Monday, April 9, 2007
New York Officially Joins the March to February 5
New York governor, Eliot Spitzer, signed into law today a bill to move the state's 2008 presidential primary. The bill (A.6430/S3544) moves the primary from the first Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in February. Not only does it move one of the most delegate-rich states further toward that front of the pack, but it is seen as a boost to two of the leading candidates from each party. New York's junior senator and Democratic front-runner, Hillary Clinton, and current Republican front-runner and former New York city mayor, Rudy Giuliani would both stand to gain from this move. As the contest nears however, that view may change. Strategically, both candidates' opponents could opt to skip New York ceding many of the delegates to the favorite son/daughter and focus resources elsewhere. With the cluster forming on February 5, there will be no lack of alternatives to New York for the likes of Edwards, Obama, McCain or Romney.
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
The Bills that Changed (or Will Potentially Change) the Primary Calendar
Since the focus on the 2008 presidential election has shifted to candidate fund-raising lately and because legislation about moving presidential primaries is going through state legislatures, things are at a bit of a standstill. With that said, I thought I would take a step back and archive all the moves states have made or are making. I'll break this into several parts depending upon the actors behind the moves in each state. For the most part, state legislatures make the decisions to move primaries, but state parties, governors and/or secretaries of state can have a say as well. In this post I'll look at the actions of state legislatures to move these primaries and in subsequent post(s), I'll examine the actions taken by (mostly) state parties to move presidential primaries or caucuses.
States that have moved:
Alabama:
HB 51 passed both houses of the Alabama legislature during the 2006 session, changing the date of the state's presidential primary from the first Tuesday in June to the now-crowded date of February 5. After being a state at the head of the frontloading movement for all three presidential elections cycles during the 1980's, Alabama reverted to its pre-1980 position in June for the 1992 cycle and has been there ever since. This original proposal for HB 51 had the primary moving to the Saturday after the New Hampshire primary (February 2), but that portion of the bill was edited to read February 5. With more states pushing to the front of the line recently though, talk about that Saturday before February 5 has been revived.
Arkansas:
The Arkansas legislature was the first to act after February 5 became the opening date of the window in which both parties require presidential primaries to occur. SB 235 made it through the legislature during its 2005 session and was signed into law by Governor Mike Huckabee in March of that year.
California:
California is the big delegate prize for both parties during a presidential nomination, and when the state changes the date on which its primary is held, it is news. The date of the 2008 primary has changed twice since the last cycle though. One move made more news than the other. Primaries have been held on the first Tuesday in March since the 2000 cycle in California, but a 2004 law (SB 1730) switched the state's primary back to its traditional, pre-1996 position (the Tuesday after the first Monday in June). This was news simply because the biggest state was breaking with the trend of increased frontloading. As more and more states moved or considered moving to February 5 though, the California legislature decided not to sit idly by. On January 22, 2007, SB 113 was introduced, changing the presidential primary date from June to February 5. The bill was signed into law in late March, fundamentally altering the outlook of the 2008 nomination contests in both parties.
Louisiana:
During the 2006 legislative session, the Louisiana State Legislature passed HB 1307 which was later signed in to law (Act 845) by Governor Kathleen Blanco. The act changes the date for the state's quadrennial presidential preference primary from the second Tuesday in March to the second Saturday in February. For the 2008 cycle that puts Louisiana's primary just four days after the February 5 super primary. As I mentioned in a post last week though, some legislators are considering moving to an even earlier date because of all the clustering on the Tuesday preceding the state's primary.
New Jersey:
If Louisiana does move again, it will join New Jersey and California as a state that has moved its presidential primary twice since the 2004 cycle. In July 2005, New Jersey moved its 2008 presidential primary from the Tuesday after the first Monday in June to the last Tuesday in February (A30/S550).* However, once momentum built behind the idea of February 5 as a de facto national primary day, New Jersey jumped on the bandwagon and acted (A4010/S2193). That bill was signed into law earlier this week as described here.
*Bill histories for these bills can be found by doing simple bill searches on the front page of the New Jersey legislature's website here.
New York:
A.6430/S.3544 (thanks to nycowboy.org for this link via the New York Legislative Retrieval System) were passed by the New York Assembly and Senate respectively on March 21, 2007. The plan calls for moving the presidential primary in New York from the first Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in February. As described in an earlier post, the bill now awaits the signature of New York governor, Eliot Spitzer. UPDATE: Governor Spitzer signed into law the above law on April 9, 2007.
States with plans to move being considered in the legislature:
Connecticut:
In Connecticut, a plan to move the state's presidential primary to February 5 (or the first Tuesday in February) for 2008 and all subsequent cycles was introduced to the Senate in the for of SB 1184. As of April 16, the bill had made it out of committee on the Senate side and was added to the chamber's calendar for consideration on the floor.
Florida:
The Florida House recently passed HB 537, which calls for Florida's 2008 presidential primary date to be moved from the second Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in February or the Tuesday after the New Hampshire primary; whichever date comes first. This sliding scale is in place unless the earliest date falls on a day earlier than the second Tuesday in January.
Georgia:
HB 487 passed the Georgia House of Representatives on March 20, 2007 (see previous post). The plan calls for moving the 2008 presidential primary from the first Tuesday in March to February 5 and then to fall on the first Tuesday in February in subsequent cycles. As of march 27 the bill had been read and referred to committee in the Senate.
Illinois:
HB 0426 was passed by the Illinois House on March 28, 2007 and has been read and referred to committee in the Senate. The bill changes the state's 2008 primary from the third Tuesday in March (a date that has been used since the 1970 off-year primaries) to the first Tuesday in February.
Kansas:
Kansas is attempting to have in 2008 its first presidential primary since 1992. Current law allows the secretary of state to set the primary on a date on or before the first Tuesday in April in which at least five other states are holding delegate selection events. In the past that has typically meant that the state of Kansas has fallen back on the default first Tuesday in April date. Currently, there are two proposals at various stages of the process. SB 310 eliminates the the portions of the code referring to the secretary of state and simply calls for the permanent institution of a presidential primary on the first Tuesday in April. This plan, however, has been bottled up in the Senate Elections and Local Government Committee since hearings on February 14, 2007. The plan that has more support behind it is SB 320, which retains the secretary of state provisions in the current code and reduces to three the number of states that must hold delegate selection events on the same date. SB 320 unanimously passed the Senate and was introduced and referred to the Appropriations Committee in the House in late February of this year. The two dates cited most by state legislators in this scenario are January 29 and February 5 with the latter being the most likely. As of April 6, 2007, the Kansas legislature had failed to act any further, with both chambers generally supporting the idea but not the financial obligation attendant to a presidential primary. Advocates of the presidential primary plan on renewing their effort to include funding in the budget when the legislature reconvenes for its "wrap-up" session at the end of April.
Maryland:
HB 1434 and SB 1025 have passed their respective chambers in the Maryland General Assembly and have been referred to the opposite chamber and introduced to committees there. According to the bills' histories (here and here), the plan to move the state's presidential primary from the first Tuesday in March to the second Tuesday in February has wide support in both chambers. The bill was re-referred to the House Ways and Means Committee and was due for a hearing there on April 5.
Montana:
HB 797 allows for the secretary of state to set the date for the presidential preference primary in February or March of 2008. This bill was passed by the Montana House and transmitted to the Senate on March 29, 2007. Currently the bill is being considered in its second committee on the House side and first committee in the Senate.
North Carolina:
North Carolina's Senate is considering a bill (S 168) that would permanently move the state's presidential primary from the first Tuesday after the first Monday in May to the first Tuesday in February. The bill was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee on February 14, 2007 and is still being considered there. At this time there no similar bill has been introduced in the House.
Oregon:
HB 2084, like the bill in Montana, leaves the decision as to the date on which the presidential primary is held up to the Oregon secretary of state. As of March 28, 2007 the plan had passed the House Elections, Ethics and Rules Committee. Here is the bill's history to this point.
Pennsylvania:
Pennsylvania has several bills circulating both chambers of the General Assembly there. SB 516 has been referred (on March 19, 2007) to the Senate State Government Committee and sets as the dates for the presidential primaries in 2008 and 2012, March 4 and March 6 respectively. HB 289 permanently moves the state's presidential primary from the fourth Tuesday in April to the second Tuesday in February (the 12th in 2008). This bill was sent to the House State Government Committee on February 7, 2007. Like SB 516, HB 63 shifts the date called for in the existing state code concerning primary elections to March 4, 2008. On January 30, 2007 HB 63 was referred to the House State Government Committee.
Rhode Island:
H 5636 and S 740 both call for moving the Rhode Island presidential primary for 2008 and all subsequent cycles from March 18* to February 5. Each bill has been introduced and referred to the Judiciary Committee in their respective chambers, but the Senate, where the bill was first introduced, has been the first to act. The Senate Judiciary Committee has a hearing on the matter scheduled for April 10. No similar action has been taken on the House side as of yet.
*Both bills cite March 18 as the 2008 primary date when in the past the Rhode Island primary has been held on the first Tuesday in March. This runs contrary to where most sources have the state's primary for the 2008 cycle.
Tennessee:
HB 2211 would move the 2008 presidential primary in Tennessee from February 12 to February 5. The Tennessee House passed the bill by a vote of 91-2 on March 22, 2007. The bill's version in the Senate (SB 2012) has been referred to the State and Local Government Committee and is on the calendar there for April 10. The legislature's website will not allow a direct link, but searching for either of the bills referenced here will give you a detailed history of their paths through both chambers.
Texas:
As I discussed in my post late last week, a bill to move Texas' 2008 presidential primary had passed the House Elections Committee. Though there were other bills (HB 993 and HB 996), HB 2017 has been the only one to get out of committee.* The plan in that bill calls for moving the state's presidential primary from the first Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in February. As of April 4, 2007, HB 2017 had been placed on the House calendar for consideration on the floor. The bill's companion in the Senate (SB 1843), has been introduced and referred to the State Affairs Committee, where it has been waiting for action since March 19.
*The "text" tab in the series of tabs running along the top of the page in the above links provides the bill as introduced as well as the bill's analysis from the Elections Committee report in the case of HB 2017.
States that have moved:
Alabama:
HB 51 passed both houses of the Alabama legislature during the 2006 session, changing the date of the state's presidential primary from the first Tuesday in June to the now-crowded date of February 5. After being a state at the head of the frontloading movement for all three presidential elections cycles during the 1980's, Alabama reverted to its pre-1980 position in June for the 1992 cycle and has been there ever since. This original proposal for HB 51 had the primary moving to the Saturday after the New Hampshire primary (February 2), but that portion of the bill was edited to read February 5. With more states pushing to the front of the line recently though, talk about that Saturday before February 5 has been revived.
Arkansas:
The Arkansas legislature was the first to act after February 5 became the opening date of the window in which both parties require presidential primaries to occur. SB 235 made it through the legislature during its 2005 session and was signed into law by Governor Mike Huckabee in March of that year.
California:
California is the big delegate prize for both parties during a presidential nomination, and when the state changes the date on which its primary is held, it is news. The date of the 2008 primary has changed twice since the last cycle though. One move made more news than the other. Primaries have been held on the first Tuesday in March since the 2000 cycle in California, but a 2004 law (SB 1730) switched the state's primary back to its traditional, pre-1996 position (the Tuesday after the first Monday in June). This was news simply because the biggest state was breaking with the trend of increased frontloading. As more and more states moved or considered moving to February 5 though, the California legislature decided not to sit idly by. On January 22, 2007, SB 113 was introduced, changing the presidential primary date from June to February 5. The bill was signed into law in late March, fundamentally altering the outlook of the 2008 nomination contests in both parties.
Louisiana:
During the 2006 legislative session, the Louisiana State Legislature passed HB 1307 which was later signed in to law (Act 845) by Governor Kathleen Blanco. The act changes the date for the state's quadrennial presidential preference primary from the second Tuesday in March to the second Saturday in February. For the 2008 cycle that puts Louisiana's primary just four days after the February 5 super primary. As I mentioned in a post last week though, some legislators are considering moving to an even earlier date because of all the clustering on the Tuesday preceding the state's primary.
New Jersey:
If Louisiana does move again, it will join New Jersey and California as a state that has moved its presidential primary twice since the 2004 cycle. In July 2005, New Jersey moved its 2008 presidential primary from the Tuesday after the first Monday in June to the last Tuesday in February (A30/S550).* However, once momentum built behind the idea of February 5 as a de facto national primary day, New Jersey jumped on the bandwagon and acted (A4010/S2193). That bill was signed into law earlier this week as described here.
*Bill histories for these bills can be found by doing simple bill searches on the front page of the New Jersey legislature's website here.
New York:
A.6430/S.3544 (thanks to nycowboy.org for this link via the New York Legislative Retrieval System) were passed by the New York Assembly and Senate respectively on March 21, 2007. The plan calls for moving the presidential primary in New York from the first Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in February. As described in an earlier post, the bill now awaits the signature of New York governor, Eliot Spitzer. UPDATE: Governor Spitzer signed into law the above law on April 9, 2007.
States with plans to move being considered in the legislature:
Connecticut:
In Connecticut, a plan to move the state's presidential primary to February 5 (or the first Tuesday in February) for 2008 and all subsequent cycles was introduced to the Senate in the for of SB 1184. As of April 16, the bill had made it out of committee on the Senate side and was added to the chamber's calendar for consideration on the floor.
Florida:
The Florida House recently passed HB 537, which calls for Florida's 2008 presidential primary date to be moved from the second Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in February or the Tuesday after the New Hampshire primary; whichever date comes first. This sliding scale is in place unless the earliest date falls on a day earlier than the second Tuesday in January.
Georgia:
HB 487 passed the Georgia House of Representatives on March 20, 2007 (see previous post). The plan calls for moving the 2008 presidential primary from the first Tuesday in March to February 5 and then to fall on the first Tuesday in February in subsequent cycles. As of march 27 the bill had been read and referred to committee in the Senate.
Illinois:
HB 0426 was passed by the Illinois House on March 28, 2007 and has been read and referred to committee in the Senate. The bill changes the state's 2008 primary from the third Tuesday in March (a date that has been used since the 1970 off-year primaries) to the first Tuesday in February.
Kansas:
Kansas is attempting to have in 2008 its first presidential primary since 1992. Current law allows the secretary of state to set the primary on a date on or before the first Tuesday in April in which at least five other states are holding delegate selection events. In the past that has typically meant that the state of Kansas has fallen back on the default first Tuesday in April date. Currently, there are two proposals at various stages of the process. SB 310 eliminates the the portions of the code referring to the secretary of state and simply calls for the permanent institution of a presidential primary on the first Tuesday in April. This plan, however, has been bottled up in the Senate Elections and Local Government Committee since hearings on February 14, 2007. The plan that has more support behind it is SB 320, which retains the secretary of state provisions in the current code and reduces to three the number of states that must hold delegate selection events on the same date. SB 320 unanimously passed the Senate and was introduced and referred to the Appropriations Committee in the House in late February of this year. The two dates cited most by state legislators in this scenario are January 29 and February 5 with the latter being the most likely. As of April 6, 2007, the Kansas legislature had failed to act any further, with both chambers generally supporting the idea but not the financial obligation attendant to a presidential primary. Advocates of the presidential primary plan on renewing their effort to include funding in the budget when the legislature reconvenes for its "wrap-up" session at the end of April.
Maryland:
HB 1434 and SB 1025 have passed their respective chambers in the Maryland General Assembly and have been referred to the opposite chamber and introduced to committees there. According to the bills' histories (here and here), the plan to move the state's presidential primary from the first Tuesday in March to the second Tuesday in February has wide support in both chambers. The bill was re-referred to the House Ways and Means Committee and was due for a hearing there on April 5.
Montana:
HB 797 allows for the secretary of state to set the date for the presidential preference primary in February or March of 2008. This bill was passed by the Montana House and transmitted to the Senate on March 29, 2007. Currently the bill is being considered in its second committee on the House side and first committee in the Senate.
North Carolina:
North Carolina's Senate is considering a bill (S 168) that would permanently move the state's presidential primary from the first Tuesday after the first Monday in May to the first Tuesday in February. The bill was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee on February 14, 2007 and is still being considered there. At this time there no similar bill has been introduced in the House.
Oregon:
HB 2084, like the bill in Montana, leaves the decision as to the date on which the presidential primary is held up to the Oregon secretary of state. As of March 28, 2007 the plan had passed the House Elections, Ethics and Rules Committee. Here is the bill's history to this point.
Pennsylvania:
Pennsylvania has several bills circulating both chambers of the General Assembly there. SB 516 has been referred (on March 19, 2007) to the Senate State Government Committee and sets as the dates for the presidential primaries in 2008 and 2012, March 4 and March 6 respectively. HB 289 permanently moves the state's presidential primary from the fourth Tuesday in April to the second Tuesday in February (the 12th in 2008). This bill was sent to the House State Government Committee on February 7, 2007. Like SB 516, HB 63 shifts the date called for in the existing state code concerning primary elections to March 4, 2008. On January 30, 2007 HB 63 was referred to the House State Government Committee.
Rhode Island:
H 5636 and S 740 both call for moving the Rhode Island presidential primary for 2008 and all subsequent cycles from March 18* to February 5. Each bill has been introduced and referred to the Judiciary Committee in their respective chambers, but the Senate, where the bill was first introduced, has been the first to act. The Senate Judiciary Committee has a hearing on the matter scheduled for April 10. No similar action has been taken on the House side as of yet.
*Both bills cite March 18 as the 2008 primary date when in the past the Rhode Island primary has been held on the first Tuesday in March. This runs contrary to where most sources have the state's primary for the 2008 cycle.
Tennessee:
HB 2211 would move the 2008 presidential primary in Tennessee from February 12 to February 5. The Tennessee House passed the bill by a vote of 91-2 on March 22, 2007. The bill's version in the Senate (SB 2012) has been referred to the State and Local Government Committee and is on the calendar there for April 10. The legislature's website will not allow a direct link, but searching for either of the bills referenced here will give you a detailed history of their paths through both chambers.
Texas:
As I discussed in my post late last week, a bill to move Texas' 2008 presidential primary had passed the House Elections Committee. Though there were other bills (HB 993 and HB 996), HB 2017 has been the only one to get out of committee.* The plan in that bill calls for moving the state's presidential primary from the first Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in February. As of April 4, 2007, HB 2017 had been placed on the House calendar for consideration on the floor. The bill's companion in the Senate (SB 1843), has been introduced and referred to the State Affairs Committee, where it has been waiting for action since March 19.
*The "text" tab in the series of tabs running along the top of the page in the above links provides the bill as introduced as well as the bill's analysis from the Elections Committee report in the case of HB 2017.
Welcome to February 5, New Jersey
In a weekend dominated by the disclosure of the presidential candidates' first quarter campaign receipts, New Jersey governor, John Corzine, signed into law a plan (Bill S2193) to move the state's 2008 presidential primary to the increasingly popular first Tuesday in February. As CQ Politics reports, the state moved for the second time this cycle; first moving from the first Tuesday after the first Monday in June to the last Tuesday in February and then from that date to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in February. State lawmakers in New Jersey cited voting rights as their main motivation. The reason for the first move was to enhance the state's say in who the major parties' nominees are to be. With more and more states clustering on February 5 however, affecting the nominations appeared less and less likely.
Of course, such a move can be seen as necessary only if one feels the nominations will be decided on or before February 5. If one is to believe the state legislatures and state parties making the decisions to move and the media, then the consensus appears to fall firmly behind that notion. However, if the picture is muddled as to which candidates remain viable after the de facto national primary on that first February Tuesday, then the February 26 date New Jersey initially moved to may have proven more consequential. Some of this thinking is reflected in the recent discussions in the Maryland legislature to move the state's primary to the week following the fifth.
Of course, such a move can be seen as necessary only if one feels the nominations will be decided on or before February 5. If one is to believe the state legislatures and state parties making the decisions to move and the media, then the consensus appears to fall firmly behind that notion. However, if the picture is muddled as to which candidates remain viable after the de facto national primary on that first February Tuesday, then the February 26 date New Jersey initially moved to may have proven more consequential. Some of this thinking is reflected in the recent discussions in the Maryland legislature to move the state's primary to the week following the fifth.
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Add Illinois, Louisiana, Michigan, Oregon and Texas to the List of Potential Movers
On the heels of the announcement Tuesday that Connecticut was set to consider a move to February 5, several other states got closer to moving their own delegate selection events.
Illinois
Barack Obama's campaign got a bit of a boost yesterday when his home state of Illinois took the first step toward moving its 2008 presidential primary into the logjam on February 5. The Illinois House overwhelming (110-4) backed a plan to move the primary from March 20 to February 5 according to the Chicago Tribune. This would give Obama a good chance at a potentially "easy" state with numerous delegates. But it would be a state that he would absolutely have to take, one would think, to remain viable in the contest. I haven't strayed to far into candidate strategy in the blog thus far, but there is a scenario where he could win several other prized states and still lose Illinois. Typically though, losing one's home state is a harbinger of things to come and is certainly something that would get some mileage in the press.
Louisiana
As reported at newshorn.com, Louisiana Secretary of State, Jay Dardenne, mentioned in a radio interview that plans to move the state's 2008 presidential primary to an even earlier date than the current February 9 date are being considered by the state legislature. One interesting plan being considered is making the primary a non-binding beauty contest and holding it simultaneously with the November 2007 gubernatorial election in the state. In Dardenne's own words, this would save the state the one and a half million dollars the presidential primary would ordinarily cost. Additionally, the non-binding nature of the contest would exempt it from the delegate selection rules of both national parties.
Michigan
Another article in the Chicago Tribune yesterday discussed the possibilities being considered by the two major parties in Michigan. Like South Carolina, the state parties in Michigan determine when and what kind of delegate selection event to hold. State Republicans are looking at January 29 (South Carolina Democratic and Florida primaries) and February 2 (South Carolina GOP primary) as possible dates to replace the current February 26 date. The Democrats, already tentatively scheduled for a February 9 (Louisiana primary) caucus, are considering a move to an even earlier date if more states move ahead of February 5 in defiance of the Democrats' delegate selection rules. As Michigan Democratic Party chairman, Mark Brewer said,
"We're still determined to go earlier than any state that violates the scheduling rules. That applies to New Hampshire. It applies to any state. Any state that violates the schedule will trigger us going earlier."
Another possibility is that both state parties agree to hold either their caucuses or semi-closed primaries on the same day.
Oregon
Oregon's legislature has also been tinkering with the idea of moving the state's May 20 presidential primary to, believe it or not, February 5. That plan (House Bill 2084) unanimously passed the House Elections, Ethics and Rules Committee yesterday, blogger Edward Walsh at The Oregonian reported. Because of the plan's $2.3 to $2.8 million price tag, it must first clear the Joint Ways and Means Committee before moving on to a formal vote.
Texas
No paper in Texas wanted to report what House committee in the Texas legislature passed a plan to move the state's 2008 primary to February 5, only that it has passed a committee. Of those papers in major Texas cities, the Dallas Morning News has the most informative summary. Even that may be due to the fact that a local representative, Helen Giddings, introduced the bill (HB 2017). The Texas legislature's web site confirms that HB 2017 was voted on and passed by the House Elections Committee. Here is the bill's language and here are the minutes from the committee's meeting. The plan would move the primary from the first Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in February.
Illinois
Barack Obama's campaign got a bit of a boost yesterday when his home state of Illinois took the first step toward moving its 2008 presidential primary into the logjam on February 5. The Illinois House overwhelming (110-4) backed a plan to move the primary from March 20 to February 5 according to the Chicago Tribune. This would give Obama a good chance at a potentially "easy" state with numerous delegates. But it would be a state that he would absolutely have to take, one would think, to remain viable in the contest. I haven't strayed to far into candidate strategy in the blog thus far, but there is a scenario where he could win several other prized states and still lose Illinois. Typically though, losing one's home state is a harbinger of things to come and is certainly something that would get some mileage in the press.
Louisiana
As reported at newshorn.com, Louisiana Secretary of State, Jay Dardenne, mentioned in a radio interview that plans to move the state's 2008 presidential primary to an even earlier date than the current February 9 date are being considered by the state legislature. One interesting plan being considered is making the primary a non-binding beauty contest and holding it simultaneously with the November 2007 gubernatorial election in the state. In Dardenne's own words, this would save the state the one and a half million dollars the presidential primary would ordinarily cost. Additionally, the non-binding nature of the contest would exempt it from the delegate selection rules of both national parties.
Michigan
Another article in the Chicago Tribune yesterday discussed the possibilities being considered by the two major parties in Michigan. Like South Carolina, the state parties in Michigan determine when and what kind of delegate selection event to hold. State Republicans are looking at January 29 (South Carolina Democratic and Florida primaries) and February 2 (South Carolina GOP primary) as possible dates to replace the current February 26 date. The Democrats, already tentatively scheduled for a February 9 (Louisiana primary) caucus, are considering a move to an even earlier date if more states move ahead of February 5 in defiance of the Democrats' delegate selection rules. As Michigan Democratic Party chairman, Mark Brewer said,
"We're still determined to go earlier than any state that violates the scheduling rules. That applies to New Hampshire. It applies to any state. Any state that violates the schedule will trigger us going earlier."
Another possibility is that both state parties agree to hold either their caucuses or semi-closed primaries on the same day.
Oregon
Oregon's legislature has also been tinkering with the idea of moving the state's May 20 presidential primary to, believe it or not, February 5. That plan (House Bill 2084) unanimously passed the House Elections, Ethics and Rules Committee yesterday, blogger Edward Walsh at The Oregonian reported. Because of the plan's $2.3 to $2.8 million price tag, it must first clear the Joint Ways and Means Committee before moving on to a formal vote.
Texas
No paper in Texas wanted to report what House committee in the Texas legislature passed a plan to move the state's 2008 primary to February 5, only that it has passed a committee. Of those papers in major Texas cities, the Dallas Morning News has the most informative summary. Even that may be due to the fact that a local representative, Helen Giddings, introduced the bill (HB 2017). The Texas legislature's web site confirms that HB 2017 was voted on and passed by the House Elections Committee. Here is the bill's language and here are the minutes from the committee's meeting. The plan would move the primary from the first Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in February.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Connecticut Set to Discuss Moving to Feb. 5
The Norwich Bulletin reports that the Government, Administration and Elections Committee of the Connecticut legislature is set to discuss on Friday a plan to move the state's 2008 presidential primary to February 5. The plan would move Connecticut's primary from the first Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in February in 2008.
New Hampshire Primary to Stay Put?
The Primary Source at the Boston Globe quoted New Hampshire Secretary of State, Bill Gardner, as saying:
"Like we have before we are going to honor the Iowa law. I hope [Iowa] will honor ours as well."
The implication there is that the state is not looking into jumping ahead of the Iowa caucuses to counter the rush to February 5. Much of that depends not on Iowa though, but other states threatening to further upend the traditional beginning to the presidential nomination process. I say this with the South Carolina Republican Party's potential move in mind. Should that move into 2007 come to fruition, New Hampshire would certainly not stand by idly and allow its traditional position to be swiped.
Thanks to The Caucus at the New York Times for the link to the report.
"Like we have before we are going to honor the Iowa law. I hope [Iowa] will honor ours as well."
The implication there is that the state is not looking into jumping ahead of the Iowa caucuses to counter the rush to February 5. Much of that depends not on Iowa though, but other states threatening to further upend the traditional beginning to the presidential nomination process. I say this with the South Carolina Republican Party's potential move in mind. Should that move into 2007 come to fruition, New Hampshire would certainly not stand by idly and allow its traditional position to be swiped.
Thanks to The Caucus at the New York Times for the link to the report.
Nevada Republicans to Move Caucus in Line with Democratic Caucus
Though the measure will not come up for a formal vote until April 4, the executive committee of the Nevada Republican Party has decided to move the party's caucus to coincide with the Democratic presidential caucus on January 19. The LA Times reports that the party has cited several reasons for the move. First, the rank and file members of the state party objected to the move earlier this month to a February 7 caucus date as not early enough. The party also raised concerns about the Democratic build up in the state for the earlier caucus turning the state blue in November 2008. This move, like those in South Carolina and Florida, would be subject to sanctions laid out in the national Republican party's delegate selection rules. However, Nevada Republicans are making the move and hoping that the national party suspends those rules when more states ignore the delegate selection window described in those rules.
Monday, March 26, 2007
SC GOP Issues a Response to Talk of a FL Move
The vote by the Florida House of Representatives last week to back a plan moving the state's 2008 presidential primary to January 29 has provoked a response from the South Carolina Republican Party. In my Florida post late last week, I largely focused on Florida horning in on the national Democratic Party's plan to include South Carolina's primary in the pre-window phase of the presidential primary calendar. The state's Democratic primary is the one scheduled for the 29th; the one with which Florida's would directly conflict. The Republicans follow on a few days later on February 2, the Saturday before the de facto national primary on February 5.
There are a couple of things at play here. One is that South Carolina is one of just a few states who have party-run presidential primaries. What that means is that the state parties are the ones in charge of setting up and financing the election and not the state legislature. This ultimately gives a state like South Carolina more freedom in avoiding legislative wrangling over whether and where to move a presidential primary that may plague other states. If the party feels like the move is in the its best interests and if the benefits of moving outweigh the national party sanctions associated with the potential move, then it is fairly easy to make the move happen.
The other thing is a bit of an oddity. It is that the Republicans are the party discussing a move and not the Democrats. That may be attributable to a South Carolina Democratic Party reluctant to move from the choice position in which the Democratic National Committee allowed them to set up shop for 2008. Now the GOP in South Carolina would certainly see a loss of attention because of Florida's primary before and the "national" primary after, but at least the primary would be the only thing in town on that particular Saturday. And the party's chairman, Katon Dawson, is not just talking about moving according to The State in Columbia, he is talking about a monumental shift to an October 2007 primary to protect the state's nominating status.
There have been straw polls late in the calendar year prior to a presidential election year in the past, but these events never had anything to do with the distribution of convention delegates. This proposed move would certainly alter that. Talk recently has had New Hampshire moving up, forcing candidates to campaign during Christmas, but if the South Carolina GOP follows through on their threat, candidates may be forced to share door time with candy-seeking kids on Halloween.
There is no word out of Concord, but at this rate, New Hampshire may hold their primary next week.
There are a couple of things at play here. One is that South Carolina is one of just a few states who have party-run presidential primaries. What that means is that the state parties are the ones in charge of setting up and financing the election and not the state legislature. This ultimately gives a state like South Carolina more freedom in avoiding legislative wrangling over whether and where to move a presidential primary that may plague other states. If the party feels like the move is in the its best interests and if the benefits of moving outweigh the national party sanctions associated with the potential move, then it is fairly easy to make the move happen.
The other thing is a bit of an oddity. It is that the Republicans are the party discussing a move and not the Democrats. That may be attributable to a South Carolina Democratic Party reluctant to move from the choice position in which the Democratic National Committee allowed them to set up shop for 2008. Now the GOP in South Carolina would certainly see a loss of attention because of Florida's primary before and the "national" primary after, but at least the primary would be the only thing in town on that particular Saturday. And the party's chairman, Katon Dawson, is not just talking about moving according to The State in Columbia, he is talking about a monumental shift to an October 2007 primary to protect the state's nominating status.
There have been straw polls late in the calendar year prior to a presidential election year in the past, but these events never had anything to do with the distribution of convention delegates. This proposed move would certainly alter that. Talk recently has had New Hampshire moving up, forcing candidates to campaign during Christmas, but if the South Carolina GOP follows through on their threat, candidates may be forced to share door time with candy-seeking kids on Halloween.
There is no word out of Concord, but at this rate, New Hampshire may hold their primary next week.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
New York is a Spitzer Signature Away from Joining the Rush to Feb. 5
The AP reports that both the New York Senate and Assembly voted on Wednesday to bump up the state's 2008 presidential primary to February 5. In essence then, once Governor Spitzer signs the bill (a formality according to the article), New York will have moved from the old Super Tuesday (first Tuesday in March) to the new Super Tuesday (the first Tuesday in February) for the 2008 cycle. If Florida's plan to move to January 29 passes muster, the 2008 primary calendar will feature three of the country's four most populous states clustered just one or two weeks after the New Hampshire primary. And Texas has at least discussed moving to the 5th as well bring all four of those states into the first month of the process.
Friday, March 23, 2007
Florida's House Passes Plan to Leapfrog into Pre-Window Period
The South Florida Sun-Sentinel has reported that the Florida House passed a plan to move the state's 2008 presidential primary to January 29, a week ahead of the cycle's Super Tuesday on February 5. This potential move is consequential for a couple of reasons. First, Florida becomes the earliest big state. Secondly though, this proposed date falls outside window of time both parties have set aside for presidential primaries to be held.
The move also interferes with the Democratic primary in South Carolina on the same day. South Carolina was one of the centerpieces of the Democratic Party plan to integrate more African American and Latino voters into the early portion of the nomination process. This integration is motivated by a perceived need to make the early contests more representative of the Democratic electorate as a whole. Along with Nevada, South Carolina moved into the pre-window period usually reserved for Iowa and New Hampshire.
Now, what does any of this have to do with Florida, a state that certainly has its share of both African American and Latino voters? Well, if the proposal makes it through the Senate and is signed by Governor Charlie Crist, then Florida is in violation of Rule 20.C(1) of the Delegate Selection Rules developed by the Rules and Bylaws Committee of the Democratic National Committee. Sadly, the Democratic Party has yet to post these rules anywhere online that I can find. However, several sites make mention of the sanctions for both state delegations and candidates if this rule is violated. Here is the language of the rule from The Green Papers and here is the same language on P2008. So, if Florida were to move to January 29, not only would the state delegation (including alternates) shrink by fifty percent, but candidates campaigning there would stand to lose pledged delegates and delegate votes from that state. On the Republican side, the rules are laid out here. Rule 15 discusses the issue of primary/caucus timing and Rule 16 details the sanctions for violating that rule. Under the GOP provisions, a state delegation would be reduced by fifty percent if the decision by the state was made prior to the party's call to the convention. If a decision to move is made following that call then the delegation would suffer a cut of ninety percent!
Those seem like significant penalties. But the vote in the Florida House featured only one dissenting vote and that would appear to indicate general support for the plan.
The move also interferes with the Democratic primary in South Carolina on the same day. South Carolina was one of the centerpieces of the Democratic Party plan to integrate more African American and Latino voters into the early portion of the nomination process. This integration is motivated by a perceived need to make the early contests more representative of the Democratic electorate as a whole. Along with Nevada, South Carolina moved into the pre-window period usually reserved for Iowa and New Hampshire.
Now, what does any of this have to do with Florida, a state that certainly has its share of both African American and Latino voters? Well, if the proposal makes it through the Senate and is signed by Governor Charlie Crist, then Florida is in violation of Rule 20.C(1) of the Delegate Selection Rules developed by the Rules and Bylaws Committee of the Democratic National Committee. Sadly, the Democratic Party has yet to post these rules anywhere online that I can find. However, several sites make mention of the sanctions for both state delegations and candidates if this rule is violated. Here is the language of the rule from The Green Papers and here is the same language on P2008. So, if Florida were to move to January 29, not only would the state delegation (including alternates) shrink by fifty percent, but candidates campaigning there would stand to lose pledged delegates and delegate votes from that state. On the Republican side, the rules are laid out here. Rule 15 discusses the issue of primary/caucus timing and Rule 16 details the sanctions for violating that rule. Under the GOP provisions, a state delegation would be reduced by fifty percent if the decision by the state was made prior to the party's call to the convention. If a decision to move is made following that call then the delegation would suffer a cut of ninety percent!
Those seem like significant penalties. But the vote in the Florida House featured only one dissenting vote and that would appear to indicate general support for the plan.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)