were to have been selected in district conventions on May 16 while the PLEO and at-large delegates were to have been selected by the Kansas Democratic State Committee on June 6.]

Importantly, if a candidate drops out of the race before the selection of statewide delegates, then any statewide delegates allocated to that candidate will be reallocated to the remaining candidates. If Candidate X is in the race in early June when the Kansas statewide delegate selection takes place but Candidate Y is not, then any statewide delegates allocated to Candidate Y in the May party-run primary would be reallocated to Candidate X. [This same feature is not something that applies to district delegates.] This reallocation only applies if a candidate has fully dropped out.  This is less likely to be a factor with just Biden left as the only viable candidate in the race, but Sanders could still gain statewide delegates by finishing with more than 15 percent statewide. Under a new deal struck between the Biden and Sanders camps, Biden will be allocated (or reallocated) all of the statewide delegates in a given state. However, during the selection process, the state party will select Sanders-aligned delegate candidates in proportion to the share of the qualified statewide vote.

Kansas Democrats Eliminate In-Person Voting in May 2 Party-Run Presidential Primary

The Kansas Democratic Party on Monday, March 30 made the decision to end in-person voting in its upcoming May 2 party-run primary.

That move comes less than two weeks after the party opted to push forward with their plans to carry out the election with both vote-by-mail and in-person voting. But Kansas Democrats arrived at the same conclusion other states with party-run contests recently have. Democrats in Alaska, Hawaii and Wyoming all chose to end their in-person voting on April 4 and completely lean on the mail-in option each had layered into their delegate selection plans from the start. That insurance policy -- the presence of and planning for a vote-by-mail system -- gave each state party something to fall back on given the threat the coronavirus now poses to in-person voting this spring.

Typically, state parties are at a disadvantage in implementing these types of party-run elections. Those parties just do not have the (funding) resources that state governments do. But in this case, careful planning ahead of time -- and in response to new DNC encouragements in Rule 2 to increase participation -- laid the groundwork for this unique alternative option. Now, states with primaries but no vote-by-mail infrastructure -- states like Delaware -- have had to change the dates of their primaries to hopefully shift out of the window of time in which the coronavirus may reach its peak.

But Kansas Democrats have not. They will press forward with plans to have an all-mail May 2 party-run primary. Voters will need to register as Democrats by April 7 in order to automatically be mailed a ballot for the race.

Voters already registered as Democrats were mailed a ballot on March 30, more newly registered voters have until April 7, and those who have not received a ballot by April 10 can still request a ballot until April 24.


--
Kansas Democratic Party press release on ending in-person voting archived here.


--
Related Posts:
Kansas Democrats Forge Ahead with May 2 Party-Run Presidential Primary, but...

Hawaii Democrats Push End of Vote-By-Mail in Party-Run Primary to May 22

A week after it had eliminated in-person voting at its party-run primary, the Hawaii Democratic Party announced changes to its delegate selection process in the face of the coronavirus pandemic.

On Friday, March 27, Hawaii Democrats laid out a revamped schedule for mailing out ballots to voters and for those voters to return the ballots. As the party revealed a week ago, the deadline to register to vote and enroll as a Democrat in the Aloha state was moved to the original date of in-person voting, April 4. Not included in that release was a plan for when and if the deadline to submit ballots would be extended as has been the case in former April 4 party-run primary states, Alaska and Wyoming. But by moving the deadline to enroll to April 4, Hawaii Democrats intimated as much.

And indeed that is the case. Hawaii Democrats will process the new enrollments and mail out ballots with the anticipated arrival in voters' hands on or around May 2. Those and other previously mailed-out ballots will now be due to the party by Friday, May 22. [This is the return deadline not the postmark deadline.] Results will then be tabulated and released by May 23.

The extension of Hawaii Democrats' deadline to submit their vote-by-mail ballots now shifts out of April another state and adds to what has become a predominantly all-mail May slate of contests in the Democratic nomination process.


The Hawaii Democratic Party extension of the vote-by-mail deadline has been added to the 2020 FHQ presidential primary calendar.


--
Related Posts:
Hawaii Democrats Nix In-Person Voting in April Primary

Alaska Democrats Extend Mail-In Voting Window, Cancel In-Person Voting

On Monday, March 23, the Alaska Democratic Party issued a press release announcing changes to the April party-run primary the state party planned on conducting. Like Hawaii and Wyoming, gone is the in-person voting component. And like those other two (formerly) April 4 states, a pre-planned mail-in option is in place to fill the void.

And in Alaska, that mail-in option is being enhanced. Already registered Democrats in the Last Frontier were mailed a ballot in March if they were registered by February 19. But now some additional accommodations have been announced to buttress that earlier alternative. First, the deadline to have vote-by-mail ballots in to the party -- originally today, March 24 -- has been extended to April 10, six days after to original in-person voting was to have concluded on April 4. Results will now be announced on Saturday, April 11, a week later than the original Alaska Democratic delegate selection plan.

Second, the state party is also posting online a downloadable PDF ballot that registered Democrats in the state can use once they have verified their registration. [It is a short ballot with a long list of instructions.]

Both moves are intended to replace the in-person voting opportunity now lost to the coronavirus pandemic.

--
Importantly, the Alaska Democratic Party punted on any issues surrounding either the mid-April House district conventions and the May state convention. Those are still technically scheduled but the timing and process of each is being reviewed. State convention delegates elected at the House district conventions are the only ones eligible to be national convention delegates of any pledged variety. The state party will have to address how it will work around the possibility that any or all of those meetings will have to be canceled or held remotely.


--
Alaska Democratic Party press release on changes archived here.

Hawaii Democrats Nix In-Person Voting in April Primary

The Hawaii Democratic Party on Friday, March 20 followed Wyoming Democrats' lead and cancelled the in-person voting component of their April 4 party-run presidential primary. The decision comes as gatherings both large and small come under increased restriction amid the rising threat of the coronavirus spread.

Ballots were mailed to all registered Democrats across the Aloha state, but another round will go out to those who are registered to vote and enrolled as Democrats by April 4, the original end to the voting phase of the process. But that "by April 4" implies that the deadline for submitting those mail-in ballots will be extended further in an effort to both increase participation, but also provide fair opportunities to vote to every Democrat in Hawaii who wants to. Those deadlines will be shared with the public when they are settled.

Among the other parts of the process that remain unresolved for Hawaii Democrats is the delegate selection process. District delegates were originally slated to be selected in congressional district caucuses at the May 23 state convention. But that convention has now been shifted to September, after the Democratic National Convention in July. That, in turn, means that the Hawaii Democratic Party will have to fundamentally reshape the way in which it had planned to select delegates in 2020. The party is in consultation with the DNC over how best to do that.

For now, Hawaii will remain on April 4 on the 2020 FHQ presidential primary calendar and will stay there until the Democratic Party in the Aloha state finalized mail-in deadlines.


--
Hawaii Democratic Party's press release/email on primary changes archived here.

Kansas Democrats Forge Ahead with May 2 Party-Run Presidential Primary, but...

Kansas Democrats are not planning at the moment to make any changes to their Saturday, May 2 party-run primary.

And that is because, the party, like those in Hawaii and Wyoming has an insurance policy: mail-in voting. As in Hawaii and Wyoming, Kansas Democrats, too, had a pre-existing mail-in option in place as part of their original delegate selection plan. It was part of the the party's response to new Rule 2 encouragements to increase participation from the DNC for the 2020 cycle. That uniquely positions these states to lean on those mail-in options in lieu of in-person voting amid the coronavirus outbreak without having to change much about what they are doing.

Alaska also has a party-run primary with a mail-in option, but unlike Hawaii, Kansas and Wyoming, Alaska is not mailing out ballots to all registered Democrats in the state. Again, that uniquely positions the above trio of states to quickly and easily respond to the crisis. They were all already planning on mailing ballots to all Democrats in the state. Alaskans are not without that option. But Democrats in the Last Frontier have to request a ballot and have it postmarked by this coming Tuesday, March 24.

But for now in Kansas, Democrats are holding pat with their originally laid out delegate selection plan -- including in-person voting -- but are encouraging the use of the mail-in option.


--
March 17 Kansas Democratic Party press release on party-run presidential primary archived here.



--
Related Posts:
Kansas Democrats Eliminate In-Person Voting in May 2 Party-Run Presidential Primary

2020 Democratic Delegate Allocation: NORTH DAKOTA

NORTH DAKOTA

Election type: party-run primary ['firehouse caucus']
Date: March 10
Number of delegates: 18 [3 at-large, 2 PLEOs, 9 congressional district, 4 automatic/superdelegates]
Allocation method: proportional statewide and at the congressional district level
Threshold to qualify for delegates: 15%
2016: proportional caucuses
Delegate selection plan


--
Changes since 2016
If one followed the 2016 series on the Republican process here at FHQ, then you may end up somewhat disappointed. The two national parties manage the presidential nomination process differently. The Republican National Committee is much less hands-on in regulating state and state party activity in the delegate selection process than the Democratic National Committee is. That leads to a lot of variation from state to state and from cycle to cycle on the Republican side. Meanwhile, the DNC is much more top down in its approach. Thresholds stay the same. It is a 15 percent barrier that candidates must cross in order to qualify for delegates. That is standard across all states. The allocation of delegates is roughly proportional. Again, that is applied to every state.

That does not mean there are no changes. The calendar has changed as have other facets of the process such as whether a state has a primary or a caucus.

North Dakota Democrats not only shook up their mode of delegate allocation and selection, but also moves the contest up twelve weeks from early June in 2016 to mid-March for 2020. And while that was among the biggest calendar moves from last cycle to this one, it was a nod to the new encouragements in DNC delegate selection rules that carries perhaps greater weight. In their draft delegate selection plan, North Dakota Democrats shift from a straight caucus format to a "firehouse" caucus format that allows for North Dakota Democrats to participate at caucus locations but to also weigh in via a "robust" vote-by-mail system that is in effect between January 20 and March 5. The intent there was to increase participation in the caucuses in line with the new Rule 2 encouragements the DNC has put in place for the 2020 cycle.

North Dakota Democrats saw their delegation shrink relative to 2016. The 2020 delegation contracted by three district delegates, one at-large delegate and one superdelegate. PLEO delegates stayed at 2016 levels for 2020.


Thresholds
The standard 15 percent qualifying threshold applies both statewide and on the congressional district level.


Delegate allocation (at-large and PLEO delegates)
To win any at-large or PLEO (pledged Party Leader and Elected Officials) delegates a candidate must win 15 percent of the statewide vote. Only the votes of those candidates above the threshold will count for the purposes of the separate allocation of these two pools of delegates.

See New Hampshire synopsis for an example of how the delegate allocation math works for all categories of delegates.


Delegate allocation (congressional district delegates)
North Dakota's 9 congressional district delegates are split across one congressional district. Since North Dakota is a one congressional district state, district level delegates are allocated based on the statewide results. That pool of delegates operates as a third pool of statewide delegates in addition to the PLEO and at-large delegates.

CD-AL - 9 delegates*

*Bear in mind that districts with odd numbers of national convention delegates are potentially important to winners (and those above the qualifying threshold) within those districts. Rounding up for an extra delegate initially requires less in those districts than in districts with even numbers of delegates.


Delegate allocation (automatic delegates/superdelegates)
Superdelegates are free to align with a candidate of their choice at a time of their choosing. While their support may be a signal to voters in their state (if an endorsement is made before voting in that state), superdelegates will only vote on the first ballot at the national convention if half of the total number of delegates -- pledged plus superdelegates -- have been pledged to one candidate. Otherwise, superdelegates are locked out of the voting unless 1) the convention adopts rules that allow them to vote or 2) the voting process extends to a second ballot. But then all delegates, not just superdelegates will be free to vote for any candidate.

[NOTE: All Democratic delegates are pledged and not bound to their candidates. They are to vote in good conscience for the candidate to whom they have been pledged, but technically do not have to. But they tend to because the candidates and their campaigns are involved in vetting and selecting their delegates through the various selection processes on the state level. Well, the good campaigns are anyway.]


Selection
The 9 district delegates in North Dakota are chosen at the state convention on April 4. Campaign-approved slates of delegate candidates will appear on the ballot at the state convention and the number allocated to a particular candidate will be selected from those slates. PLEO delegates and then at-large delegates will be selected at the Democratic state convention on April 4 as well.

Importantly, if a candidate drops out of the race before the selection of statewide delegates, then any statewide delegates allocated to that candidate will be reallocated to the remaining candidates. If Candidate X is in the race in early April when the North Dakota statewide delegate selection takes place but Candidate Y is not, then any statewide delegates allocated to Candidate Y in the March primary would be reallocated to Candidate X. [This same feature is not something that applies to district delegates.] This reallocation only applies if a candidate has fully dropped out. Candidates with suspended campaigns are still candidates and can fill those slots allocated them. This is unlikely to be a factor with just two viable candidates in the race.

2020 Democratic Delegate Allocation: DEMOCRATS ABROAD

DEMOCRATS ABROAD

Election type: party-run primary
Date: March 3-10
Number of delegates: 17 [12 at-large, 1 PLEO, 4 automatic/superdelegates]
Allocation method: proportional globally
Threshold to qualify for delegates: 15%
2016: proportional (party-run) primary
Delegate selection plan


--
Changes since 2016
If one followed the 2016 series on the Republican process here at FHQ, then you may end up somewhat disappointed. The two national parties manage the presidential nomination process differently. The Republican National Committee is much less hands-on in regulating state and state party activity in the delegate selection process than the Democratic National Committee is. That leads to a lot of variation from state to state and from cycle to cycle on the Republican side. Meanwhile, the DNC is much more top down in its approach. Thresholds stay the same. It is a 15 percent barrier that candidates must cross in order to qualify for delegates. That is standard across all states. The allocation of delegates is roughly proportional. Again, that is applied to every state.

That does not mean there are no changes. The calendar has changed as have other facets of the process such as whether a state has a primary or a caucus.

There are subtle changes to the rules in states and territories across the country, but for Democrats Abroad there were really no changes for the 2020 cycle relative to 2016. The dates for the global primary remained the same with the voting opening on Super Tuesday and concluding a week later. The delegation also remained the same size. There are 17 total delegates in the same 12 at-large, one PLEO and four superdelegates. [Eight superdelegates -- DNC members -- will go to the national convention as a part of the Democrats Abroad delegation, but will only have half a vote.]


Thresholds
The standard 15 percent qualifying threshold applies globally in this party-run primary.


Delegate allocation (at-large and PLEO delegates)
To win any at-large or PLEO (pledged Party Leader and Elected Officials) delegates a candidate must win 15 percent of the global vote. Only the votes of those candidates above the threshold will count for the purposes of the allocation of these delegates. In the case of Democrats Abroad, these 13 delegates are pooled and not allocated separately as they are in other states.

See New Hampshire synopsis for an example of how the delegate allocation math works for all categories of delegates.


Delegate allocation (automatic delegates/superdelegates)
Superdelegates are free to align with a candidate of their choice at a time of their choosing. While their support may be a signal to voters in their state (if an endorsement is made before voting in that state), superdelegates will only vote on the first ballot at the national convention if half of the total number of delegates -- pledged plus superdelegates -- have been pledged to one candidate. Otherwise, superdelegates are locked out of the voting unless 1) the convention adopts rules that allow them to vote or 2) the voting process extends to a second ballot. But then all delegates, not just superdelegates will be free to vote for any candidate.

[NOTE: All Democratic delegates are pledged and not bound to their candidates. They are to vote in good conscience for the candidate to whom they have been pledged, but technically do not have to. But they tend to because the candidates and their campaigns are involved in vetting and selecting their delegates through the various selection processes on the state level. Well, the good campaigns are anyway.]


Selection
Nine of the 13 pledged delegates will be chosen at regional conventions to be held between April 14 and May 16. Regional conventions occur in 1) the Americas, 2) the Asia/Pacific region and 3) a Europe/Middle East/Africa region. How many of the nine delegates each region selects depends on the regional participation in the global primary in March. Slots are proportionally apportioned to a region based on the region's vote in the primary.

The remaining three at-large delegates and the one PLEO delegate are selected at the May 17 global convention. Those slots are used to balance the delegation to reflect the proportional allocation of delegates determined by the results of the March global primary.

Importantly, if a candidate drops out of the race before the selection of at-large or PLEO delegates, then any statewide delegates allocated to that candidate will be reallocated to the remaining candidates. If Candidate X is in the race in April and May when the Democrats Abroad delegate selection takes place but Candidate Y is not, then any statewide delegates allocated to Candidate Y in the March primary would be reallocated to Candidate X. [This same feature is not something that applies to district delegates.] This reallocation only applies if a candidate has fully dropped out. Candidates with suspended campaigns are still candidates and can fill those slots allocated them. This is unlikely to be a factor with just two viable candidates in the race.

Kansas Democrats Settle on May Party-Run Primary

The Kansas Democratic Party on Thursday, May 2 released their 2020 draft delegate selection plan, exactly one year ahead of when the party intends to hold a presidential preference primary.

Like Alaska, Hawaii and North Dakota Democrats, Democrats in Kansas are shifting away from traditional caucuses and toward a mode of delegate selection closer to a primary. While the window for voting in the May 2 party-run primary in the Sunflower state is fairly narrow -- 10am-2pm -- that is offset by 1) the contest being scheduled for a Saturday and 2) the party allowing for absentee voting (by mail) from March 30 through April 24. Additionally, although the field is likely to have winnowed to some degree by the beginning (March 30) of that absentee window, registered Democrats in Kansas will use a ranked choice voting ballot. Absent additional details, it would appear that voters will have a full list of candidates to rank order on the ballot (unlike the variation in Alaska where voters choose/rank their top three).

Moreover, Kansas would become the largest state to adopt a party-run primary approach to delegate selection process, and that bigger potential electorate entails a larger cost to the process. Those costs are borne out through the need for addition voting locations and volunteers to staff them. The draft Kansas plan does indicate that the party will have at least one primary day voting location in each of the Sunflower state's 40 state senate districts. While the allocation of delegates to the national convention will be based on the results of the May 2 primary, the selection process will follow starting with May 9 state senate district conventions, May 16 congressional district conventions (where congressional district delegates will be chosen) and a June 6 state convention (where at-large and PLEO delegates will be selected).

Finally, Kansas Democrats have 39 delegates (which includes six superdelegates) under the Democratic Party delegate apportionment formula. However, due to the proposed date of the party-run primary -- after the May 1 -- the party would gain an additional 20 percent bonus on its base delegation. That would likely tack another six delegates onto the total number of Kansas delegates heading to the national convention in Milwaukee.


Related:
3/13/19: North Dakota Democrats Plan to Hold March 10 Firehouse Caucuses

3/26/19: Hawaii Democrats Aim for an April Party-Run Primary in Lieu of Caucuses

3/31/19: Alaska Democrats Plan on April 4 Party-Run Primary



--
The Kansas Democratic party-run primary date is now reflected on the 2020 FHQ Presidential Primary Calendar.

--

Follow FHQ on Twitter and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

Alaska Democrats Plan on April 4 Party-Run Primary

On Saturday, March 30, the Alaska Democratic Party released for public comment the party's draft delegate selection plan for the 2020 cycle. And in it were details from yet another traditionally caucus state laying the groundwork for a party-run primary.

Yes, the caucuses will remain as the primary means through which delegates will be selected, but the allocation process will shift from hinging on the results of precinct caucuses to a party-run primary that will take place in at least nine locations across the state between 10am and 2pm on Saturday, April 4. No, a four hour voting window in just nine (to start) locations does not come across as adequate in a state as geographically large as Alaska, but Democrats in the Last Frontier have planned for that. In addition to the in-person voting on the April 4 primary day, Alaska Democrats will also have the option voting absentee by mail or electronically (in a system that remains undetermined). That window for alternate forms of voting will stretch from March 3 (Super Tuesday) through March 24.

Miscellany

• The Alaska draft plan calls for a ranked choice system of voting, elements of which have appeared in other formerly caucus states (Hawaii, Iowa and Nevada). 

• The Alaska primary will for the second cycle in a row coincide with the contest in Hawaii. Although both are positioned after the fourth Tuesday in March, the pair alone does not qualify for a regional cluster bonus (15 percent added to the base delegation). Four years ago when Washington state Democrats joined the pair, the collective trio qualified for that bonus. Unless another partner joins the effort -- Oregon comes to mind (but is unlikely) as do the Pacific territories -- then Alaska and Hawaii would fall short of a 15 percent clustering bonus, but would maintain a 10 percent timing bonus for the April date of their contests.

--
Alaska now joins Hawaii and North Dakota as non-carve-out and traditionally caucus states that have moved in the direction of party-run primaries as means of allocating delegates. The only states that have attempted so far to maintain the traditional caucus set up as a part of the allocation process are Iowa and Nevada. And one can hypothesize that such a move is a clear enough nod to the New Hampshire primary that both states' contests bookend. The other caucus states have no similar conflict.


--
The Alaska party-run primary date has been added to the 2020 FHQ presidential primary calendar.


Related:
2/11/19: Iowa Democrats Release Draft Delegate Selection Plan for 2020

3/13/19: North Dakota Democrats Plan to Hold March 10 Firehouse Caucuses

3/21/19: Nevada Democrats Release Draft Delegate Selection Plan

3/26/19: Hawaii Democrats Aim for an April Party-Run Primary in Lieu of Caucuses

--

Follow FHQ on Twitter and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

Hawaii Democrats Aim for an April Party-Run Primary in Lieu of Caucuses

The Hawaii Democratic Party on Monday, March 25 released its draft 2020 delegate selection plan for a thirty day comment period.

Traditionally a caucus state, but faced with new encouragements from the DNC concerning participation in that format, Hawaii Democrats have opted instead to pursue a party-run primary for the 2020 cycle. Although the language used in the plan refers to the Saturday, April 4 event as both a preference poll and a primary, the reality is that, much like North Dakota before it, Hawaii Democrats will attempt to broaden participation in the presidential nomination process. At 20 locations around the Aloha state, Hawaii Democrats will be able to vote for their top three preferences in a limited ranked choice voting system between 7am and 3pm on April 4. Additionally, the party will allow for an early vote-by-mail period (with the same limited top three preferences ranked choice system) that stretches from March 3 (Super Tuesday) through March 28.

While that part -- the early vote-by-mail window -- of the process is occurring, Hawaii Democrats will hold precinct meetings to begin the selection process. On Wednesday, March 4 (the day after Super Tuesday), those precinct meetings will choose delegates to the May 23-24 state convention where national convention delegates will be chosen.

--
This is further evidence of state parties, especially caucus state parties, straying from business as usual. Moreover, it provides at least some credence to the notion that later caucus states -- those not in the February carve-out state window -- are freer to move in the direction of contests that look more like primary election, but primaries conducted by the state parties. North Dakota and Hawaii have followed the sort of "firehouse caucus" model that came out of the discussions dating all the way back to the 2016 national convention in Philadelphia and were noted in the Unity Reform Commission report. Thus far, only Iowa and Nevada -- both states tiptoeing around the New Hampshire primary they bookend -- have attempted to thread a certain needle, maintaining the traditional caucuses while opening the door through early voting and/or virtual caucuses as a means of increasing participation. Neither followed the "firehouse caucus" model and New Hampshire is why.

The remaining caucus states are mostly not actually states at all, but territories. Although there are a few states yet to release their draft delegate selection plans, it is likely that they follow the model more similar to what Hawaii has outlined above. However, it remains to be seen what territorial parties will do with their contests. Time will tell. All drafts are due to the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee for review by May 3.

--
The Hawaii party-run primary date has been added to the 2020 FHQ presidential primary calendar.


Related:
2/11/19: Iowa Democrats Release Draft Delegate Selection Plan for 2020

3/13/19: North Dakota Democrats Plan to Hold March 10 Firehouse Caucuses

3/21/19: Nevada Democrats Release Draft Delegate Selection Plan

--

Follow FHQ on Twitter and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

North Dakota Democrats Plan to Hold March 10 Firehouse Caucuses

North Dakota Democrats on Wednesday, March 13 released for public comment the party's draft 2020 delegate selection plan.

Traditionally, Democrats in the Peace Garden state have conducted caucuses as the means by which the party has allocated delegates to the national convention. But caucus states on the Democratic side face a burden in the 2020 that they have not faced in the past. The onus is on those state parties to make the case to the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee that they have taken steps to maximize participation in the typically low turnout caucus/convention format. And the evidence thus far indicates that Democratic caucus states are reacting to the new encouragements in Rule 2 in different ways. Iowa Democrats, for example, have proposed new virtual caucuses. Nevada Democrats, too, have laid out plans for early voting in their caucus process.¹

Now, with the release of the draft delegate selection plan, North Dakota Democrats have put their own unique spin on a more participatory caucus. Rather than a traditional moving caucus, the North Dakota Democratic-NPL will essentially conduct a party-run primary. Often this is called a firehouse primary because they have been, more often than not, held in firehouses, but North Dakota Democrats are using the term "firehouse caucus" -- verbiage that came out of the Unity Amendment that created the Unity Reform Commission and later appeared in the URC recommendations -- instead.

The terms -- firehouse caucus or firehouse primary -- are interchangeable as both are party-run primaries where typically no state-funded primary option is available. In practice, the difference rests on how many polling locations are set up. State-funded (and run) primaries offer more locations and theoretically greater participation. And while the party-run version has fewer locations, they run all day rather than the smaller and more rigid window used in the caucus format.

And that is the basic structure of the North Dakota plan. There will be 14 firehouse caucus locations set up throughout the state and polls will be open from 11am-7pm on Tuesday, March 10. [That is twelve weeks earlier than the first Tuesday in June caucuses North Dakota Democrats held in 2016.]

In addition to those changes, the party will also use a vote-by-mail process. What is clear about the vote-by-mail proposal is that it is intended to function much like the virtual caucuses in Iowa. Voters with conflicts during the hours in which the caucuses are in session have an alternative option available to them. And it is an option that is available from January 20-March 3. What is not clear is how the vote-by-mail system will operate; whether it will function on top of the state's vote-by-mail system or not. Most unclear is how ballots will be distributed to voters wanting to take advantage of the process. That is something the Rules and Bylaws Committee will train its sights on when this plan is reviewed.

It should likely be the expectation that other caucus states will fall in line with some variation of this plan rather than what Iowa has done and Nevada plans to do. Later caucus states will not have the same restrictions -- working around New Hampshire -- with their delegate selection plans like the other carve-out caucus states do.


The date of the North Dakota Democratic firehouse caucus will be added to the 2020 FHQ presidential primary calendar.

--
¹ There are a great many things left unsaid about details of how the Nevada Democrats are going to accommodate early voting in the caucuses. FHQ will have more on that in a separate post.

--

Follow FHQ on Twitter and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

Funding Still an Issue for South Carolina Republican Presidential Primary

The question of how the South Carolina Republican presidential primary will be paid for is one that simply won't die. The story has moved from a battle between the state government and the state Republican Party to one more between the state party and elected Republicans on the county level. The latter is more of an intra-party battle; particularly given the Republican Party dominance in the Upstate of South Carolina.

At issue now is that the Spartanburg and Greenville County Councils are considering a lawsuit against the  South Carolina Elections Commission over what local officials are calling an "unfunded mandate" -- that they are being made to disburse funds not accounted for in county budgets for a party function. Yes, on the surface this looks like more of a state versus municipal government dispute. There is that element to this, but again, given the nature in which Republican partisanship permeates the state, much less the region of the state in question, it becomes just as much an issue of tensions between state and local Republicans.

For our purposes here at FHQ, this isn't entirely meaningful. This dispute will not affect the South Carolina Republican Party's ability to stage a presidential primary next year. However, what this does do is call into question the ability of the party to pull off a contest that operates smoothly. Once the looming time crunch is layered in as well, the picture becomes even murkier. If these questions concerning the funding of the primary persist simultaneous with the reality that this is going to be an mid-January to early February contest, the likelihood that the contest can be held without significant problems drops. Now, if the results end up being one-sided for Perry or Romney or whomever, this will not be an issue. Yet, if the primary is a close one, there could conceivably be challenges brought because corners were cut to hold the contest in a cost-effective manner (fewer polls workers, etc.).

Now, this may prove to be something of a false alarm ex post facto, but it warrants watching between now and when the South Carolina primary rolls around.

Recent Posts:

Ohio Presidential Primary Back to March 6

Utah Presidential Primary Move to February or March Unlikely

Missouri Senate Adjourns; Presidential Primary Bill Saved for Supposed Last Special Session Day on Friday

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

An Update on the Situation with the South Carolina Presidential Primary

Well, that caucus thing isn't happening. According to Danny Yadron at the Washington Wire blog:¹

“That is not on the table and will not happen,” state GOP Executive Director Matt

Moore told Washington Wire. “We got a good start on fund-raising.”

Later, South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson clarified the issue of either of the state parties contracting the South Carolina Elections Commission -- the institution that carried out the 2008 presidential primaries for the state/parties -- to do the same in 2012, but with state party funding. Wilson's statement:

"Unless the statute is repealed, or a court concludes otherwise, we believe the answer to your question is yes," the opinion states. "The State Election Commission possesses the authority either to conduct the Presidential Preference Primary itself, or, in the alternative, to contract with the parties to do so."

That frees the South Carolina Republican Party to use the commission, but still puts the party in the position of having to raise the money necessary to hold a primary in 2012. The only remaining piece of that puzzle is how much of the estimated $1.5 million will the party have to raise. Nearly $700,000 left over from the 2010 cycle had been earmarked in the budget that passed the state legislature as available for the primary. The question was whether Governor Nikki Haley (R) would veto that part of the bill. The answer, due tomorrow, appears to be yes according to anonymous sources close to Haley.

In summary, then, there will be no last minute substitute caucuses, and the party-funded primary can be run by the South Carolina Elections Commission.

--

¹ Yadron also tagged the line, "The state Democratic Party doesn't plan to hold a 2012 primary." onto the end of the post. The South Carolina Democratic Party's 2012 delegate selection plan proposal seems to refute that notion. There may not be a competitive Democratic primary in the Palmetto state, but it looks like they intend to hold a primary.

Recent Posts:

Mindful of Huckabee in 2008, Will Romney Go on the Attack in 2012?

Wisconsin Assembly Has Until Thursday to Pass Presidential Primary Bill, Avoid Delay

New Jersey Senate Budget Committee Sends Bills to Eliminate Separate Presidential Primary to the Floor

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

What's Happening with the Funding of the South Carolina Primary?

Not much really.

Much has been made over the last week about the fate of the South Carolina primary. The "will it be funded/not funded?" question is not a new one. On Friday, FHQ exchanged emails with Politico's Kendra Marr and my general sentiments have not changed since then given the most recent news from south of the border here in North Carolina. Here's what I told her:

I don't think I'm as pessimistic about SC as some of the things I've read about the situation there this week. I think the most important thing to note is that the state parties in SC have traditionally picked up the tab for their nomination contests. 2008 was the first time the legislature stepped in to pass legislation to institute state funding.

My take home is that the SC GOP will find a way to fund the contest and that it will be just as important to the Republican nomination as it always has been (assuming there is enough time between the FL primary and SC's).

The important thing is to take a step back and provide some context. The fact that state funding of the presidential primary was new in 2008 is extremely important in this instance. FHQ made the case back in March in our write up of the final days of the South Carolina state House's final consideration of the budget that the funding of the primary was new and was expendable because it had not been institutionalized as it is many other states. That is still the case, but let's look between the lines of what the various (Republican -- the ones in power) political actors are saying in the Palmetto state.

No, wait. I won't even give you the run down. Let's say that you, as a party, had funding for the contest in 2008 (or as an individual or interest group on a particular issue or project) and your funding was being threatened. Wouldn't your first order of business be to make the case for why said funding was necessary and what the "dire" consequences would be if that funding was stripped. In the instance of the South Carolina Republican Party, you may even have to mention that holding a caucus was necessary and that that would affect the amount of money and attention the presidential candidates and media would pay to the state.

It might come up.

Oh, it already has:

“It would be the death of a tradition that began after Reagan,” [Columbia-based GOP operative, Richard] Quinn said of ending the primary, which developed the reputation as “the place where presidents are chosen. It would be a tragedy,” Quinn said.

Quinn added a caucus likely would not include the independent voters whose turnout built the GOP primary, which does not require voters be registered Republicans to vote.

Again, FHQ just isn't that pessimistic about the situation. And we should be just as careful in our discussions of South Carolina's contest as we have been with Iowa's caucuses and the doomsday warnings about how candidates wouldn't pay attention to a contest in a state that is "lurching" to the right. The problem is the same really. Switching to a caucus would not be the "death knell" for South Carolina. It may be the death knell for Jon Huntsman's presidential aspirations -- a death knell that is likely to come before the nomination race reaches the Palmetto state anyway -- but it wouldn't necessarily be the end for South Carolina's role in the nomination process. Do caucuses, all other things equal, receive less money and attention from the candidates and the media than primary states? Yes they do as Paul Gurian's research has shown us. But allow me to stand on the shoulders of giants here with my own research. Early states matter more. Early states that have the spotlight to themselves matter even more. South Carolina, whether primary or caucus, will have one of those first four spots. Even if Florida's Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee decides to hold a January 3, 2012 primary, South Carolina, along with Iowa, New Hampshire and probably Nevada will jump the Sunshine state or any other state attempting to infringe on their first in the nation turf. That is just how this thing works until the national parties decide to adopt a different strategy for the nomination process.

And that brings us back to the point I was trying to make in drawing a line between Iowa and South Carolina. What we're really talking about here is that the frontrunner, Mitt Romney, is not spending the "requisite" amount of time in either state and that is being viewed as an indication of the downfall of these contests as important players in Republican presidential nomination races. Well, Mitt isn't doing that bad in either Iowa or South Carolina. His strategy is working for now and may work for 2012. But that doesn't demonstrate that Iowa and South Carolina won't be significant players in future nominations if the parties continue to protect their privileged positions. It would indicate that Romney made a calculated decision after his 2008 experience and did what was necessary to win a nomination (assuming the former Massachusetts governor does end up winning the nomination -- anything but a foregone conclusion) in the 2012 cycle. That's it. If Romney wins both Iowa and South Carolina, they will have been important. He will have won where he was not supposed to and that will essentially end the race.

Now, let's get back to South Carolina's situation. This discussion is nothing more than a last ditch effort to secure funding for the South Carolina Republican Party to hold a primary. If they cannot save that funding, I fully expect to the state party to do what former chair, Katon Dawson, said they would do:

“Raise the money and partner with the Election Commission,” Dawson said, when asked what the S.C. GOP should do. “They’re going to have to man up and get the thing done.”

And if the party doesn't do that, FHQ expects them to hold an early stand-alone caucus that won't include independent voters and won't hurt anyone but candidates seeking those independents' votes. Romney might like them, but it will likely really hurt someone like Huntsman who is counting on those sorts of voters to help him in New Hampshire and South Carolina to propel him into Florida. Romney doesn't necessarily need South Carolina for the nomination. He has other paths. Other candidates don't.

This has been a lot to look at. What's the take home? South Carolina will hold an early primary or caucus and the contest will have an impact on the outcome of the Republican nomination race. And that will be the case whether Governor Nikki Haley strikes the primary's funding from the budget via her veto or not.

Recent Posts:

Ohio Senate Votes in Favor of Shifting Presidential Primary to May

Rhode Island House Unanimously Passes Amended Senate Primary Bill

Rhode Island House Passes Bill to Move Presidential Primary to April

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