Saturday, February 12, 2011

New Bill Introduced to Eliminate Separate Presidential Primary in New Jersey

Superfluous though it may be, a new bill to eliminate the February presidential primary and shift it back to occur concurrently with the June primaries for state and local offices has been introduced in the New Jersey Assembly. The only things different about this bill and the two technically-active current bills are that the new one (A3777) was introduced by a Democrat and during the 2011 session. Other than that, the bill is exactly like the two bills proposed last year by Republicans in the Assembly and Senate.

That a Democrat introduced the bill is important considering both houses of the New Jersey legislature are controlled by the Democratic Party. That it was introduced by deputy speaker, John Wisnieski, is indicative of at least some institutional support for such a move among Democrats (similar to what has been seen in Maryland and Tennessee). And unless the Republicans who proposed similar bills in 2010 have changed their tunes, there is some bipartisan support for the idea of one June primary to nominate candidates for national, state and local offices. Like California, some of the impetus behind the push has to be budgetary. Similar separate presidential primary elections have come under fire in the Golden state and was eliminated in 2009 in Arkansas.

As state legislatures continue their sessions and to deal with budgetary constraints, separate presidential primaries could increasingly be targeted as a means of cutting costs. To this point, however, momentum behind that idea is limited to a handful of states.


Friday, February 11, 2011

Florida Primary: Are Governor Scott and the GOP Leadership in the General Assembly Really "At Odds"?

In the wake of Democratic state legislators filing bills in the Florida General Assembly to move the Sunshine state's presidential primary from January back to March, there has been quite a bit of chatter in the Florida press about "battles brewing" and "lines forming" over when the primary should be held. The fight being portrayed, though, misses the point and actually mischaracterizes the parties involved.

The true dividing line on this issue is not, as it seems to be in some of the Florida press, an intra-party struggle within the Republican-controlled state government, but rather a inter-party battle between those same Republicans in control and the minority party Democrats without a contested presidential nomination race. There has been a fair amount of talk about the bills being offered by Democrats to move the primary back into compliance and about the Florida Democratic Party's chair calling for a later date.* But that angle has taken a backseat to the supposedly looming intra-party battle among Republicans.

Look, there may yet be a contentious debate over whether Florida should assert itself and maintain an early, non-compliant primary date or tow the national party line and move back. There are obvious pros and cons either way: go early and take a penalty (one that may not be enforced at the convention) or go later and with many other states and have less influence (while maintaining a full slate of delegates). But it isn't apparent to me that there either is or will definitely be a battle on this issue -- not during this legislative session at least.

Let's look a bit more closely at these "battle lines". First off, the Republican leadership in the House and Senate appears to be supportive of maintaining the January primary.

President of the Senate Mike Haridopolos: "I happen to think the position we're in right now is the correct one. We're going to most likely decide who the next president of the United States is. I think it'd make sense if we did it early in the process."

Speaker of the House Dean Cannon: "I think the earlier we are, the more relevant we are as a national voice. I think the members of the House will be reluctant to move it all the way forward. Again, I'm not taking any hard and fast position, but I certainly favoring [sic] leaving it early as a general principle."

There's some wiggle room there for both, but both seem to support the idea of leaving the presidential primary where it is.

What about the other side of this brewing showdown? Rick Scott has maintained a fairly consistent albeit ambiguous line. In the governor's comments after speaking with RNC chair, Reince Priebus, and in more recently, he has essentially said that Florida should go as early as it can without losing any delegates. That doesn't really tell us anything other than the governor is trying to tread the fine line between what the national party wants and what may be best on the state level (Florida influencing the ultimate identity of the Republican nominee.). In other words, I don't see Scott bringing any real pressure to the table to get legislators to do what the national party desires. Not at this time anyway.

I don't really see that happening in the future either. And I think that simply because this whole discussion of a brewing fight amongst Republicans in Florida on this issue ignores one concrete fact: the governor will likely stay out of the discussion in any direct way unless and until a bill to change the date of the primary lands on his desk. To the extent there will be a debate on this issue, it will take place in the legislature and the leadership seems inclined to potentially bottle these bills up in committee to keep the primary where it is.

Republican legislators may be gambling on this, but it is a calculated gamble. They are betting that, though the national party may complain about a non-compliant primary, they will eventually cave before the convention and reinstate all of the the delegates as they have done in the past. You will also hear some talk about Florida having to switch to a proportional allocation of delegates because of a change in Republican Party rules -- and I don't expect any fight there -- but that will happen whether they have a primary in January or March. The real issue is whether there will be a full Florida delegation in the event of a January primary. If Republicans in the state legislature do nothing and leave the primary where it is, they are operating under the assumption that the national party will yield to Florida in the interest of demonstrating national party unity to the American people at the Tampa convention. Any and all divisiveness will be tamped down or eliminated altogether.

So battle lines? What battle lines? If there are any, they are where they have been since Florida moved in 2007: between the state parties/governments and the national parties. That there is any imminent battle looming among Republicans in Florida has yet to manifest itself in any measurable way in my eyes.

*According to Rule 20.C.7 of the 2012 Democratic Delegate Selection Rules, the state party has make at least some effort to change the date through the legislature if it wants to have any chance of a waiver to hold an early primary or assistance from the national party in holding an alternate contest.



Thursday, February 10, 2011

Bills Introduced in Both Chambers to Move Tennessee Presidential Primary to March

On February 10, bills were introduced in both the Tennessee state House and Senate to shift the Volunteer state's presidential primary back to March where the primary was between the 1988 and 2000 cycles. While the presidential primary during those years was on the second Tuesday in March, the current legislation would move it from the first Tuesday in February to the first Tuesday in March. This would be the third consecutive cycle Tennessee has moved its primary -- from the second Tuesday in March to the second Tuesday in February in 2004 and up to the first Tuesday in February in 2008.

Tennessee, like Florida, is under unified Republican control, but in contrast to the Sunshine state, Republicans in the Tennessee General Assembly are the ones pushing, or at least proposing, the date change. In the House, Rep. Gerald McCormick (R-26, Chattanooga) introduced HB 612, and Sen. Mark Norris (R-32, Collierville) introduced SB 599. As was the case in Maryland, these legislators are members of the leadership in their respective chambers. McCormick is the Republican leader in the House and Norris is the majority leader in the Senate. Leadership sponsorship does not guarantee a bill will pass, but it won't hurt its chances.

The change to March, if codified, would bring Tennessee back into compliance with the 2012 delegate selection rules in both national parties.


“I happen to think the position we’re in right now is the correct one."

Spoken like someone who might endorse shifting the Florida presidential primary back to March like the national parties and the Florida Democratic Party and state legislators want, right?

Well, maybe not.

Those were the words of Florida Senate President Mike Haridopolos this morning in some press availability time. On the one hand the senator holds some clout as the leading Republican in the state Senate majority. However, on the other, sticking up for Florida and its right to have a primary whenever it wants is a nice and easy issue to trumpet support of when you are running for the Republican nomination for US Senate in 2012 (No, the primaries for state and local office are later in the year in Florida, not concurrent with the presidential primary.).

Even if Haridopolos had potentially conflicting motivations here, that doesn't really say much for the general lack of response from other Republican legislators on this same issue. As FHQ said earlier today, it has been quiet from their corner of the state of Florida.

Not anymore -- at least not from one influential Republican.

--
Here's the full post from Peter Schorsch at the saintpetersblog (St. Petersburg Times):
Haridopolos: Keep presidential primary in January '12
Despite calls from both major political parties leaders in Florida – and legislation already being filed that would do so – Senate President Mike Haridopolos said Thursday that the state’s 2012 presidential primary should not be moved from January to March, reports the News Service of Florida. Haridopolos, who will himself be on the ballot next year for U.S. Senate, said that even if either the Democratic or Republican National Committees strip Florida of all of its delegates, as the DNC did in 2008, it was worth holding the primary early. “Florida’s the most important state in the presidential election,” he said. “I happen to think the position we’re in right now is the correct one. We’re going to most likely decide who the next president of the United States is. I think it’d make a lot of sense if we did it early in the process.” Both Republican Party of Florida Chairman David Bitner and Florida Democratic Party Chairman Rod Smith have urged lawmakers to move the primary to March, which both national parties have said would preserve its delegate strength.




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

Democrat Files House Companion for March Presidential Primary in Florida

On February 9, Representative Martin Kiar (D-97, Parkland) filed a companion bill (H 695) to S 860 which would also move the Sunshine state's presidential primary from the last Tuesday in January to the first Tuesday in March. This move would bring Florida back into compliance with both set of national party delegate selection rules, but again, like the Senate bill, it is being pushed -- so far at least -- by Democrats and not the Republicans in control of both chambers in the state legislature. The extent to which Republican lawmakers jump on board either of these bills as co-sponsors or just voicing support, will go a long way toward determining whether either bill has a chance of making it through to Governor Scott's desk to be signed into law. The RNC is certainly urging action, but Republican legislators have been quiet thus far.





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

Expected House Companion Bill to Move Maryland Primaries Introduced

As was mentioned in the post yesterday about the legislation introduced in the Maryland Senate to move the state's primaries, there was already a placemarker for a House companion bill (HB 671) to SB 820.

As was the case with the Senate bill, the House companion also has the support of the full leadership in the chamber. The bill is sponsored by Speaker of the House Michael Busch (D-30, Anne Arundel County) and co-sponsored by the majority leader, Kumar Barve (D-17, Montgomery County), and the minority leader, Anthony O'Donnell (R-29C, Calvert and St. Mary's Counties). Given the weight of the leadership in both chambers, these bills are more likely to pass than SB 501 and have the effect of moving the presidential primary from the second Tuesday in February to the first Tuesday in April and the primaries for state and local offices from the second Tuesday after the first Monday in September to the last Tuesday in June.




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

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

Two Bills to Move Maryland Presidential Primary Back Introduced

There are now two bills that have been introduced in the Maryland Senate to shift the dates on which the Old Line state's primaries for state and local offices will be held. The express purpose of those bills is to move state and local primaries in midterm election years from the second Tuesday after the first Monday in September because it conflicts with the federal mandate in the MOVE act. That mandate requires at least a 45 day cushion between the primary election and the general election to allow for the printing of ballots and timely distribution of them to military and overseas voters. In addition, both bills also move the state's presidential primary from the second Tuesday in February in order to comply with national party rules regarding the timing of delegate selection events.

SB 501 was introduced on February 4 by Senator Roy Dyson (D-29, Calvert, Charles & St. Mary's Counties) and would move the presidential primary from February to the first Tuesday in March -- which would coincide with the plans in fellow Potomac Primary state Virginia. The midterm year primaries would be shifted from September up to the second Tuesday in July.

And just today (February 9) at the request of President of the Senate Thomas Miller (D-27, Calvert & Prince George's Counties), SB820 was introduced (cosponsored by the Majority Leader Robert Garagiola (D-15, Montgomery County) and Minority Leader Nancy Jacobs (R-34, Cecil & Harford Counties)). The bill would move the presidential primary to the first Tuesday in April and the midterm election year primaries for statewide and local offices to the last Tuesday in June. With a House companion (HB 671) on the way and the full bipartisan support of the Senate leadership, this bill would presumably have the better chance of winning passage and making to Governor O'Malley's desk. It also lends some credence to the presidential primary date discussed in the Washington Examiner's piece over the weekend about the potential breaking up of the Potomac Primary.

Still, that first Tuesday in April date is an interesting one. FHQ would speculate that there are a couple of possible reasons for that date. First, one could guess that Maryland legislators are hoping to catch lightning in a bottle for the second consecutive cycle by hoping that a supposed March 6 Super Tuesday proves inconclusive in wrapping up the Republican nomination race. That would leave the Maryland primary in that sparsely populated area of the calendar between early March and the Pennsylvania primary in late April. In the event that happened, Maryland -- along with Mississippi and Illinois -- could prove quite consequential to the Republican race. The other idea that crosses my mind is that this could also be an effort at another regional primary. There has been some chatter about officials in Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania and West Virginia discussing the possibility. And the first Tuesday in April is a date that Pennsylvania has used in the past -- one of the two times the commonwealth moved its presidential primary. At this point, I'm more inclined to put stock in the first option rather than the second. But we'll see. None of those other states have made any moves at the state legislative level on this front as of yet.


Recent Posts:




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

Bill to Move Florida Presidential Primary to March Filed in Florida Senate

Florida Senator Arthenia Joyner (D-Tampa) filed S 860 on February 8. The bill would shift the date on which the Sunshine state's presidential primary is held from the last Tuesday in January to the first Tuesday in March. FHQ has for some time now discussed the importance of Florida in terms of what the 2012 presidential primary calendar will ultimately look like. Out of compliance in 2008 and still, by law, non-compliant for 2012, a Florida move to a later date would be the first necessary domino to fall in determining when Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina will hold their 2012 delegate selection events. Florida is not the only non-compliant state, but it is the earliest, and its presence at the end of January is keeping the beginning of the process there -- at least hypothetically -- and not in February where both of the national parties prefer the presidential primary process to begin.

The other complicating factor here is partisanship. Joyner, the minority leader in the Senate, is a Democrat and while Florida being non-compliant in the Democratic nomination process may not be all that consequential* with the nomination likely being uncontested, Republicans control the state legislature and the executive branch. The GOP in the state holds the power and with a contested nomination race in 2012 may prefer influence, albeit with penalties affecting the size of their convention delegation, over following the rules.

That said, a bill has been filed to move the state's primary to a later, compliant date, but the ball is in the Republican majority's court. The Florida legislature convenes on March 8.

*Democrats in states with unified Republican control have to, according to the DNC's delegate selection rules, make a "good faith" effort to make the necessary timing change through legislative channels to have any hope of a waiver from the Democratic Rules and Bylaws Committee in the event a non-compliant primary is held (Rule 20.C.7).



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

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

DC Bill to Move Primaries to June

Early last week, we discussed the possibility that Washington, DC would shift both the district's presidential primary back and its primaries for other offices up on the calendar for 2012 elections. The next day (February 1) Councilwoman Mary Cheh introduced B19-90 which accomplishes just that. The legislation moves both sets of primaries to the first Tuesday after the second Monday in June (In 2012, that's June 12.); as opposed to the June or July possibilities mentioned before the bill was introduced. The presidential primary would move back from the second Tuesday in January and the primaries for local offices up from the first Tuesday after the second Monday in September.

Yeah, that's right, from January to June. The council moved the presidential primary from May to January for the 2004 cycle and moved the primary to February to coincide with Maryland and Virginia on the second Tuesday in February in 2008. And either there was a sunset provision on the move to February for 2008 that is not apparent in the resulting law or the current legislation incorrectly identifies the date of the presidential primary as the second Tuesday in January. Well, that or there was an effort during the 2009-2010 council session to move the primary from February back to January with no one noticing. FHQ is guessing sunset.



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

"New rules threaten region's 2012 primary clout"

Over the weekend, Freeman Klopott penned a nice piece in the Washington Examiner on the apparent break up of the 2008 Potomoc Primary, the subregional primary the brought the primaries in Washington, DC, Virginia and Maryland together (see full article below). The outcome was attractive enough that the Democratic Change Commission recommended to the Rules and Bylaws Committee that the 2012 Democratic Delegate Selection Rules include some provision that would entice state to hold similar "clustered" contests. From the looks of it, the addition of extra delegates was not enough to keep the model regional primary together for the 2012 cycle. There is still time in the legislative session, but with Virginia already close to moving its primary to March and DC considering a later primary that would coincide with those for state and local offices, it doesn't necessarily look good for the Potomac Primary in 2012.

Regional primaries are difficult to coordinate across states and especially state governments and even when they are successfully managed the initial intention is rarely met. Just ask the southern participants in the Southern Super Tuesday in 1988.

--

New rules threaten region's 2012 primary clout
by Freeman Klopott, Washington Examiner
New presidential primary rules passed by the Democrat and Republican national committees are busting the bonds that made the 2008 "Potomac Primary" possible and threatening the Washington region's clout in 2012.

In 2008, Virginia, D.C. and Maryland all held their primaries on Feb. 12. It was just one week after "Super Tuesday," when 24 states voted on presidential candidates. But there were no clear front-runners for the party nominations following the Feb. 5 votes, and the Washington region became key for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Forming the Potomac Primary guaranteed the Washington region electoral pull.

"We'd like to have a regional primary again to help make sure we remain important to the candidates," said David Meadows, executive director of the D.C. Democratic Committee.

But "right now both parties have coordinated what they want to do with the primary calendar because things got out of hand in 2008, " said political scientist Josh Putnam, who tracks the primary calendar on his blog Frontloading HQ. "Now states with primaries scheduled for February are stuck having to change that."

On Feb. 1, Virginia broke ranks. Its Senate passed a bill to set the commonwealth's primary for March 6. If that's the final date, then under the new party rules Virginia's Republican Party will have to change its delegate apportionments from its winner-take-all model to one that distributes them based on the number of votes each candidate receives. If the party doesn't, Virginia risks losing half its delegates at the Republican National Convention.

Meanwhile, Ward 3 D.C. Councilwoman Mary Cheh has introduced a bill tentatively setting the District's primary for June 5. Gov. Martin O'Malley is "likely" to introduce s bill setting Maryland's primary for April 3, spokesman Shaun Adamec said.

That's the first day new party rules allow for winner-take-all states to vote and, Meadows said, "we're hoping D.C. will join Maryland."

Adamec said, "we'd like to have a regional primary again, and hope the other states join us in April."

Down in Virginia, though, "we didn't think about a regional primary," said Sen. Jill Vogel, R-Winchester, who introduced the March 6 bill. "We wanted to have it on the earliest day we could."




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