Washington Democrats Will Allocate Delegates in March, but How?

Last week the Washington State Democratic Party released and opened for public comment their draft delegate selection plan for 2020. Only, rather than just one plan, the party released two plans contingent on the mode of delegate allocation the party opts to use during its April 7 central committee meeting. In doing this, the party has made the primary or caucus question the one most likely to draw public comment in the next thirty days before the central committee votes.

And bear in mind that while those comments are not binding on the decision of the state central committee, they are submitted along with the draft delegate selection plan of choice to the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee as part of the plan approval process. Under the hypothetical scenario, then, that the party chooses to continue with the caucus/convention system as the means by which delegates from the state will be allocated and selected even in the face of public support for the primary, the party would have some explaining to do before the RBC. And that is doubly true considering 1) the Democratic primary bill that has made its way through the Washington state legislature is more likely than not to be signed into law and 2) the RBC will be operating under the guidance of Rule 2.K in which "[state] parties are encouraged to use government-run primaries."

In that situation, the Washington State Democratic Party would have to make a very persuasive case to the RBC for why the party chose caucuses over the primary pushed through and passed by a Democratic-controlled state government. And the Democratic bill got the green light -- that it would be consistent with DNC rules -- from RBC member and WSDP parliamentarian, David McDonald during the committee hearings in each legislative chamber.

That is a tough sell.

It seems, then, that the best case to be made for retaining the caucuses is one in which there is a groundswell of support for it in this public comment stage followed by a state central committee vote in favor of the caucuses.

But assuming Governor Inslee (D) signs SB 5273, then it is quite likely the party opts for the primary.

--
Regardless of which option is chosen on April 7 in Washington, the two plans do clearly indicate a couple of important timing points. First, the date listed for the primary in the primary plan is March 10. It is clear then that the state party is assuming the primary bill heading to Inslee's desk -- the one moving the primary from May to March -- will be signed into law. Additionally, the alternate caucuses plan includes a Saturday, March 21 date for precinct caucuses should that plan be adopted and approved by the RBC. Should the party move in that direction, it would constitute a caucus/convention process that begins on the third Saturday in March rather than the fourth Saturday in March on which the precinct caucuses were held in 2016.



Related:
Washington State Legislation Would Again Try to Move Presidential Primary to March

An Update on March Presidential Primary Bills in Washington: One Bill Through Committee

Washington Senate Passes Democratic March Presidential Primary Bill

Senate-Passed Washington Presidential Primary Bill Passes House Committee Stage on Party Line Vote

Washington State House Passes March Presidential Primary Bill

--

Follow FHQ on Twitter and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

Utah Senate Passes Super Tuesday Presidential Primary Bill

In the waning days of the 2019 regular session, the Utah legislature is in hurry up mode. The state Senate today suspended the rules on required third readings of bills before blitzing through all the legislation remaining before it that originated in the upper chamber.

That included the first substitute to SB 242, the bill to reestablish a presidential primary in the Beehive state and schedule it for March 3. State Senator Curtis Bramble (R-16th, Utah/Wasatch) quickly introduced the bill on the floor and got an immediate thumbs up on the caucus-to-primary transition from Democratic Senate caucus manager, Senator Derek Kitchen (D-2nd, Salt Lake), who cited the last two cycles with troublesome caucuses on the Democratic side in Utah. The only question Bramble received on the bill concerned its fiscal impact. The $3 million price tag cited in response to Senator Lyle Hillyard's (R-25th, Cache) query was enough to push him into the nay column when the bill came up for a vote.

But Hillyard was only joined by one other member in opposition to the measure, and the bill passed 25-2 (with two additional members absent). SB 242 now moves over to the House side. The session comes to a close on Thursday, March 14.



Related:
2/25/19: Legislation Would Push Reestablished Utah Presidential Primary to Super Tuesday

3/7/19: Super Tuesday Presidential Primary Bill Introduced in Utah

3/11/19 (a): Super Tuesday Presidential Primary Bill Unanimously Passes Senate Committee Stage in Utah


--
Follow FHQ on Twitter and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

Democrats Abroad Chart Out an Early March Presidential Preference Vote in Draft Delegate Selection Plan

Since 1976 American citizens and Democrats living and working overseas have had voting rights at the national convention through the Democratic Party Committee Abroad. That is no different for the 2020 cycle when 13 of 21 total delegates to the national convention in Milwaukee will be at stake in a global presidential preference vote.

As was the case in 2016, voting will take place over a week, beginning on Super Tuesday according to the Democrats Abroad draft delegate selection plan. While the voting begins on Super Tuesday, it will end a week later on March 10 should be draft plan be approved by the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee. Sanders was announced as the winner of the Democrats Abroad preference vote in 2016 nearly two weeks after voting -- which can take place in person, by mail, by email or by fax -- was complete.


--
The dates of the DPCA preference vote have been added to the 2020 FHQ presidential primary calendar.

Super Tuesday Presidential Primary Bill Unanimously Passes Senate Committee Stage in Utah

With little discussion on Friday, March 8, the Utah Senate Government Operations Committee unanimously sent SB 242 on to the full state Senate for its consideration.

The committee favorably reported the measure to reestablish a presidential primary in the Beehive state and schedule it for March 3 for the 2020 cycle. The state was without a presidential primary in 2016 and it has been since the 2008 cycle that both major parties in Utah used an available presidential primary in lieu of caucuses. The Utah presidential primary was on Super Tuesday in 2008 as well.

Technically, the bill passed and favorably reported was a substitute version of the original bill introduced by Senator Curtis Bramble (R-16th, Utah/Wasatch). But the change was made in a section concerning the canvassing process and not when or whether the primary would be held or funded.


Related:
2/25/19: Legislation Would Push Reestablished Utah Presidential Primary to Super Tuesday

3/7/19: Super Tuesday Presidential Primary Bill Introduced in Utah

3/11/19 (b): Utah Senate Passes Super Tuesday Presidential Primary Bill


--
Follow FHQ on Twitter and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

Arkansas Senate Makes Quick Work of March Presidential Primary Bill

On Thursday, March 7, the Arkansas state Senate moved with little vocal dissent to pass SB 445. The measure would shift up from late May to the first Tuesday in March the consolidated primary, including the presidential primary, in the Natural state.

In an 18-7 vote with another ten members either voting present, not voting or excused the bill passed and was sent to the state House for its consideration. Only Republicans supported the bill while the Democratic caucus was split between opposing the measure and voting present. Two Republicans voted no and explained why as the bill was considered on the Senate floor. One member, Sen. James Sturch (R-19th, Batesville), stood against the legislation due to the unresolved complaints from county elections officials (a dispute that came up during the committee hearing for the bill). The other Republican member in opposition, Sen. Blake Johnson (R-20th, Corning), argued that the bill's residual impact on when the state legislature holds fiscal sessions would disproportionately affect those members in the state in agriculture/farming.

Regardless, the SB 445 easily passed the state Senate and moves Arkansas closer to permanently shifting its presidential election year primaries to March. The House will take up the bill starting next week.


--
Related:
2/6/19: Out of Arkansas, An Apparent Challenge to the New Hampshire Primary

2/11/19: Arkansas Lawmaker Signals a Scaling Back of Presidential Primary Legislation

2/16/19: Amendment to Arkansas Bill Eyes March for Presidential Primary Move

3/1/19: New March Presidential Primary Bill Flies Through Arkansas Senate Committee

3/13/19: Arkansas House Committee Advances March Presidential Primary Bill

3/19/19: On to the Governor: Super Tuesday Bill Passes Arkansas House

3/25/19: Arkansas Presidential Primary to Super Tuesday


--
Follow FHQ on Twitter and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

#InvisiblePrimary: Visible -- Presidential Primary Movement (So Far and Yet to Come)

Thoughts on the invisible primary and links to the movements during the day that was...

Presidential primary maneuvering in 2019 has gotten off to a slow start.

Obviously, the 2017 shift of the California primary weighs heavily on how one views primary movement for the 2020 cycle. And while states have changed the dates of presidential primary elections in years other than the year before the presidential election year -- like California, North Carolina and the District of Columbia have done for 2020 -- that sort of movement is the exception rather than the rule. States tend to act under a couple of primary conditions. First, legislators often wait for a period of time when there is either more urgency to move or more information to better position a contest on the calendar is available. That combination of urgency and information aligns best when newly-elected state legislatures convene after the midterm elections.

In other words, that is right now in the quadrennial cycle.

And yet, things are seemingly off to a slow start. There are at least a couple of reasons for that. For those with memories longer than just the last cycle, recall that 2011 saw a flurry of activity as a host of states with February (or earlier) contests codified in state law had to make changes to comply with new national party rules that no longer allowed February primaries. State legislatures shot out of the gate in early in 2011 and kept a constant stream of legislation going into the summer months.

But not every state played along with the new rules in 2012 and so the Republican Party in particular increased its penalties for violating the timing restrictions placed on states for scheduling their primaries and caucuses. Cleaning up that residual 2012 mess for the 2016 cycle again provided a more narrowly cast urgency to some states to move and comply with the rules.

Before 2015, four states -- Arizona, Florida, Louisiana and North Carolina -- had changed their dates for 2016. Two of those -- Arizona and Florida -- were rules breakers from 2012 and shifted back to compliant dates. Another, North Carolina, had moved to a more provocative, non-compliant position on the calendar. Combined, that alleviated some but not all of the state-level need to move. But by March 8, 2015, there still had been 20 bills introduced in state legislatures across the country, and while no state had officially moved in 2015, Florida was less than two weeks from codifying legislation to further clarify the date of the primary in the Sunshine state.

Early 2019 looks similar to 2015, but without the leftover rules breakers from the previous cycle. Yes, three states moved prior to 2019, two of them shifting a sizable chunk of delegates with them into earlier in March, but thus far just 16 bills have been proposed to change the dates of presidential primary elections in 2019 (and that includes the two 2016 caucus states, Maine and Utah, attempting to create and use presidential primaries for 2020). That is a far cry from the chaos of 2011.

Nevertheless, there are a handful of wildcards out there with the potential to add to the calendar logjam in March 2020. Colorado Democrats may be signaling a Super Tuesday primary, but that date can be officially set for any of the first three Tuesdays in March by the governor and secretary of state any time before September 1 this year. Georgia, too, grants the date-setting discretion to an officer outside of the legislature, the secretary of state. And new Georgia secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger (R) has until December 1 at the latest to settle on a date for the primary in the Peach state. Finally, New York remains a question mark. There have been some indications that a March date may be in the offing. However, that likely will not be settled until toward the end of the state legislative session in June if the past two cycles are any indication.

And keep an eye on the remaining Democratic caucus states as well. Those have tended to fall in the earlier part of the calendar in competitive cycles. Those states like Colorado and Georgia above could move into March outside of state legislatures where, so far, more attention has been granted to presidential candidate ballot access (proposed tax return requirements) than to maneuvering on the primary calendar.



--
Elsewhere in the invisible primary...

1. Announcements: Sherrod Brown takes a surprising pass on a White House run.

2. #MoneyPrimary: Inslee is not shy about accepting super PAC support.

3. #StaffPrimary: This is not about recent hires by any campaign, but instead about the diversity among campaign managers on board with the various Democratic campaigns at this point.

4. #[Non]EndorsementPrimary: Unlike her rivals, Gillibrand is struggling to pull in home-state support. Part of this can be explained away by the fact that the junior New York senator remains in exploratory mode, but only part.  That does tell us something, but we can do better than a simple binary treatment of the aggregation of endorsement data. There are tiers even here. Which candidates have locked down their home state delegations? Which have not? There are degrees there that help us at this early stage to begin to differentiate between candidates. Booker, for instance, fits in the former category while Warren falls into the latter. That, too, tells us something or at the very least gives rise to questions of why the disparity between the two despite being from similarly-sized blue states. Anyway, we can do better than haves and have nots even at this point in time. But Gillibrand is certainly in have not territory here.

5. #EndorsementPrimary: Harris gains the support of three San Francisco area mayors and another from further south in Long Beach. The junior California senator also reeled in the support of DC's attorney general.

6. Travelogue: Sanders hit Iowa before he heads to New Hampshire this weekend. DeBlasio will continue his early state tour in South Carolina. Inslee stopped by the Hawkeye state as well.

7. Moulton is still mulling, now on national security grounds. Of course, this is terrain that Biden has begun to emphasize as well.

8. Hickenlooper states the obvious: finish strong in Iowa or New Hampshire or go home. That is true for him and just about every other Democratic candidate.


Has FHQ missed something you feel should be included? Drop us a line or a comment and we'll make room for it.


--
Follow FHQ on Twitter and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

Super Tuesday Presidential Primary Bill Introduced in Utah

With the 2019 Utah state legislative session in its waning days, legislation has been introduced to schedule the newly funded presidential primary in the Beehive state for Super Tuesday.

State Senator Curtis Bramble (R-16th, Utah/Wasatch) has filed SB 242. The bill would not only schedule the presidential primary funded during the 2017 session for the first Tuesday in March, but would make some other technical corrections to the presidential primary code that has remained as part of the Utah statutes.

Mainly, those corrections consist of a couple of matters with respect the timing of the presidential primary. First, it strikes the outdated language referring to the contest as the Western States Presidential Primary, an artifact from the early 2000s when the presidential primary was first created. But second and more importantly, the legislation also removes a clause -- "the the legislature makes the appropriation" -- that makes the the default funding mechanism conditional on the legislature. Of course, the legislature retains the ability to end those appropriations, but now it is a given rather than requiring the legislature to take the proactive step of adding the funding.

The legislative session ends on March 14, so this one will have to move quickly.



Related:
2/25/19: Legislation Would Push Reestablished Utah Presidential Primary to Super Tuesday

3/11/19 (a): Super Tuesday Presidential Primary Bill Unanimously Passes Senate Committee Stage in Utah

3/11/19 (b): Utah Senate Passes Super Tuesday Presidential Primary Bill


--
Follow FHQ on Twitter and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

Colorado Democrats Signal Super Tuesday Presidential Primary in Draft Delegate Selection Plan

The public release late last week of the Colorado Democratic Party draft delegate selection plan contained at least some indication that the newly reestablished presidential primary in the Centennial state will fall on Super Tuesday.

Indeed, that is the earliest date on which the Colorado governor in consultation with the secretary of state can set the date. But the pair have until September 1, 2019 under the new law to set the date for a Tuesday between the first and third Tuesdays of the March. That gives them a bit of discretion in choosing the most advantageous spot on the calendar for the Colorado primary. And that window is going to be jam-packed with contests. As of now, the first Tuesday in March -- Super Tuesday -- is the most delegate-rich date on the calendar, followed by the second Tuesday in March (if Washington finalizes a move to that date), and that is followed by the third most delegate-rich date on the third Tuesday in March.

That is the range in which Colorado can settle. And there are a number of different paths that can be taken. Again, the state Democratic Party and the secretary of state are assuming a March 3 date for the primary. That would not only be the earliest date allowed by the national parties for states other than the carve-out states to hold primaries and caucuses, but would be the earliest under Colorado law that the date could be set. But that is a date devoid of regional partners (unless one considers the behemoth contest further west in California). Utah, too, could end up on Super Tuesday. Other western partners -- Idaho and likely Washington -- would coincide with a Colorado primary a week later and neighbor Arizona has its primary on the third week in March.

Regardless, the governor and secretary of state have until September 1 to make that decision. All we have from Colorado Democrats and the secretary are assumptions -- signals -- that the primary in the Centennial state will fall on that date. However, the date remains an unknown and Colorado something of a wildcard on the 2020 presidential primary calendar.

--

Follow FHQ on Twitter and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

Funding for the Idaho Presidential Primary "Slipped Through the Cracks"

Just when it looked like both Idaho parties would use the presidential primary election in 2020...


...came this news from Betsy Z. Russell at the Idaho Press:

Idaho Secretary of State Lawerence Denney forgot to budget for the 2020 presidential primary, creating an unpleasant $2 million surprise for legislative budget writers who set his office’s budget on Wednesday. 

The Legislature’s Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee had already set all but 4 percent of the state’s general fund budget for next year, working through it agency by agency over the past month, when Denney’s came up with a $2 million hole in it.

This is atypical. Usually if there is a funding issue with a presidential primary, it something that is initiated by the secretary of state or state legislature to save funds in a given state. Washington state, for example canceled its presidential primary during the 2012 cycle to cut back on expenditures and states like Alabama, California and New Jersey consolidated separate presidential primaries in the same cycle with the same intent.

But forgetting the appropriation entirely is a different matter. That is a new one to FHQ. But in Secretary Denney's defense, he is right that the appropriation for the 2016 primary was included in a parallel bill to the legislation to reestablish the presidential primary in the Gem state and not in the funding package. If one starts a new legislative year with the items in the appropriation package the session before, then something funded outside the main appropriations bill can potentially get lost in the shuffle.

Still...


What is at least somewhat noteworthy about all of this is that Idaho Democrats came to the conclusion last summer to utilize the primary in lieu of caucuses during the 2020 cycle and have already made plans -- via their draft delegate selection plan -- to do just that.

This will likely get worked out, but it is not a snafu that is all that common.

--

Follow FHQ on Twitter and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

Washington State House Passes March Presidential Primary Bill

In a roughly party-line vote, the Washington state House on Monday passed legislation to move the presidential primary in the Evergreen state from the fourth Tuesday in May to the second Tuesday in March.

SB 5273 passed the House by a 54-42 vote that saw just one Democrat from the chamber majority join House Republicans. This Democrats-for/Republicans-against pattern mirrored not only the vote at the committee stage in the House, but also the previous floor vote in Senate.

And the battle lines were the same. Republicans more sympathetic to Secretary of State Kim Wyman's (R) bill balked at the Democratic version throughout the legislative process for barring unaffiliated voters from participating in the primary and for making public which ballot voters choose. In fact, several Republican-sponsored amendments were raised on the House floor to reverse both changes to the primary law. One struck much of the language from the Senate-passed Democratic version of the bill and insert provisions from a Republican version left languishing in committee in both the state House and Senate. Two others were more narrow in scope, attempting to remove the data-gathering portion and allowing unaffiliated voters to participate through a separate mail ballot. A final Republican amendment took a different tack. It simply pushed the conflict items aside and addressed the primary date change alone.

None passed muster with a majority of the House, clearing the way for an up-or-down vote on the bill that came out of committee.

Since the version that passed the House is identical the Senate-passed version, the bill is done in the legislative branch and now heads off to Governor Jay Inslee (D) for his consideration.

And the governor may now have at least some interest in an earlier Washington primary (even if it follows Super Tuesday by a week).


Related:
Washington State Legislation Would Again Try to Move Presidential Primary to March

An Update on March Presidential Primary Bills in Washington: One Bill Through Committee

Washington Senate Passes Democratic March Presidential Primary Bill

Senate-Passed Washington Presidential Primary Bill Passes House Committee Stage on Party Line Vote

--

Follow FHQ on Twitter and Facebook or subscribe by Email.