Oregon Bill to Move Primaries Back to June

There are a couple of bills before the Oregon legislature -- introduced earlier -- concerning the timing of primaries in the Beaver state, but one (SB 615) leaves the presidential primary alone while moving the state and local primaries to September.¹ The other, however, introduced at the behest of the House Interim Committee on Rules, proposes moving all of the primaries -- presidential included -- from the third Tuesday in May to the second Tuesday in June. HB 2429, if passed and signed into law, would place Oregon's presidential primary -- and those for state and local offices as well -- on June 12, the final day in which delegate selection events can be held according to the national parties' rules regarding delegate selection.

Section 254.056 of the Oregon Statutes does not as it is currently written separately mention the various primaries, merely the date on which the primary is to be held. SB 615 amends the code to reflect separate dates for the two sets of primaries, but HB 2429 does not. The latter continues to treat all of the primary elections as one and on one date.

Here's the current law:

254.056 Date and purpose of general election and primary election. (1) The general election shall be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of each even-numbered year. Except as provided in ORS 254.650, at the general election officers of the state and subdivisions of the state, members of Congress and electors of President and Vice President of the United States as are to be elected in that year shall be elected.

(2) The primary election shall be held on the third Tuesday in May of each even-numbered year. At the primary election precinct committeepersons shall be elected and major political party candidates shall be nominated for offices to be filled at the general election held in that year. [1979 c.190 §229; 1979 c.316 §20a; 1987 c.267 §1; 1995 c.712 §1; 1999 c.59 §64; 1999 c.999 §28; 2001 c.965 §12; 2003 c.542 §7]

And here is how HB 2429 amends it:

254.056 is amended to read:   254.056. (1) The general election shall be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of each even-numbered year. Except as provided in ORS 254.650, at the general election officers of the state and subdivisions of the state, members of Congress and electors of President and Vice President of the United States as are to be elected in that year shall be elected.   (2) The primary election shall be held on the   { - third Tuesday in May - }  { +  second Tuesday in June + } of each even-numbered year. At the primary election precinct committeepersons shall be elected and major political party candidates shall be nominated for offices to be filled at the general election held in that year.

No, this isn't, as was the case with Idaho, a big move, but it is another proposed move backward and one that was not necessary to bring Oregon back into compliance with national party rules. Overall, it is a curious move simply because it isn't clear what the motivation -- at least in regard to the presidential primary timing -- is.

¹This bill would place the state and local primaries very close to the back end of the window to hold primaries and remain in compliance with the MOVE act mandate (in order to finish primary elections, print ballots and get them out to military and overseas personnel abroad 45 days prior to the general election date).

UPDATE: HB 2429 is slated for a public hearing on March 9.

Recent Posts:

The Links 3/8/11

2012 Presidential Primary Movement: The Week in Review (Feb. 28-March 6)

Bill to Tie Presidential Primary to Parties' Use Passes Washington State House

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

The Links 3/8/11

Charlie Cook asks "next in line" or "no one's in line" for the GOP nomination.

Chris Cillizza has his own take on the "frontrunner-less" GOP field.

Whether a frontrunner emerges may determine whether Alabama is irrelevant in next year's primaries.

Ohio's still concerned about how redistricting might affect the March primary next year.

But that's not new.

Huckabee briefly passed Palin in Google searches last week. I don't know what it says about the metric that Kenya/Portman triggered more searches than Gingrich's "bobbled" announcement last Thursday. Huckabee's jump was the first past Palin since Bobby Jindal in the lead up to and aftermath of his State of the Union response in 2009.

Recent Posts:

2012 Presidential Primary Movement: The Week in Review (Feb. 28-March 6)

Bill to Tie Presidential Primary to Parties' Use Passes Washington State House

Louisiana Republican Sees Need to Move Presidential Primary Back

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

2012 Presidential Primary Movement: The Week in Review (Feb. 28-March 6)

Last week proved to be a busy one for state legislative action concerning the scheduling of presidential primaries. Legislatures convened, adjourned, introduced legislation, held hearings on bills and passed bills moving or potentially canceling primaries across the country. Here's a recap:

• Pass it on: In Oklahoma, the state Senate passed SB 808 to move the Sooner state's presidential primary back to the first Tuesday in March from the first Tuesday in February. That bill has moved over to the House (where a similar bill has been proposed) for consideration.

In the far northwest of the country, the state House in Washington on Saturday passed a bill to require the two major parties there to utilize the presidential primary to allocate all of their convention delegates as a means of justifying having the primary (and the associated costs) at all in future cycles.

• "Do Pass": The Missouri Senate bill to move the Show-Me state's primary back to March was favorably reported out of the Financial and Government Organization and Elections Committee last week. That clear the way for the bill to be considered on the floor of the Senate.

In Alabama, a bill to move the presidential primary back to June to coincide with other statewide and local primaries was not only introduced during the first week of the legislature's session, but it was referred to and favorably reported from the Constitution, Campaigns and Elections Committee as well.

• Introducing...: Bills were introduced in Missouri (to move the primary to June), Alabama (to move the primary to June), Georgia (to give the secretary of state the power to set the primary date) and Connecticut (to move the primary to March) last week. Of those, the Georgia bill holds the most intrigue because it would set up a system of primary date selection similar to what New Hampshire has had in place since the 1970s. The other bills merely propose moving the respective states' primaries back into compliance with the national party rules.

• Can you hear me now?: Hearings were held in the Missouri House and in Washington DC over the active primary legislation in each. Both are still under consideration in committee at the moment.

• Locked in: Minnesota's state law on caucuses triggered a February 7, 2012 date for the states caucuses next year when the two parties failed to coordinate an alternate date. It remains to be seen whether the national parties deem this problematic, but as it stands, the Minnesota caucuses would fall just one day after the date on which the national parties want the Iowa caucuses to be held.

• As has been mentioned in this space several times, there are currently 18 states with presidential primaries scheduled for February 2012. That would put those 18 states in violation of both parties' delegate selection rules for 2012.

• Of those 18 primary states, 16 of them (Alabama, California, Connecticut, Missouri, New York, Arizona, Georgia, Delaware, Tennessee, Wisconsin, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, Utah, Oklahoma and Virginia) have convened or completed their 2011 state legislative sessions.

• Of those 16 states, 10 (Alabama, California, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Maryland, Missouri, Tennessee, Connecticut, Georgia, and Virginia) have bills that have been introduced and are active within the state legislature to move their contests' dates back. California, Missouri and New Jersey have bills that would eliminate an early and separate presidential primaries and position those events with the other primaries for state and local offices. That would mean June presidential primaries for both states if those bills pass and are signed into law. In the remaining states, the efforts are to simply shift the states' presidential primaries from dates in violation of the two major parties' rules to the earliest allowed date (the first Tuesday in March). There is also an active bill in Washington, DC to move the districts primary back to June.

• The Utah legislature will adjourn for the year on Thursday (March 10) and has yet to propose any legislation to shift the date on which the presidential primary will be held next year.

• During this next week, the state legislature in Florida will convene bringing the total of non-compliant states currently in legislative session to 16. Those 16 early states in conflict with the national parties' rules will be the ones to watch. But we are to a point in the cycle where there are still state legislatures yet to convene but also states that are wrapping up business and are thus unable to make changes to election laws past that point (see Utah above).

• How would all of this look if all these bills happened to be passed and signed into law? States with active bills to move their primaries are listed twice, once where law has them currently and once in bold and italicized for where active legislation could move them.

NOTE: THIS IS NOT THE CURRENT CALENDAR, ONLY WHAT IT COULD LOOK LIKE IF CURRENT LEGISLATION IS ENACTED.

Tuesday, January 31: Florida

Tuesday, February 7 (Super Tuesday): Alabama, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Minnesota caucuses, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas and Utah

Saturday, February 11: Louisiana

Tuesday, February 14: Washington (DC), Maryland, Virginia

Saturday, February 18: Nevada Republican caucuses, Nevada Democratic caucuses

Tuesday, February 21: Hawaii Republican caucuses, Wisconsin

Tuesday, February 28: Arizona, Michigan

Tuesday, March 6: Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia

Tuesday, March 13: Mississippi

Tuesday, March 20: Colorado caucuses, Illinois

Tuesday, April 3: Kansas, Maryland

Tuesday, April 24: Pennsylvania

Tuesday, May 1: Tennessee

Tuesday, May 8: Indiana, North Carolina and West Virginia

Tuesday, May 15: Idaho, Nebraska, Oregon

Tuesday, May 22: Arkansas, Kentucky and Washington

Tuesday, June 5: Alabama, California, Massachusetts, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico and South Dakota

Tuesday, June 12: Missouri, Washington, DC

Tuesday, August 7: Kentucky

Recent Posts:

Bill to Tie Presidential Primary to Parties' Use Passes Washington State House

Louisiana Republican Sees Need to Move Presidential Primary Back

Bill to Hand Power to Set Primary Date Over to Secretary of State Filed in Georgia

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

Bill to Tie Presidential Primary to Parties' Use Passes Washington State House

The Washington state bill to link the existence and use of a presidential primary in a given cycle to the parties utilizing the contest to allocate all of their delegates to the national conventions passed the state House on Saturday (March 5). HB 1860 would require the Democratic and Republican state parties to break from the tradition of using just a caucus or the caucus in combination with a primary, respectively, as the means of allocating delegates in the presidential nomination races. This bill would eliminate the presidential primary in years in which the parties do not abandon the caucus for the primary.

Bills to temporarily eliminate the primary for the 2012 cycle have been proposed in both chambers of the Washington legislature, but have recently stalled while HB 1860 has gained momentum and passed the House. By a largely party-line vote, the House passed the bill 53-44 with most of the Democratic majority in support of the measure and most of the Republican minority against. The legislation now heads to the state Senate.

Recent Posts:

Louisiana Republican Sees Need to Move Presidential Primary Back

Bill to Hand Power to Set Primary Date Over to Secretary of State Filed in Georgia

The Links (3/4/11) -- Calendar Edition

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

Louisiana Republican Sees Need to Move Presidential Primary Back

Louisiana does not convene its 2011 state legislative session until next month, but already some within the state parties are raising the issue of the Pelican state's 2012 presidential primary date. Scheduled for the second Saturday in February next year, the Louisiana primary is one of nineteen that conflict with both national parties' rules on the timing of delegate selection events. Louisiana, along with any other contests penciled in for any time before March 6, 2012, faces losing at least half their delegates to the national conventions without a change. That problem has prompted one member of the Republican State Central Committee, Mike Bayham, to file a resolution -- within the party -- to call on the legislature to shift the primary back to the first Saturday after the first Tuesday of March. That would be the Saturday after the would-be Super Tuesday if the DNC and RNC have their way.

Of course there is no consensus behind the idea between the two parties in the state much less the within the legislature. Louisiana Republican Party chair, Roger Villere, favors moving the primary back past the first of April to preserve the state's ability to allocate its delegates in a winner-take-all manner. The RNC gives states the option of choosing how to allocated their delegates to the Republican National Convention in Tampa after that April threshold, but has instituted a new proportionality requirement for all states prior to that point on the calendar. Democrats in the state have to this point remained tight lipped about moving the primary, but under the Democrats' rules, legislators in the state have to make some effort to move the primary back or run the risk of losing more than 50% of the delegation to the Democrats' Charlotte convention (Rule 20.C.7). What remains to be seen, regardless of how the state parties feel about the matter, is how a narrowly divided legislature deals with the issue. Democrats control the state Senate by just two seats while Republicans have a four seat advantage in the state House.

Resolutions for the state parties or not, it will be next month before anything is known about what will happen with the 2012 presidential primary in Louisiana.

Recent Posts:

Bill to Hand Power to Set Primary Date Over to Secretary of State Filed in Georgia

The Links (3/4/11) -- Calendar Edition

A Note on FHQ's 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar(s)

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

Bill to Hand Power to Set Primary Date Over to Secretary of State Filed in Georgia

A bipartisan coalition of six Georgia representatives has come up with by far the most interesting approach to 2012 presidential primary timing. Rep. Mark Hamilton (R-23rd, Cumming), Rep. John Meadows (R-5th, Calhoun), Majority Whip Edward Lindsey (R-54th, Atlanta), Rep. Mary Oliver (D-83rd, Decatur), Rep. Tyrone Brooks (D-63rd, Atlanta) and Rep. Alisha Morgan (D-39th, Austell) prefiled HB 454 on March 3 and has several wrinkles to it.

First of all, the bill shifts the presidential primary date-setting authority from the state legislature to the secretary of state. The effect is that this frees a state of the potential for partisan conflict that often hampers the movement of a primary. Such a move would also remove the issue of a state legislature having to be in session to move the date of a presidential primary around. This is how New Hampshire has been able to move with such ease in protecting its first-in-the-nation status since 1976. There is no partisan conflict and in New Hampshire's case, Secretary of State Bill Gardner can wait until a very late date -- after all the other states have selected dates -- to choose when New Hampshire will go. It would appear that this is the intent in Georgia as well.

The short term impact of this is that Georgia will remain an unknown for a while if this bill is passed and signed into law. There are, however, a few additional guidelines that add to the intrigue of this. The secretary of state wouldn't have unlimited discretion here. He or she would have to make a decision on the date "not later than 60 days preceding the date on which the presidential primary is to be held". Candidates have to have time to file and local elections administrators have to have time to prepare for the primary.

But let's look at this in the context of 2012. Secretary of State Brian Kemp, if given this authority, could wait all the way up to December 1, and like New Hampshire, see where all the other states are going to be positioned on the calendar. Now, 60 days from December 1 is January 30. That is just enough time to see not where New Hampshire is positioned, but where Florida ends up. Oddly -- or not so oddly enough -- Florida is currently positioned on January 31. Kemp can wait it out, see if Florida budges, how the RNC reacts and set the date of the Georgia primary accordingly. If the RNC caves to Florida's insistence on being on January 31, then Kemp could move Georgia up to coincide with its neighbor to the south on January 31. But if the RNC comes down hard on Florida, Kemp could move Georgia's primary back into compliance with national party rules (on March 6, for instance).

What this bill would do is keep Georgia's options open and allow it the most leeway to select an advantageous date that would not necessarily threaten New Hampshire or Iowa or South Carolina, but would potentially help the Peach state to align with Florida in a sub-regional act of defiance.

File this one away.

UPDATE: Jim Galloway at the AJC beat me to the punch by minutes, but adds more.

Recent Posts:

The Links (3/4/11) -- Calendar Edition

A Note on FHQ's 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar(s)

The 2012 Candidates: Newt's In (?)

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

The Links (3/4/11) -- Calendar Edition

I must admit that in getting back in the swing of things with posting in 2011, I've gotten quite bogged down in the minutiae of the 2012 calendar at the expense of other and equally as relevant things (...at least relative to the 2012 presidential election). One of those is a series of posts I used to put out on a semi-regular basis that simply pointed FHQ readers to other matters that, while important, FHQ just didn't have the time to comment on in any great detail if at all. Part of the reason for this is that I do a lot of that linking through retweets on Twitter. But believe it or not, not everything gets tweeted in the first place. So let's resurrect "The Links".

No, today's edition doesn't stray too far from the calendar topic, but each link provides a different perspective on both the rules of delegate selection and the "craziness" of the evolution of the calendar itself. Incidentally enough (Modesty Alert!), each link also either mentions FHQ or quotes me. But as I said, there are some interesting talking points from some of the players on the ground nationally and in a series of states relevant to the calendar and that's something that should be shared. [Look, if you're coming here regularly, you probably get enough of me as it is.]

Molly Ball checks back in on how the calendar is progressing. (This is an update to a December post.)

Nathan Hurst and Marisa Schultz delve into the perspective from one of those non-compliant states, Michigan.

Beth Reinhard examines the impact of the new Republican delegate selection rules.

Recent Posts:

A Note on FHQ's 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar(s)

The 2012 Candidates: Newt's In (?)

Is There a Utah Problem for the 2012 Primary Calendar?

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

A Note on FHQ's 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar(s)

We are entering a phase in the formation of the 2012 presidential primary calendar that is much more difficult to track efficiently. Some states are moving dates, others are proposing legislation to the move dates of their presidential primaries and still others are to this point doing nothing. With all of this going on it, the potential exists for there to be a number of iterations of the calendar out there to account for all of the minor details that are changing. Our effort is to get as much information out there as possible about this process, but if we continue to produce calendar after calendar every time something changes, we run the risk of confusing visitors who enter the site on a past calendar page and are unable to get the most recent update. Links to the most recent calendar posts are always added when the calendar is updated, but those have proven ineffective.

As such, FHQ has made the proactive decision to automatically redirect visitors coming into those past 2012 calendars to a static page that has been created to house the most current update. This will first and foremost get visitors the most up-to-date information on where the calendar stands. That is the primary objective.

But what does that mean for you old hands who drop by on a regular basis to check on the calendar. Well, for folks who come into FHQ from our RSS, Twitter or Facebook feeds, not much. It is still business as usual. When a change to the calendar takes place, a new update will be posted. You will get that notification through the channels listed above once that update posts and can choose to follow that link to the post or to go to the static page for the calendar. They will both be updated (nearly) simultaneously. One of the advantages of a page (and link) devoted to the latest update is that it gives FHQ the ability to add links to new legislation from states to that calendar without having to put out an all-new calendar for that one minor change. Again, we don't want to flood the market with seemingly conflicting calendars. Updates, then, will be reserved for when the calendar actually changes -- like when Idaho moved or once Minnesota's first Tuesday in February date was triggered. For those just interested in a quick glance at where the calendar stands, but not necessarily how it got to that point, it is probably a good idea to bookmark the new page, and check in for the latest update at your own leisure.

Everyone has their own way of checking these things and we don't want to mess with that, but FHQ has to balance being completely open and making sure that people are getting an updated and informative look at where the calendar stands at the moment they enter the site. Once the calendar is set in stone, the redirects will be removed and people can once again go through the archive of updates. A post linking to all those updates will probably be useful at that point.

--

Thanks.

Josh

Recent Posts:

The 2012 Candidates: Newt's In (?)

Is There a Utah Problem for the 2012 Primary Calendar?

Bill to Move Connecticut Presidential Primary to March Raised in Committee

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

The 2012 Candidates: Newt's In (?)

...with a website.

But it is a website announcing his intention to explore the option of exploring the exploration of the formation of an exploratory committee for the office of president of the United States. In a time when all that is out there officially are Herman Cain and Buddy Roemer candidacies, Newt Gingrich exploring anything remotely related to the presidency or a White House run is noteworthy (...especially for someone who has been lumped in with the first tier of candidates -- from a polling perspective). It may not be what the former Speaker wanted today to be about, but it'll be something to take to Iowa next week.

Let's update the list to include exploratory committee timing:

Michelle Bachmann

Haley Barbour

John Bolton

Jeb Bush

Herman Cain (exploratory: 1/12/11)

Chris Christie

Mitch Daniels

Jim DeMint

Newt Gingrich (exploratory: 3/3/11)

Rudy Giuliani

Mike Huckabee

Jon Huntsman

Bobby Jindal

Gary Johnson

Sarah Palin

George Pataki

Ron Paul

Tim Pawlenty

Mike Pence (1/27/11)

Rick Perry

Buddy Roemer (exploratory: 3/3/11)

Mitt Romney

Rick Santorum

John Thune (2/22/11)

--

A message from Newt and Callista (from NewtExplore2012.com):

America's greatness lies in 'We the People.'

We are a nation like no other. To remain so will require the dedicated participation of every citizen, of every neighborhood, of every background. This is the responsibility of a free people.

We are excited about exploring whether there is sufficient support for my potential candidacy for President of this exceptional country.

Recent Posts:

Is There a Utah Problem for the 2012 Primary Calendar?

Bill to Move Connecticut Presidential Primary to March Raised in Committee

A Two-Thirds Potomac Primary? DC Might Try to Align Primary with Maryland

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

Is There a Utah Problem for the 2012 Primary Calendar?

This is Part Three in a series of posts examining early and non-compliant 2012 primary states and why they have not acted to move their presidential primaries to be timed in accordance with national party rules on delegate selection. See Part One (Connecticut) and Part Two (Delaware) as well.

Utah

• Current Primary Date: February 7, 2012
• Legislature Convened: January 24, 2011
• Deadline to Introduce Legislation: February 3, 2011
• Crossover Deadline: March 7, 2011
• Legislature Adjourns: March 10, 2011

Unlike Connecticut and Delaware, the situation in Utah -- in terms of moving the date on which the Beehive state's 2012 presidential primary will be held -- is seemingly much more dire. To this point in the legislative session in Utah, no bills have been advanced dealing with the timing of the presidential primary directly and only two bills (HB 264 and SB 162) even cite the section of the Utah code that deals with the "Western States Presidential Primary". Needless to say, neither alters in any way the date on which that primary is to be held -- the first Tuesday in February. The former ties board of education primaires to municipal primaries while the latter changes the date of municipal primaries from September to August. But the presidential primary remains untouched.

What further complicates the situation is that there are a couple of important legislative deadlines in the Utah legislature next week. March 7 is the date on which one chamber must have finished consideration of, passed and transmitted to the opposite chamber -- a so-called "crossover" deadline -- any bill so that it can be considered there before the legislature adjourns on March 10. That is a week from today. Given how far into the legislative session Utah is, the date for having proposed legislation has already passed as well. In other words, there will have to be an amendment added to an existing piece of legislation that is agreed to by both chambers before next Thursday if a move is going to take place.¹

The logical next question is whether there is any motivation to move the primary at all. And if not, what alternatives does Utah have? With no legislation to show for it, moving the 2012 primary does not seem to be something that is high on the list of legislative priorities. That said, what does Utah stand to gain by flaunting the national party rules on primary/caucus timing? Well, Mitt Romney won the state handily in 2008 and having Utah early may be of some benefit to the former Massachusetts governor. The catch is that by ignoring the rules Utah would be hit with a couple of penalties. First the state delegation would be cut in half, but on top of that the delegation -- one the make up of which is typically determined by winner-take-all allocation rules -- would have to allocated its delegates proportionally according to the new RNC rules change. Even though Romney took all the delegates from Utah in 2008, that haul would be halved and allocated differently if Utah stands pat and he is able to repeat the 2008 win in 2012.

As far as alternatives are concerned, Utah has a history of state party-run primaries and it is conceivable that the state could move in that direction without action from the legislature. But it is unclear at this point whether the state parties actually want to pick up the tab for such a contest and if they would even be willing to schedule it later to comply with national party rules if so.

What is clear is that Utah is running out of time to alter the date of its 2012 presidential primary.

Clock is ticking rating: Very High.

¹This is not unprecedented. In 2007, after a bill specifically to move the presidential primary in Georgia from the first Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in February died in committee, an amendment was added to a broader elections bill to accomplish the move.

Recent Posts:

Bill to Move Connecticut Presidential Primary to March Raised in Committee

A Two-Thirds Potomac Primary? DC Might Try to Align Primary with Maryland

The Clock is Ticking on States to Change 2012 Primary Dates: Delaware

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