Utah Bill Would Shift February Presidential Primary Option Back to March

Utah Representative Jon Cox (R-58th, Ephraim) last year introduced and shepherded though the Utah state House legislation to move the Beehive state presidential primary ahead of Iowa and New Hampshire. That bill failed in the state Senate, but Rep. Cox is back with a 2015 bill affecting the date of the Utah presidential primary. This time, however, it is less provocative.

Currently, both Utah presidential primary options are non-compliant with the national party rules. If the legislature appropriates funds to a separate presidential primary, it would fall in February. Absent that funding, the parties would be forced into the June primary¹, which falls on a date too late to comply with the rules. In other words, some change must be made on one end of this spectrum or the other if Utah is to hold a compliant presidential primary in 2016.

HB 329 was introduced by Rep. Cox on Thursday, February 12 and would move the earlier primary option available to Utah political parties from the first Tuesday in February to the fourth Tuesday in March.² That fourth Tuesday in March -- March 22 -- is not only compliant with the national party delegate selection rules, but also is a date on which the neighboring Arizona primary has already been scheduled. Oklahoma is also eyeing that date and both Idaho and New Mexico are considering earlier March options as well. All together, that movement -- first in the legislatures and then on the calendar -- could facilitate a western regional primary (an effort Utah has been linked to). That, however, would require some revision to the legislation being considered in Idaho and New Mexico.

The regional primary considerations are secondary at this point in Utah. The bigger hang up in the Beehive state may be that a presidential primary option is being pushed within the state government while the state Republican Party is leaning toward adopting caucuses. That would render this move moot should the legislation be passed and signed into law. Yet, a regional primary may provide some measure of enticement to state party Republicans weighing their delegate selection options. But the decision-making within the Utah Republican Party could affect deliberations on this bill first. If the party chooses to move to a caucuses/convention system for 2016, movement on this bill may stop completely.

--
UPDATE (3/5/15): Amended bill passes House committee.


--
¹ They could also opt to hold caucuses as a means of selecting and allocating delegates, but at the parties' expense.

² That creates/appropriates funds to a separate presidential primary and leaves the primaries for state and local offices in late June.


Recent Posts:
Michigan Presidential Primary Bill Passes State Senate, but...

Oklahoma Presidential Primary Bill Gets the Green Light from Senate Committee

Texas Presidential Primary Bill Challenging Carve-Out States Does Not Have State Party Support

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

Evidence of a Big Ten Presidential Primary?

There may not be any new evidence, but there is definitely talk of a midwestern regional primary in Michigan.

The only catch is that the only state actively targeting a March 15 primary date for 2016 is Michigan. In other legislatures in the region, it is all quiet on the midwestern front. Nearby Illinois and Missouri are already on that date.

Recent Posts:
New Mexico Attempt to Join Would-Be Western Regional Presidential Primary is In

Connecticut Republicans Strategize About Opening Primaries, Moving Presidential Primary Up

Idaho Bill Reestablishing Presidential Primary Introduced

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

Utah Again Linked to Possible Western Regional Primary

FHQ chimed in about the possibility of Utah Republicans shifting from a primary to a caucuses/convention system in 2016 yesterday. But as Bryan Schott at Utah Policy reports, there is maybe another layer to the primary/caucuses story.

Yes, Schott mentions the same tension between a state party perhaps wanting caucuses and a Republican-controlled state government with at least some support for maintaining the primary system for allocating national convention delegates in the 2016 presidential nominations races. He also notes the very same double whammy the Utah primary options face; non-compliant on both ends of the calendar.

The real noteworthy addition to all that though, is that Utah Democrats -- or their chairman, Peter Corroon, anyway -- are supportive of joining a March 22 western regional primary. This is not the first time this idea has come up. Last spring, after the Utah legislative session closed and killed the bill that would have tried to move Utah ahead of Iowa, there was also talk of Utah joining forces with Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico and Wyoming on the same date for a regional primary in 2016. Again, this idea is not new, but it has yet to be pulled off as successfully as southern states managed in 1988. The notion was championed by former Utah governor, Mike Leavitt, as far back as the 1996 cycle (see Busch 2000). The 2000 calendar found the Utah primary sharing an early March date with just Colorado and Wyoming.

But that was as far as it went.

Now, it appears that that option is on the table for 2016. Arizona moved back to March 22 during its 2014 legislative session. And now that date is being discussed in some circles in Utah again. All is quiet in the other states, but that is something to watch as winter transitions into spring this year.

From the Utah perspective, this is another layer, but if the date can get changed -- either the June primary date or most likely the February "Western States Presidential Primary" date -- that may offer added enticement to a Utah Republican Party that may be leaning toward holding caucuses next year. If a state-funded option exists at a point on the calendar that is workable to the state parties, that goes a long way toward keeping the primary going.¹

--
¹ The thought of Utah Republicans demanding a $50,000 filing fee as a means of paying for the caucuses is probably far-fetched. Schott rightly notes that it will be difficult for the party to command that high a price for caucuses that may or may not be the only game in town on a particular date on the calendar. It is a plan seemingly destined to backfire.


Recent Posts:
SEC Primary Bill Finds Early Support in Mississippi House Committee

Utah Republicans Leaning Toward 2016 Caucuses Over Primary

The 2016 RNC Super Penalty

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

State Legislatures Move Most Presidential Primaries. ...But They Have to Change State Law First

Don Gonyea had a good background piece on the possibility/formation of an SEC primary this morning on NPR's Morning Edition.

However, Mr. Gonyea lost FHQ when he began to place odds on which southern states would join the potential southern regional presidential primary on March 1 of next year. Alabama, Georgia and Mississippi were deemed "sure things" while it was mentioned that the "lineup could include" Tennessee, Arkansas, Texas and Florida. This not correct.

It was a small section in an otherwise solid story, but it is misleading about how the presidential primary calendar forms from cycle to cycle. Some states are constant date-tweakers. New Hampshire, for instance, has to be able to change the date of the presidential primary there to stay at the front of the queue every presidential election year. They move dates every cycle. But the majority of states are not like New Hampshire: They stay in the same position if not every cycle, then for multiple cycles. Indiana has held its presidential primary on the first Tuesday after the first Monday of May for the entire post-reform era (1972-2012), for example.

Part of the reason why is that the motivation is not always present in a given state to move the date on which a presidential primary is held. The benefits are not readily apparent. And even when the benefits of added attention and candidate spending are somewhat clear, the decision still has to filter through two chambers of a state legislature and garner a governor's signature. That introduces the layer of state-level partisanship and possible partisan gridlock (which FHQ discussed in some detail recently).

But here's the thing: When a state legislature cannot pass legislation moving the date of the presidential primary or has not passed legislation the default position of such a contest is the position described in state law. That very definitely affects the odds of a state joining a proposed regional primary or in moving a primary to an earlier date as has been the fashion for much of the post-McGovern-Fraser reform era.

State laws in Tennessee, Texas and maybe Florida currently indicate that those states are "sure things" for March 1. There is nothing fluid about that. There are no discussions in any of those states about changing the state laws concerning the dates of presidential primaries.¹

Arkansas may join the SEC primary, but it could be tough. In any event, the calculus is different in the Natural state than it is in any of the other states on the SEC primary list.

There is unified Republican control of the state governments in both Alabama and Mississippi and appears to be support for the idea of bumping the primaries up a week in each state. Mississippi Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann indicated to his Georgia counterpart, Brian Kemp (who is behind the SEC primary concept), that everyone in the Magnolia state is "on board".

Georgia is unique in that the legislature does not factor into the presidential primary date-setting decision. Like New Hampshire, the secretary of state sets the date of the primary in the Peach state. That streamlines the decision-making process and mean that Georgia is only a formal declaration away from a March 1 primary date next year.

But again, if we're trying to place odds on which states will be involved in this southern regional primary, then look to the state laws first. Tennessee and Texas are the sure things. State laws in each say so. There's still work to be done -- and potential roadblocks -- in the other states (though there does not seem to be much resistance to moving up in most of those states).

--
Here are some related posts on the intricacies of the formation of the SEC primary:
Why is Florida on March 1 and Not March 15?

Will a Calendar Bump Up Mean More Candidate Visits in SEC Primary States?

Why Getting Arkansas into an SEC Primary is More Difficult

But Southern States Will Have to Be Proportional

Louisiana not inclined to join 'SEC' presidential primary day in 2016

A Couple of Reasons the 2016 Texas Presidential Primary Isn't Going Anywhere

--
¹ There may be a discussion in Florida at some point about clarifying the law, but the state legislature does not convene in the Sunshine state until March.


Recent Posts:
Oklahoma Bill Would Move Presidential Primary Back Three Weeks

Oregon Bill Would Split Presidential, Other Primaries

Has the RNC Set a Later Starting Date for the First Primaries and Caucuses?

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

Will a Calendar Bump Up Mean More Candidate Visits in SEC Primary States?

Just this morning Alabama Secretary of State-elect, John Merrill (R) clearly added his voice to the chorus of SEC presidential primary supporters in an op-ed at Yellowhammer News. He repeated a variation of the refrain that has become one of the go-to lines during the frontloading wave of the post-McGovern-Fraser reforms era:

"The main goal of this effort is to create an environment that forces candidates to appeal to the an even larger and more complete constituency than they currently do. Southerners, and more specifically Alabamians, represent a largely conservative, working class group of voters, but because of the timing of our primary elections, our calls for more conservative candidates have gone unheard."

...
"As your Secretary of State and Chief Elections Official, I will do all that I can to help position the South — and more specifically Alabama — as a place that all Presidential candidates will make an effort to visit and meet our remarkable people." [Emphasis is FHQ's.]

This echoes what Merrill's counterpart in neighboring Mississippi, Delbert Hosemann, has said:

"With Georgia, and Tennessee and Arkansas and Louisiana we are putting together a group where we would have a super SEC Tuesday where basically the candidates would have to come through Mississippi before they got elected president of the United States. Both Democrats and Republicans." [Again, emphasis is FHQ's.]

But would moves by Alabama or Mississippi or Arkansas to earlier dates on the 2016 presidential primary calendar do anything to really improve the lot of southern states in terms of attention paid them by the various presidential candidates in 2016? That remains to be seen. Such moves have not been a cure-all for states in the South or elsewhere in the past. Both Merrill and Hosemann seem to be talking about this as an increase in visits/attention. That may be the case, but it could also be that these states are merely splitting up a finite number of visits -- or visits within a rather finite window of time -- and aren't necessarily gaining attention to issues of, say, the Deep South. Is a visit to Texas or Tennessee a proxy visit to Alabama or Mississippi, for example?

If the focus shifts to a micro-examination of just those states looking to move to March 1 to be a part of the so-called SEC primary the advantages -- as measured by candidate visits -- are not all that clear.

Total Presidential Candidate Visits by SEC Primary States (2000-2012)
State	20001	20041	20082	20123
Alabama	0	5	13	27
Arkansas	0	10	16	1
Georgia	2	32	38	47
Mississippi	0	1	13	20
1 Data from Ridout and Rottinghaus (2008). The 2000 data are via the Washington Post; gathered from October 1, 1999-primary season 2000. Hotline provided the 2004 data; gathered from June 1, 2003-primary season 2004. 2 Data from Frontloading HQ via Slate.com Map the Candidates visits tracker. 3 Data from the Washington Post Campaign 2012 Republican Primary Tracker; gathered from June 2011-primary season 2012. * For the calendar dates of the contests in these from 2000-2012 click on the year.

Clearly earlier is better (see Ridout and Rottinghaus 2008; Mayer and Busch 2003). Alabama and Arkansas were lodged in June and late May primaries respectively in 2000 and 2004 while Georgia and Mississippi were in March in those years. Georgia benefited. Mississippi did not. Georgia has consistently been scheduled on the earliest date allowed by the national parties during this period (save 2004) and was delegate-rich enough to draw attention from the candidates despite being on dates shared by a large number of states.

In 2008, all of the above states were scheduled on the first Tuesday in February with the exception of Mississippi which as a month later on the second Tuesday in March. All gained over the previous couple of cycles.¹ Mississippi was later on the calendar but took advantage of the fact that it was the lone contest on its date in the midst of a tightly contested two-candidate race for the Democratic nomination.

As we look toward 2016, however, 2012 may be not only a decent guide but a cautionary tale for this. Arkansas was both late and after the point at which most of the Republican candidates had dropped out of the Republican nomination race.² The Natural state got one lone visit from Herman Cain. The other states potentially moving to a March 1 SEC primary for 2016 were earlier on the 2012 calendar. Georgia incrementally gained over 2008 despite just one party having a contested nomination race and sharing the most crowded date on the calendar with 11 other states; the earliest date allowed by the national party delegate selection rules.

Alabama and Mississippi were together a week later. The Deep South duo's power in 2012 may have been their sub-regional contiguity and that together the two dominated a day that also included caucuses in Hawaii and the American Samoa (neither large draws).

That raises questions if not red flags for a move for 2016 for those latter couple of states. Does a move away from a date that still finds Alabama and Mississippi dominant and to a date shared by a number of larger southern states (Florida, Georgia and Texas among them) net more or fewer visits in 2016 over 2012? If Ohio vacates March 8 to join a later March midwestern primary, would it not be more beneficial to stick with a date you dominate versus a date shared with others? Is a visit to Texas -- a regional visit -- the same as a candidate visit in Alabama or Mississippi?

These are tough questions to answer for state actors who have a limited state legislative session window in which to act in the spring of the year before the primary. And these folks tend to be risk-averse. Alabama and Mississippi would only gain by sticking with a later date is the nomination races are ongoing once they get to the second Tuesday in March. The field may be winnowed too much by then dropping the number of visits to either.

This is the mindset that has dominated the frontloading era. Move up or get left behind. But it isn't clear in this instance that states in the South will receive the attention they crave. In the meantime, decision makers in both Alabama and Mississippi seem to have forgotten what they gained in 2012 with their sub-regional coalition. Surely "cheesy grits" would have proven more memorable to elected officials in the Deep South.

--
¹ Some of that has to do with how and when the visits data was gathered, but some of that also has a great deal to do with how many parties had contested/competitive campaigns and how many candidates were involved in the race at the time of the primaries in these states.

² Romney had not clinched enough delegates to assume the mantle of presumptive nominee, but was approaching that mark with only Ron Paul actively running in the later primary states.


Recent Posts:
Why Getting Arkansas into an SEC Primary is More Difficult

But Southern States Will Have to Be Proportional

Louisiana not inclined to join 'SEC' presidential primary day in 2016

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

Why Getting Arkansas into an SEC Primary is More Difficult

As the 2015 state legislative sessions draw nearer, primary movement for the 2016 cycle is back on the radar. Lately, much of that discussion has centered on the possibility of a southern regional primary forming on the first date allowed by the national parties, March 1. As FHQ has mentioned previously, this effort is being spearheaded by Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp (R). Secretary Kemp has reached out to his counterparts in a number of other SEC states to gauge their interest in their states -- Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi -- joining Georgia (and a number of other southern and border states) on March 1.

Louisiana has already bumped their primary up in 2014 and is not necessarily eager to shift -- even if only slightly -- again.

Alabama and Mississippi coordinated their primary dates on the second Tuesday in March for 2012. Neither state would seemingly face too much resistance to moving up another week for 2016.

In Georgia, the power to set the presidential primary date lies with the secretary of state and Kemp seems more than inclined to keep Georgia on the first Tuesday in March for a second straight cycle.

There is also some interest in Arkansas, but the decision-making calculus on moving the presidential primary is different in the Natural state than it is in the other states. That is true for a few reasons:

When the Arkansas presidential primary was shifted up for the 1988 and 2008 cycles, the decision was made to create an all new and separate presidential primary election at an earlier point on the calendar. Traditionally, the majority of Arkansas primary elections have been consolidated in mid- to late May. In 1988 and 2008, everything but the presidential primary stayed in May while a presidential primary was created and moved into March and February, respectively.

Relatedly, to do that again, Arkansas state legislators would have to consider whether to incur the costs associated with a separate presidential primary as has been the case in the past. In 2008, that meant an extra $1.7 million to conduct that additional election. The alternative is to do what Alabama and Mississippi have done: consolidate all primary elections on the earlier presidential primary date. Mississippi has been doing this for years, but Alabama shifted both its presidential primary from February to March and its other primaries from June to March in 2008.

Arkansas could follow suit. But there is one catch that was raised in 2009 when Arkansas legislators were considering (and ultimately deciding on) eliminating the presidential primary and consolidating it with the other 2012 primaries. A constitutional amendment was passed by Arkansas voters in 2008 that moved the state legislatures sessions from biennially to annually. Annual sessions meant that the possibility existed for campaigning and fundraising to take place (for state legislators) during the state legislative session, violating a self-imposed rule (for those activities not to overlap). A March 1 [consolidated] primary would fall in the midst of the 2016 state legislative session.

So, in Arkansas it is a decision between the financial costs of creating and scheduling an earlier presidential primary or breaking the norm of state legislators campaigning/fundraising during their legislative session. The former has been the (less cost-effective) precedent in Arkansas in the past while the latter will potentially serve as a deterrent to moving up. Every additional roadblock makes moving a presidential primary forward and joining the proposed SEC primary that much more difficult, and Arkansas has a list of obstacles that other southern states involved do not have. That does not mean the presidential primary in the Natural state will not end up on March 1. Rather, it does indicate a more difficult path to that end.

Recent Posts:
But Southern States Will Have to Be Proportional

Louisiana not inclined to join 'SEC' presidential primary day in 2016

A Couple of Reasons the 2016 Texas Presidential Primary Isn't Going Anywhere

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

Louisiana not inclined to join 'SEC' presidential primary day in 2016

The story from the Times-Picayune.

--
A couple of notes:
1. Louisiana, as the story notes, has already moved its presidential primary for the 2016 cycle. Moving again would be fairly atypical. States, if they move at all, usually only move once per cycle. Double moves happen, but they are rare and recent occurrences. Both California and New Jersey moved twice ahead of 2008.¹

2. This would likely be a wise move on Louisiana's part. A Saturday, March 5 primary would be proximate enough -- regionally and on the calendar -- to the proposed SEC primary on March 1 to benefit from the regional attention. However, being on a separate date means that Louisiana would be less likely to be lost in the shuffle among larger neighboring states (with more delegates) on March 1. During the following week, March 8 is also a point on the calendar that is sparsely populated with contests. That is particularly true if Alabama and Mississippi move up a week; leaving only Ohio and the Hawaii Republican caucuses. Such a line up is unlikely to pull the campaign immediately out of the South following March 1.

--
¹ California moved from March to June before moving into February. New Jersey first moved up to late February before bumping the Garden state primary up a few more weeks to early February.

Recent Posts:
A Couple of Reasons the 2016 Texas Presidential Primary Isn't Going Anywhere

Nebraska Democrats Commit to Caucuses for 2016

Michigan Presidential Primary Move Bottled Up in State House Until After Christmas

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

"SEC Presidential Primary" Back on the Radar for 2016

Jim Galloway and Greg Bluestein at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution report that Georgia Secretary of State, Brian Kemp (R) is still working on a southern regional primary for March 1, 2016:

"Secretary of State Brian Kemp’s efforts to build what he calls an “SEC” presidential primary in 2016 appear to be proceeding apace.  

"Kemp is working with his counterparts in Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, Arkansas and Alabama to arrange a coordinated, regional primary for the first Tuesday in March 2016.  

"In a letter to six Southern secretaries of state, Kemp confirmed that he intends to set March 1 as the date for Georgia’s presidential primary:

'It is my hope that our region will participate together that day and that the voters of the Southeast will have a major impact in the selection of the presidential nominees of both parties.'"

--
A few things either mentioned or neglected:
1) Kemp seems focused on that March 1 date for the Georgia presidential primary in 2016. The secretary has signaled more than once now that this is a likely destination for the primary in the Peach state. That is a change from the 2012 cycle when the date of the Georgia primary was an unknown through much of 2011 after the state legislature ceded the date-setting authority to the secretary of state.

2) Mississippi, Louisiana, Tennessee, Arkansas and Alabama are the low hanging fruit of potential presidential primary moves for 2016. Here's the calendar. Tennessee is already on March 1 (as Galloway and Bluestein mention) and Louisiana is now locked into a Saturday, March 5 primary date after legislation moving the primary up by two weeks was signed into law this summer. That will be as far as Louisiana moves up; the same week as the other southern states. Alabama and Mississippi are already slated for primary dates just a week later on March 8. Those states bumping their dates up by a week is not all that heavy a lift. Arkansas is a different matter. Having gotten lost in the early state shuffle during the Southern Super Tuesday in 1988 and the Titanic Tuesday of 2008, state legislators moved the presidential primary back to the traditional May date in the immediately subsequent cycles. However, Republicans now have unified control of the state government in the Natural state after the 2014 midterms and may be more receptive to such a move.

3) Perhaps more importantly, it should be noted that the two biggest SEC states -- Florida and Texas are already positioned on March 1. It leaves one to wonder if this version of a Southern Super Tuesday plays out the same way as it did in 1988, but in reverse. Spurred by the action of Southern Democratic action, most southern states moved up to the second Tuesday in March in 1988. There was a split decision on the Democratic side with Michael Dukakis, Al Gore and Jesse Jackson all laying some claim to having won the day. While Democrats had a split decision across the South, George HW Bush swept the region. Such a reversal may be less about the decisions throughout the South to cluster primaries on the same date than how the Republican and Democratic nomination races are shaping up at this point in late 2014. Still...


Recent Posts:
2014 Senate Forecast

Michigan Bill Would Undermine February Presidential Primary

Michigan Republicans Green Light March 15, but...

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

Utah Presidential Primary in 2016, Prologue or Epilogue

FHQ is late to this but I did want to point readers in the direction of a nice summary piece on the recent effort in Utah to move the presidential primary in the state online and ahead of the carve-out states.

More interesting, perhaps, is the brief bit on where legislators or the parties in Utah may turn next, now that the move to challenge Iowa and New Hampshire has passed:

Utah Republicans are working with their counterparts in Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona to put together a regional primary that would be held between March 15 and April 1, Hough said.

This is noteworthy on the heels of news that there is an effort underway among a series of southern states to have a southern regional primary at the beginning of March. But such a western regional primary would be susceptible to some of the same issues that would face a southern primary. Mostly, that it is potentially difficult to coordinate. Still, it looks at though Utah is unlikely to wait until June to conduct its presidential primary in 2016. The rest? We'll have to wait until 2015 to see about them.

Recent Posts:
Missouri Senate Passes Bill Moving Presidential Primary to March

Nebraska Bill on Binding Delegates Based on Primary or Caucus Results Signed into Law

Missouri Presidential Primary Bill Clears Procedural Hurdle in Senate

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

Delaware Governor Quietly Signs Presidential Primary Bill, Moving Election to April 24

[Click to Enlarge]

With little fanfare,¹ Delaware governor, Jack Markell (D), quietly signed SB 89 into law on Wednesday, July 27. The legislation, nearly unanimously supported in both chambers of the state legislature, calls for moving the presidential primary in the First state from the first Tuesday in February to the fourth Tuesday in April. In that slot Delaware will have a presidential primary that coincides with presidential primaries in neighboring New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Connecticut. That regional primary should comprise the largest cache of delegates between the diminished Super Tuesday on March 6 and the first Tuesday in June when California (and likely New Jersey) hold presidential primaries concurrently with delegate selection events in Montana, New Mexico and North and South Dakota.

The move now leaves only New Jersey -- a Chris Christie signature away from moving itself -- and Missouri as the only states remaining from the 2008 Super Tuesday date. [Minnesota is an exception to that even though the Republican caucuses there are scheduled for the same date as last time. The Minnesota caucuses were scheduled for the first Tuesday in March before the state law that was changed 2008. Following passage of that law, the parties had the option of collectively deciding on a common date. Having not exercised that option by March 1 of this year, the caucuses were automatically scheduled for the first Tuesday in February. Minnesota Democrats have since opted for a March 6 date for their caucus meetings.]

You can find an update of the 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar here.

--

¹ FHQ is reminded of this.

Recent Posts:

2012 Maine Republican Caucuses

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (7/30/11)

California Presidential Primary to June 5

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

Second April Presidential Primary Bill Signed in Rhode Island

A great many links came into my inbox yesterday about the presidential primary bill that Rhode Island governor, Lincoln Chaffee (I), had signed into law Tuesday. However, none of the items ever specified which bill had been signed. As such, it was difficult to determine whether the bill in question was the little-discussed presidential primary bill signed on July 1 (S 399) or the unsigned H 5653. Rhode Island's General Assembly web site today provided the answer, indicating it was the latter that Chaffee had signed. As I indicated last week, the second, just-signed bill was superfluous in light of the fact that S 399 had already moved the 2012 presidential primary in Rhode Island. Yet, H 5653 was among the extensive group of bills signed on July 12.

An updated 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar can be found here.

Recent Posts:

Message to News Outlets: Cite Your Sources

Cuomo Signs Bill Moving New York Presidential Primary to April 24

West Virginia Republicans Eye Super Tuesday (March 6) State Convention for Delegate Allocation

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

Rhode Island Presidential Primary to April 24

[Click to Enlarge]

Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chaffee (I) on Friday, July 1, signed SB 399 into law. The bill moves the Ocean state's presidential primary from the first Tuesday in March to the fourth Tuesday in April, bringing the state in line with the primary in Pennsylvania. Legislation to move presidential primaries to the same date has been passed and is awaiting gubernatorial approval in Connecticut, Delaware and New York. All five states, blue states in 2008 and under nearly unanimous Democratic control, should all benefit from the bonus delegates associated with later (post-March) primaries and additional bonuses based on the coordination of primaries.

The companion House bill (HB 5653) has been transmitted to Governor Chaffee as well, but seems superfluous at this point with SB 399 having now moved the primary back.

An updated 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar can be found here.

Recent Posts:

Ohio Presidential Primary to May 8

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (7/1/11)

More from Secretary Kemp on Coupling Georgia's Presidential Primary with Florida's

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

Rhode Island Senate Passes Companion April Presidential Primary Bill from the House

In what will likely (hopefully!?!) the last presidential primary bill passed on a very busy legislative day, Rhode Island brought up the rear. The state Senate in the Ocean state, a night after having passed the House-amended version of its own primary bill (SB 399), passed HB 5653. Both bills would move the Rhode Island presidential primary from the first Tuesday in March to the fourth Tuesday in April to coincide with primaries in Connecticut, Delaware, New York and Pennsylvania.

On a 36-1 vote on the eve of the adjourning, the Rhode Island General Assembly sends to Governor Lincoln Chaffee (I) the second of two presidential primary bills.

Recent Posts:

Delaware House Makes Quick Work of April Presidential Primary Bill

Ohio House Concurs with Elections/Presidential Primary Bill, Passes on to Governor

New Jersey Senate Unanimously Passes Bill Eliminating Separate Presidential Primary

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

Delaware House Makes Quick Work of April Presidential Primary Bill

The Delaware House spared no time in passing SB 89 after the bill emerged from committee earlier this afternoon. By a unanimous vote -- 41-0 -- on the day before the legislature is set to adjourn, the House passed and sent off to Governor Jack Markell (D) the bill that would move the First state's presidential primary back nearly three months (from the first Tuesday in February to the fourth Tuesday in April).

Should Governor Markell sign the legislation, Delaware's primary would coincide with primaries in Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island.

Recent Posts:

Ohio House Concurs with Elections/Presidential Primary Bill, Passes on to Governor

New Jersey Senate Unanimously Passes Bill Eliminating Separate Presidential Primary

Delaware House Committee Advances April Presidential Primary Legislation

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

Delaware House Committee Advances April Presidential Primary Legislation

The Delaware state House Administration Committee this afternoon unanimously passed -- by a vote of 5-0 -- SB 89, the bill that would move the First state's presidential primary from the first Tuesday in February to the fourth Tuesday in April. As was stated earlier today in FHQ's post updating the situation in Rhode Island, that would place Delaware on a date shared by four other neighboring states (Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island), forming a small northeastern/mid-Atlantic regional primary.

The bill now heads to the House floor for consideration there by the full lower chamber.

Recent Posts:

Idaho Republicans Considering Super Tuesday Caucuses

Rhode Island Senate Passes House-Amended, April Presidential Primary Bill

Prominent Utah Legislators Don't Appear to Have a Desire to Appropriate Money for a Presidential Primary

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

Rhode Island Senate Passes House-Amended, April Presidential Primary Bill

The Rhode Island Senate on Tuesday, June 28, passed by a vote of 34-2 a measure to shift the Ocean state's presidential primary from the first Tuesday in March to the fourth Tuesday in April. S 399 originated in the state Senate and was passed in April with no provision addressing the scheduling of the presidential primary. The House added that amendment to the bill and passed the package last week. Initially, the legislation was on the calendar for a vote on Wednesday, but with time running out in a legislative session due to adjourn at the end of the month on Thursday, the Senate got to it early.

S 399 now heads to Governor Lincoln Chaffee (I) for his consideration. The move would place the Rhode Island primary on the same date as the presidential primary in Pennsylvania next year. Legislation has already been passed in both Connecticut and New York to move those states' primaries to April 24 as well. Legislation eying the same date is also active in Delaware. Together, the moves would set up a five state regional primary in late April.

--

Hat tip to Philip Marcello at the Providence Journal for bringing news of the early vote to FHQ's attention.

Recent Posts:

Prominent Utah Legislators Don't Appear to Have a Desire to Appropriate Money for a Presidential Primary

There Won't Be a Stampede to the Front of the 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar

Where Georgia's Presidential Primary Might End Up

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

Rhode Island House Unanimously Passes Amended Senate Primary Bill

After passing HB 5653, the Rhode Island state House quickly followed that by unanimously passing the state Senate's presidential primary bill, SB 399, as well. Both bills were amended in the Judiciary Committee on the House side to shift the Ocean state's presidential primary back to late April and had some trivial corrections added on the floor. The Senate-passed version, now amended and identical to the House bill, returns to the Senate to be reconsidered.

The Senate has just under a week to complete consideration of the bills before the Rhode Island legislature adjourns next week as the month ends.

Recent Posts:

Rhode Island House Passes Bill to Move Presidential Primary to April

Ohio Senate Committee Passes May Presidential Primary Legislation

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (6/22/11)

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

Rhode Island House Passes Bill to Move Presidential Primary to April

By a 71-1 vote on Thursday afternoon, the Rhode Island state House unanimously passed an amended version of HB 5653. The bill would move the Ocean state's presidential primary from the first Tuesday in March to the fourth Tuesday in April. This moves Rhode Island one step closer to a proposed regional primary that would include Connecticut, Delaware, New York and Pennsylvania.

The bill will now move on to the Rhode Island state Senate for consideration in the upper chamber.

Recent Posts:

Ohio Senate Committee Passes May Presidential Primary Legislation

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (6/22/11)

In Florida, Some Chatter Behind the Idea of a Thursday Presidential Primary

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

Rhode Island House Committee Amends House and Senate Elections Bills to Move Presidential Primary to April

On Tuesday, June 21, the Rhode Island House Judiciary Committee recommended the passage of H 5633 and S 399, two bills meant to bring the BayOcean state's presidential primary process into compliance with the federal MOVE act. However, the committee amended the bills, changing the date of the presidential nominating contest from the first Tuesday in March to the fourth Tuesday in April. This is the first action in Rhode Island toward the goal of an April 24, 2012 regional primary based on the chatter from Connecticut. The legislation would bring the state's contest in line with those in Pennsylvania, Connecticut (if legislation is signed), New York (if legislation is signed) and Delaware (if legislation is passed and signed).

[Click to Enlarge]

Both Rhode Island bills are on the WednesdayThursday House calendar for consideration and potentially votes by the full lower chamber.

This legislation will be added to the Presidential Primary Bills Before State Legislatures section in the left sidebar.

Recent Posts:

And then there was New York: Last February State Rapidly Moves Bill Through Legislature

Alabama Presidential Primary to March 13

Louisiana Senate Passes March Presidential Primary Bill, House Concurs

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

Hints of an April 24 Regional Primary from CT Secretary of State

Here's the press release from Connecticut Secretary of State, Denise Merrill:

Secretary Merrill: 2012 Presidential Primary Likely to Move to April 24th in House Vote

House Passage of HB 6532 Puts Connecticut on Path to Have Unified Presidential Primary with Pennsylvania, New York, Rhode Island

Hartford: Secretary of the State Denise Merrill today noted that unanimous House passage of House Bill No. 6532, “An Act Concerning the Presidential Preference Primary,” sets Connecticut on a path to move the date of the 2012 Presidential Primary to back to Tuesday April 24, 2012. Current state law pegs the Connecticut Presidential Preference Primary to the first Tuesday following the first Monday in February, and the last such primary took place on February 5, 2008. Since then, both the Democratic and Republican national committees have provided state parties with incentives to move their primaries to later dates to avoid the front-loading of the Presidential selection process. Both state Democratic and Republican party leadership have agreed on the date of April 24, 2012 as an acceptable date for Connecticut’s next Presidential Preference Primary, a date which may result in a regional primary with the neighboring states of Pennsylvania, New York, and Rhode Island.

“I am happy to see both parties have agreed on the April 24^th date for our Presidential Preference Primary, and I call on the State Senate to approve this measure quickly so we can begin to plan for this important election,” said Secretary Merrill, Connecticut’s chief elections officer. “Pushing the primary date back a little will allow Connecticut to have more regional clout, especially if our neighboring states also move their primaries to that day. This helps both state parties and the voters, who are already paying close attention to the critical process of choosing our President.”

House Bill No. 6532 had originally named a date of March 6, 2012 to hold the next Presidential Primary in Connecticut, a date shared by the state of Massachusetts. The date was moved further back to April 24^th due to further incentives from the national parties and in order to avoid coinciding with the Connecticut Mastery Tests taking place in schools, which could have created logistical problems as many polling places are public schools in Connecticut.

--

Hmmm.

This is an interesting follow up to FHQ's discussion of the amendments added to the Connecticut bill that would move the presidential primary to April 24. It is even more interesting in the face of the impending bill in Delaware (This would force the Delaware primary even further back into the shadows in the eyes of the presidential contenders.). Let's look at this regional conglomeration a little more closely. Pennsylvania will not have to do anything. The Keystone state is already scheduled for April 24. Connecticut and Delaware are both already eying that date in actual or future legislation.

But moves in New York and Rhode Island are news to FHQ. Given the fact that New York law schedules the Empire state's presidential primary for the first Tuesday in February, it is still among the states that, under national party rules, has to change the date of its contest in order to comply with those rules. In other words, New York is a state FHQ has been observing rather closely since the first of the year. No legislation has been proposed in either chamber in the New York legislature. And it should be noted that while Democrats control the governor's mansion and the state House, Republicans hold a narrow majority in the state Senate. On the surface, then, there would be a potential partisan roadblock to a move to April. That said, mention of that roadblock should be tempered by the fact that New York Republicans -- like their counterparts in Delaware, Georgia, Ohio and Texas and add Connecticut to that list -- have traditionally allocated delegates on a winner-take-all basis. If the Republican Party of New York desires the status quo on that front, members may be more amenable to a move to late April (a month in which New York scheduled its primary for all but one cycle between 1976 and 1992).

In Rhode Island, the story is slightly different. First of all, Democrats control both chambers of the Rhode Island legislature and Republican-turned-Independent Lincoln Chafee occupies the governor's mansion. The latter would not necessarily have a clear reason to sign or veto a bill to move the presidential primary in the Ocean state. Secondly, Rhode Island Republicans do not have the motivation that the above list of states does. The party has traditionally allocated national convention delegates proportionally. The states currently first Tuesday in March position is not a problem for the party then. The state already has proportional allocation and would not have to make a change to stay in compliance with RNC rules. Finally, Rhode Island, while not on FHQ's watch list, has not seen any legislation proposed to change the presidential primary date. There are two bills -- HB 5653 and SB 399 -- that "would make changes relating to the primaries for election of delegates to national conventions and for presidential preference". But neither bill addresses the Rhode Island statute (17-12.1-1) that sets the presidential primary date. Instead, both bills make minor changes to candidate filing deadlines and other smaller details. The original Senate version has already passed and moved to the House. Both bills, then, are in committee in virtually the same form in the House and neither includes any provision to move the presidential primary. Unlike New York and its year-round legislative session, the Rhode Island legislature adjourns late next month.

Obviously, this is something that bears attention over the next few weeks. This would be a fairly significant regional primary and the attendant delegate boost on the Democratic side due to "clustering" would be rather large for already delegate-rich states like Pennsylvania and New York. It would also have the effect on the Republican side -- where all the action is going to be anyway -- of stripping out from the beginning, February/March part of the calendar a grouping of comparatively more moderate states. But FHQ will save the discussion of that impact for another, future post. Stay tuned...

Recent Posts:

Legislation to Move Delaware Primary to April on the Horizon

Ohio House Passes Bill Moving Presidential Primary Back to May

Suggestions Needed: Who Should Replace Mike Huckabee on the Candidate Emergence Tracker?

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