The Electoral College Map (8/25/20)

Update for August 25.

The Republican National Convention enters day two today with just ten weeks now separating this presidential race from election day. But the polls added at FHQ today all came from states that have favored Joe Biden from the jump, all were in the field during or just after the virtual Democratic confab a week ago, and all were consistent with previous polling or existing (FHQ) averages in each. None of that adds up to big sweeping changes. But in a couple of deep blue states -- Biden's home of Delaware and New York -- the updates were helpful in contextualizing both with respect to the swings witnessed from 2016 to now.

And no, the Empire state does not appear to be moving into a more competitive space, contra some recent claims.


Polling Quick Hits:
Delaware 
(Biden 58, Trump 37)
Public Policy Polling dropped into the First state to conduct the first survey there since January. And things really have not changed all that much. Unsurprisingly, the Democratic nominee (and favorite son) is doing quite well in Delaware. Yet, even with a 21 point lead, the former vice president has only matched the average share Democratic presidential candidates have received there over the last three cycles. And while Biden has gained five points on Hillary Clinton's showing in Delaware four years ago, the president has lost nearly five off his. That makes the swing in Delaware a bit above average.


Florida
(Biden 48, Trump 44)
The North Carolina-based polling firm, Public Policy Polling, was also in the field in Florida over the weekend (which FHQ was surprised to see was their first time conducting a public poll there in calendar 2020). But the survey was not all that inconsistent with the current FHQ averages frr both candidates in the Sunshine state. In fact, when those averages are rounded, they come to Biden 48, Trump 44. Understandably, that hardly shook Florida from its position as a state flirting with the line between the Biden Toss Up and Lean categories.


New York
(Biden 63, Trump 32)
The third of Public Policy Polling's trio of weekend surveys was in the Empire state. If not for the April Siena poll of the state, this would have marked both Biden's high water mark in New York and his largest margin in a poll there in calendar 2020. Instead, it is more evidence that New York is among the bluest of states. The Trump share is right on his New York average at FHQ, but in this poll, Biden is running a bit ahead of his. But that is with a decent number of undecideds still out there.


North Carolina
(Biden 49, Trump 46)
Finally, Morning Consult fielded a survey in the Tar Heel state that stretched through the duration of the Democratic convention and into the weekend following it. And like many recent polls of North Carolina, it fell in a relatively tight range of Biden +4 to Trump +2. As FHQ said a day ago about in a synopsis of where things stand in Texas, North Carolina is one of those states that is simply close, but unlike Texas is tipped fairly consistently in the former vice president's direction. And while Biden may be a bit ahead of his averages there in this poll, Trump is near enough his.



NOTE: A description of the methodology behind the graduated weighted average of 2020 state-level polling that FHQ uses for these projections can be found here.

The Electoral College Spectrum1
MA-112 (14)	CT-7 (162)	WI-10 (252)	AK-3 (125)	UT-6 (60)
HI-4 (18)	NJ-14 (176)	PA-203 NE CD2-1 (273 | 286)	MO-10 (122)	IN-11 (54)
CA-55 (73)	OR-7 (183)	FL-29 (302 | 265)	SC-9 (112)	ID-4 (43)
VT-3 (76)	CO-9 (192)	NV-6 (308 | 236)	KS-6 (103)	KY-8 (39)
NY-29 (105)	NM-5 (197)	AZ-11 (319 | 230)	MT-3 NE CD1-1 (97)	AL-9 (31)
WA-12 (117)	ME-2 (199)	NC-15 (334 | 219)	MS-6 (93)	ND-3 (22)
MD-10 (127)	VA-13 (212)	ME CD2-1 OH-18 (353 | 204)	AR-6 (87)	SD-3 (19)
IL-20 (147)	MN-10 (222)	IA-6 (185)	NE-2 (81)	OK-7 (16)
ME CD1-1 RI-4 (152)	MI-16 (238)	GA-16 (179)	LA-8 (79)	WV-5 (9)
DE-3 (155)	NH-4 (242)	TX-38 (163)	TN-11 (71)	WY-3 NE CD3-1 (4)
1 Follow the link for a detailed explanation on how to read the Electoral College Spectrum. 2 The numbers in the parentheses refer to the number of electoral votes a candidate would have if he or she won all the states ranked prior to that state. If, for example, Trump won all the states up to and including Pennsylvania (Biden's toss up states plus the Pennsylvania), he would have 286 electoral votes. Trump's numbers are only totaled through the states he would need in order to get to 270. In those cases, Biden's number is on the left and Trumps's is on the right in bold italics. To keep the figure to 50 cells, Washington, DC and its three electoral votes are included in the beginning total on the Democratic side of the spectrum. The District has historically been the most Democratic state in the Electoral College. 3 Pennsylvania is the state where Biden crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election, the tipping point state. The tipping point cell is shaded in yellow to denote that and the font color is adjusted to attempt to reflect the category in which the state is.

Today's new polls add new understanding about where this presidential race currently stands, and it is not more than a stone's throw away from where it has been: showing Biden comfortably enough ahead to have a more than 80 electoral vote cushion in the projected electoral college tally. Now again, the race still has 70 days to go, so that can change. But it is remarkable just how stable things have been. New York and the two Biden toss ups all kept their positions on the Electoral College Spectrum above, but Delaware shifted even further into Biden's coalition of states, pushing three more cells over into the far left column.

However, the Watch List remained unchanged from a day ago. The same 12 states and districts that were within a fraction of a point of changing categories are still there, joined by underpolled Nevada. Those states and districts are the ones to watch. But even then, if the objective is to witness change in the overall tally, then that list is pared down to just three. Georgia, Iowa and Ohio are the states that are positioned closest to the partisan line and most likely to alter the projected number of electoral votes for each major party candidate.

--
There were no new polls from Nevada today.

Days since the last Nevada poll was in the field: 117.

--
NOTE: Distinctions are made between states based on how much they favor one candidate or another. States with a margin greater than 10 percent between Biden and Trump are "Strong" states. Those with a margin of 5 to 10 percent "Lean" toward one of the two (presumptive) nominees. Finally, states with a spread in the graduated weighted averages of both the candidates' shares of polling support less than 5 percent are "Toss Up" states. The darker a state is shaded in any of the figures here, the more strongly it is aligned with one of the candidates. Not all states along or near the boundaries between categories are close to pushing over into a neighboring group. Those most likely to switch -- those within a percentage point of the various lines of demarcation -- are included on the Watch List below.

The Watch List1
State	Potential Switch
Florida	from Toss Up Biden	to Lean Biden
Georgia	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Biden
Iowa	from Toss Up Trump	to Toss Up Biden
Maine	from Strong Biden	to Lean Biden
Maine CD2	from Toss Up Biden	to Toss Up Trump
Mississippi	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Missouri	from Toss Up Trump	to Lean Trump
Nebraska CD2	from Lean Biden	to Toss Up Biden
Ohio	from Toss Up Biden	to Toss Up Trump
Pennsylvania	from Lean Biden	to Toss Up Biden
South Carolina	from Lean Trump	to Toss Up Trump
Virginia	from Strong Biden	to Lean Biden
1 Graduated weighted average margin within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

--
Methodological Note: In past years, FHQ has tried some different ways of dealing with states with no polls or just one poll in the early rounds of these projections. It does help that the least polled states are often the least competitive. The only shortcoming is that those states may be a little off in the order in the Spectrum. In earlier cycles, a simple average of the state's three previous cycles has been used. But in 2016, FHQ strayed from that and constructed an average swing from 2012 to 2016 that was applied to states. That method, however, did little to prevent anomalies like the Kansas poll that had Clinton ahead from biasing the averages. In 2016, the early average swing in the aggregate was  too small to make much difference anyway. For 2020, FHQ has utilized an average swing among states that were around a little polled state in the rank ordering on election day in 2016. If there is just one poll in Delaware in 2020, for example, then maybe it is reasonable to account for what the comparatively greater amount of polling tells us about the changes in Connecticut, New Jersey and New Mexico. Or perhaps the polling in Iowa, Mississippi and South Carolina so far tells us a bit about what may be happening in Alaska where no public polling has been released. That will hopefully work a bit better than the overall average that may end up a bit more muted.


--
Recent posts:
The Electoral College Map (8/24/20)

One Thing About Convention Bounces

The Electoral College Map (8/22/20)


Follow FHQ on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

The Electoral College Map (6/30/20)

Changes across the month of June. Update below.

Update for June 30.

Changes (June 30)
State	Before	After
Missouri	Lean Trump	Toss Up Trump

Another couple of polls were released on Tuesday, 18 weeks ahead of Election Day. One was more disruptive, if one can call it that, than the other. But new polling data is new polling data. And there were some changes to the map on the last day of June.

Polling Quick Hits:
Missouri:
First of all, out in the Show-Me state, Garin-Hart-Yang found not only a close presidential race, but a slight Joe Biden lead in a state that President Trump carried by 18 points in 2016. Now, if Missouri were to follow the national and state-level polling trajectory over the last couple of months, then a contraction of some sort could be expected. In fact, even before this poll, Biden was already enough above Hillary Clinton's share of support in 2016 in 2020 Missouri polling that he was in line with the Democrats' average share in the state over the last three presidential election cycles. And Trump was underperforming his Missouri showing by about seven points as well. And that had brought his advantage down to a bit more than six points in the FHQ graduated weighted average there.

But that was before this poll. And before this poll, there had been a handful of surveys conducted in Missouri but only a couple since February. That meant that the early polls were carrying a weight in the average that had decayed quite a bit and were overwhelmed a bit by a fully weighted new poll with Biden ahead. Translation: Missouri jumped from a relatively comfortable Lean Trump state to a state in Trump toss up turf. But this poll, as FHQ explained earlier in a Twitter thread, is an outlier. The swing in this poll from 2016 to 2020 is almost twice what the average swing has been across all states.

It is not that Missouri cannot be closer than it was in 2016, but this poll paints a picture that is a bit tighter than the rest of the polling out there might otherwise depict. That said, if Missouri is within six points -- even with Trump in the lead -- that means that a lot of other states are running much closer than they were in 2016 and are likely a bit bluer than they were four years ago.

And that is pretty much what the map above and Electoral College Spectrum below have consistently shown since FHQ began updating these projections two weeks ago.


New York:
Siena has done most of the survey work in the Empire state in 2020 and the university-based polling outfit added another poll today. There is not much to say about this one. Last month Biden led 57-32 and one month later, the former vice president led 57-32. Like the Pennsylvania poll a day ago, this one was right around the preexisting average here at FHQ. So this one was a confirming poll more than anything else. Biden is in no danger in New York and the new Siena poll did not break with that likely conclusion.


NOTE: A description of the methodology behind the graduated weighted average of 2020 state-level polling that FHQ uses for these projections can be found here.

The Electoral College Spectrum1
MA-112 (14)	CT-7 (173)	NE CD2-1 PA-203 (269/289)	MO-10 (125)	NE-2 (56)
HI-4 (18)	OR-7 (180)	NH-43 (273/269)	AK-3 (115)	TN-11 (54)
CA-55 (73)	DE-3 (183)	FL-29 (302/265)	MT-3 (112)	AL-9 (43)
VT-3 (76)	CO-9 (192)	NV-6 (308/236)	SC-9 (109)	ID-4 (34)
NY-29 (105)	NM-5 (197)	AZ-11 (319/230)	UT-6 (100)	KY-8 (30)
MD-10 (115)	MN-10 (207)	NC-15 (334/219)	LA-8 NE CD1-1 (94)	ND-3 (22)
IL-20 (135)	VA-13 (220)	OH-18 (352/204)	MS-6 (85)	SD-3 (19)
WA-12 (147)	ME-2 (222)	GA-16 (368/186)	IN-11 (79)	OK-7 (16)
RI-4 ME CD1-1 (152)	MI-16 (238)	TX-38 (170)	KS-6 (68)	WV-5 (9)
NJ-14 (166)	WI-10 (248)	IA-6 ME CD2-1 (132)	AR-6 (62)	WY-3 NE CD3-1 (4)
1 Follow the link for a detailed explanation on how to read the Electoral College Spectrum. 2 The numbers in the parentheses refer to the number of electoral votes a candidate would have if he or she won all the states ranked prior to that state. If, for example, Trump won all the states up to and including Pennsylvania (Biden's toss up states up to the Keystone state), he would have 289 electoral votes. Trump's numbers are only totaled through the states he would need in order to get to 270. In those cases, Biden's number is on the left and Trumps's is on the right in bold italics. To keep the figure to 50 cells, Washington, DC and its three electoral votes are included in the beginning total on the Democratic side of the spectrum. The District has historically been the most Democratic state in the Electoral College. 3 New Hampshire is the state where Biden crosses the 270 electoral vote threshold to win the presidential election, the tipping point state for the former vice president. But because the line between New Hampshire and Pennsylvania creates an Electoral College tie (269-269), Pennsylvania is the tipping point state for Trump. It is where the president surpasses 270 electoral votes. Collectively, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania are the tipping point states.

While Missouri's shade may have lightened on both the map and the Spectrum, it did not budge on the Spectrum, retaining its space in the order. The average margin there for Trump may have shrunk some, but it remains a distant takeover opportunity for Biden if it can really be considered one at all. But it is noteworthy that the Trump toss ups have now extended into the fourth column on the figure.

New York obviously did not go anywhere. It, too, stayed in place with the new poll basically affirming the extant state of the race there.

With no new polls in either New Hampshire or Pennsylvania, not to mention those states immediately around them, the tipping point states remained the same as June came to a close. Meanwhile, the Watch List was also unchanged from a day ago. The same group of states near the break points in the various categories were stuck in neutral.


--
NOTE: Distinctions are made between states based on how much they favor one candidate or another. States with a margin greater than 10 percent between Biden and Trump are "Strong" states. Those with a margin of 5 to 10 percent "Lean" toward one of the two (presumptive) nominees. Finally, states with a spread in the graduated weighted averages of both the candidates' shares of polling support less than 5 percent are "Toss Up" states. The darker a state is shaded in any of the figures here, the more strongly it is aligned with one of the candidates. Not all states along or near the boundaries between categories are close to pushing over into a neighboring group. Those most likely to switch -- those within a percentage point of the various lines of demarcation -- are included on the Watch List below.

The Watch List1
State	Switch
Florida	from Toss Up Biden	to Lean Biden
Georgia	from Toss Up Biden	to Toss Up Trump
Louisiana	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Mississippi	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Nebraska CD1	from Strong Trump	to Lean Trump
Nebraska CD2	from Toss Up Biden	to Lean Biden
New Hampshire	from Toss Up Biden	to Lean Biden
Ohio	from Toss Up Biden	to Toss Up Trump
Pennsylvania	from Toss Up Biden	to Lean Biden
South Carolina	from Lean Trump	to Strong Trump
Utah	from Lean Trump	to Strong Trump
Virginia	from Strong Biden	to Lean Biden
Wisconsin	from Lean Biden	to Toss Up Biden
1 Graduated weighted average margin within a fraction of a point of changing categories.

--
Methodological Note: In past years, FHQ has tried some different ways of dealing with states with no polls or just one poll in the early rounds of these projections. It does help that the least polled states are often the least competitive. The only shortcoming is that those states may be a little off in the order in the Spectrum. In earlier cycles, a simple average of the state's three previous cycles has been used. But in 2016, FHQ strayed from that and constructed an average swing from 2012 to 2016 that was applied to states. That method, however, did little to prevent anomalies like the Kansas poll the thad Clinton ahead from biasing the averages. In 2016, the early average swing in the aggregate was  too small to make much difference anyway. For 2020, FHQ has utilized an average swing among states that were around a little polled state in the rank ordering on election day in 2016. If there is just one poll in Delaware in 2020, for example, then maybe it is reasonable to account for what the comparatively greater amount of polling tells us about the changes in Connecticut, New Jersey and New Mexico. Or perhaps the polling in Iowa, Mississippi and South Carolina so far tells us a bit about what may be happening in Alaska where no public polling has been released. That will hopefully work a bit better than the overall average that may end up a bit more muted.


--
Related posts:
The Electoral College Map (6/29/20)

The Electoral College Map (6/26/20)

The Electoral College Map (6/25/20)



Follow FHQ on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook or subscribe by Email.

2020 Democratic Delegate Allocation: NEW YORK

NEW YORK

Election type: primary
Date: June 23
    [April 28 originally]
Number of delegates: 324 [61 at-large, 29 PLEOs, 184 congressional district, 50 automatic/superdelegates]
Allocation method: proportional statewide and at the congressional district level
Threshold to qualify for delegates: 15%
2016: proportional primary
Delegate selection plan (post-coronavirus)


--
Changes since 2016
If one followed the 2016 series on the Republican process here at FHQ, then you may end up somewhat disappointed. The two national parties manage the presidential nomination process differently. The Republican National Committee is much less hands-on in regulating state and state party activity in the delegate selection process than the Democratic National Committee is. That leads to a lot of variation from state to state and from cycle to cycle on the Republican side. Meanwhile, the DNC is much more top down in its approach. Thresholds stay the same. It is a 15 percent barrier that candidates must cross in order to qualify for delegates. That is standard across all states. The allocation of delegates is roughly proportional. Again, that is applied to every state.

That does not mean there are no changes. The calendar has changed as have other facets of the process such as whether a state has a primary or a caucus.

New York Democrats saw a number of changes both before and after the coronavirus pandemic wreaked havoc on the Empire state. In the time since 2016 and before the calendar flipped to 2020, the New York state legislature in 2019 shifted the primary back a week from the mid-April position it held alone in 2016 to the final Tuesday in April alongside a group of five other neighboring states.

But after the coronavirus hit in earnest in March 2020 and hit especially hard in New York state, Governor Andrew Cuomo (D) first pushed the primary back to June 23 and then issued an executive order requiring county elections officials to mail absentee ballot applications (with postage-paid return) to all eligible New York voters. However, days later, acting on the new powers granted it under a new provision in a budget bill signed into law, the New York State Board of Elections opted to cancel the June 23 presidential primary. [For more on the further empowerment of the Board of Elections in this scenario, see this post on the maneuvering after the cancelation.] That move was challenged in federal court. And first the district court reversed the cancelation and then the court of appeals upheld that decision, ushering back in the June 23 presidential primary.

The state did not appeal that court of appeals decision, cementing the presidential primary on June 23. Voters will now have until June 16 -- a week before the the primary -- to have their ballot requests in to county elections offices in order to receive their ballot in time for the election.

All ballots are then due to county elections offices postmarked on or before Monday, June 22, or delivered in person by election day on June 23. 

Overall, the Democratic delegation in New York changed by 29 delegates from 2016 to 2020. Since the last Democratic nomination four years ago, Democrats in the Empire state added 21 district delegates, seven at-large delegates and two superdelegates. The only category of delegates to shrink since 2016 was the group of PLEO delegates that decreased by one delegate. Most of the gains came from New York having rejoined the Acela primary group of states -- originally in late April -- and tacking on a 15 percent clustering bonus from the DNC. New York was a part of the group in 2012, but went a week earlier than the rest in 2016.


[Please see below for more on the post-coronavirus changes specifically to the delegate selection process.]


Thresholds
The standard 15 percent qualifying threshold applies both statewide and on the congressional district level.


Delegate allocation (at-large and PLEO delegates)
To win any at-large or PLEO (pledged Party Leader and Elected Officials) delegates a candidate must win 15 percent of the statewide vote. Only the votes of those candidates above the threshold will count for the purposes of the separate allocation of these two pools of delegates.

See New Hampshire synopsis for an example of how the delegate allocation math works for all categories of delegates.


Delegate allocation (congressional district delegates)
New York's 184 congressional district delegates are split across 27 congressional districts and have a variation of just two delegates across districts from the measure of Democratic strength Empire state Democrats are using based on the results of the 2012 and 2016 presidential elections in the state. That method apportions delegates as follows...
CD1 - 6 delegates
CD2 - 6 delegates
CD3 - 7 delegates*
CD4 - 7 delegates*
CD5 - 8 delegates
CD6 - 6 delegates
CD7 - 7 delegates*
CD8 - 8 delegates
CD9 - 8 delegates
CD10 - 7 delegates*
CD11 - 6 delegates
CD12 - 8 delegates
CD13 - 8 delegates
CD14 - 6 delegates
CD15 - 7 delegates*
CD16 - 8 delegates
CD17 - 7 delegates*
CD18 - 6 delegates
CD19 - 6 delegates
CD20 - 7 delegates*
CD21 - 6 delegates
CD22 - 6 delegates
CD23 - 6 delegates
CD24 - 7 delegates*
CD25 - 7 delegates*
CD26 - 7 delegates*
CD27 - 6 delegates

*Bear in mind that districts with odd numbers of national convention delegates are potentially important to winners (and those above the qualifying threshold) within those districts. Rounding up for an extra delegate initially requires less in those districts than in districts with even numbers of delegates.


Delegate allocation (automatic delegates/superdelegates)
Superdelegates are free to align with a candidate of their choice at a time of their choosing. While their support may be a signal to voters in their state (if an endorsement is made before voting in that state), superdelegates will only vote on the first ballot at the national convention if half of the total number of delegates -- pledged plus superdelegates -- have been pledged to one candidate. Otherwise, superdelegates are locked out of the voting unless 1) the convention adopts rules that allow them to vote or 2) the voting process extends to a second ballot. But then all delegates, not just superdelegates will be free to vote for any candidate.

[NOTE: All Democratic delegates are pledged and not bound to their candidates. They are to vote in good conscience for the candidate to whom they have been pledged, but technically do not have to. But they tend to because the candidates and their campaigns are involved in vetting and selecting their delegates through the various selection processes on the state level. Well, the good campaigns are anyway.]


Selection
The 184 district delegates will still be directly elected on the New York Democratic presidential primary ballot, but now that primary will take place on June 23. Similarly, the state convention -- some time in July -- will continue to be the body that selects both the PLEO and then at-large delegates. But it is noteworthy that the New York Democratic Party state convention is a state convention in name only, at least as compared to how most other states conduct state conventions. The typical state convention is comprised of a group of delegates who are selected at more local caucuses or conventions during primary season. The New York Democratic state convention is alternatively just the state central committee. In essence, then, it is a meeting of the committee rather than a convention of delegates. However, each campaign will have at least one member representing them on the nominating committee at the convention.

[Under the originally approved and compliant delegate selection plan, New York Democrats would still have directly elected their district delegates on the primary ballot. That remains the case, but that would have taken place on April 28, before the primary moved back to June. Likewise, the PLEO and at-large delegates would have been chosen at the state convention that was planned for May 12.]


Importantly, if a candidate drops out of the race before the selection of statewide delegates, then any statewide delegates allocated to that candidate will be reallocated to the remaining candidates. If Candidate X is in the race in July when the New York statewide delegate selection takes place but Candidate Y is not, then any statewide delegates allocated to Candidate Y in the late June primary would be reallocated to Candidate X. [This same feature is not something that applies to district delegates.] This reallocation only applies if a candidate has fully dropped out.  This is less likely to be a factor with just Biden left as the only viable candidate in the race, but Sanders could still gain statewide delegates by finishing with more than 15 percent statewide. Under a new deal struck between the Biden and Sanders camps, Biden will be allocated (or reallocated) all of the statewide delegates in a given state. However, during the selection process, the state party will select Sanders-aligned delegate candidates in proportion to the share of the qualified statewide vote.

Appeal Denied. New York Democratic Presidential Primary Set for June 23

The US 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday, May 19 upheld a lower court ruling from earlier in the month reinstating the canceled New York Democratic presidential primary.

The state of New York had appealed the district court decision to reverse the New York State Board of Elections action canceling the primary under a new law that allowed the Board to remove candidates no longer in the race. Following the 2nd circuit ruling, the state will not appeal any further.

And that officially slates the New York Democratic presidential primary for June 23, a date just five weeks away.

Candidates both for president and district delegate had already filed for the April 28 primary ballot, so none of the state government nor judicial decisions have had any demonstrable impact on the filing process. Nor does the decision today affect the selection process for those district delegates. They will continue to be elected directly from the primary ballot. However, the date of the state convention and the selection of statewide -- at-large and PLEO -- delegates has been affected in the move to June. The State Democratic Committee will now select those delegates -- based on the statewide results of the primary -- at the late July state convention.

And two other factors will affect the administration of the election. First, the delay in finalizing the date of the New York primary did no favors to the State Board of Elections. Sure, the Board held that up with the appeal, but it also delayed finalizing the ballot for the primary election itself. And under the federal UOCAVA law, ballots are to go out to military and other personnel overseas 45 days before any election. There are workarounds for that -- counting the ballots when they come in, for example -- but a delay is a delay and can influence the implementation of election law.

Additionally, Governor Cuomo's April 24 executive order to provide absentee ballot applications (with a postage paid return option) to all eligible New York voters for the primary must be rolled out in the 35 day window remaining. The details of that process will have to be finalized as well, particularly the return of the completed ballots and whether that is mail-only for voters or if they can physically drop them off with election administrators.


--
One other matter to note is that the New York Democratic Party has amended its delegate selection plan to reflect not only the date change for the primary, but the allocation of delegates. Now, this point is moot at this time given that the primary is back on, but the language of Part 2, Section A of the delegate selection plan lays out the conditions under which the process would operate if the primary were canceled. Originally (and traditionally), the plan has called for all of the delegates to be allocated to the one candidate who has qualified for the primary ballot. That remains the case, but with a slight tweak. As a rider on that provision another is included: "or at the discretion of such Candidate." That addition was seemingly made in response to the deal struck between the Biden and Sanders campaigns to not only allow Sanders to keep his statewide delegates but to get a share of New York delegates if the primary ultimately ended up canceled. It is not and thus that provision is unnecessary. Still, there was a notable change to the language of the rules.


--
Related Posts:
On-Again, Off-Again New York Democratic Presidential Primary is Back on Again

Cuomo Executive Order Confirms New York Presidential Primary Will Move to June 23

New York State Legislature Begins Working on Alternatives to April 28 Presidential Primary

On-Again, Off-Again New York Democratic Presidential Primary is Back on Again

The late April New York State Board of Elections decision to cancel the Democratic presidential primary in the Empire state met some judicial resistance on Tuesday, May 5.

In a federal case brought by former Democratic presidential candidate, Andrew Yang, and some of those who filed to run as delegates aligned with him on the New York primary ballot, the aim was to reinstate candidates and delegates pushed off the ballot last month. It was that action -- the removal of  suspended candidates from the ballot -- that was the predicate to the state board's decision regarding the primary cancelation.

But the groundwork for that maneuver was laid in the budget agreed to by the state legislature and Governor Cuomo (D). Under traditional New York state election law, the State Board of Elections has the ability to cancel a primary if only one candidate qualifies, rendering the election uncontested and superfluous. That obviously was not the case in the 2020 Democratic nomination race. Although the bar to qualify for the New York presidential primary ballot is high, Vice President Joe Biden was not the only candidate to make the ballot.

However, Biden was the only candidate who had not suspended his campaign by the time the budget deal was being finalized. And while other candidates were still technically on the ballot, all had suspended their campaigns and most had endorsed Biden. And language was inserted in the budget bill to provide the state board with an additional tool given that contingency. The board was empowered with the ability to remove candidates from the primary ballot if they were no longer actively running for the nomination. That, in turn, triggered the "only one candidate" provision that has been a part of New York election law for years.

But again, candidates, both presidential and district delegate, had qualified for the original April ballot before the primary was shifted to June 23. And when the primary was canceled in late April, that drew the ire of the newly suspended Sanders campaign and the aforementioned Yang case.

So, on the one hand, one has the argument that the cancelation suppresses the vote not only in the presidential race in New York, but in all the down ballot races in parts of the Empire state that are still on for June 23. On the other is a state government attempting to manage the public health concerns around in-person voting and the coronavirus pandemic and possible budgetary savings from scaling that primary back that would help diminished state coffers in the face of the virus.¹

Now that federal judge, Analisa Torres, has issued an injunction and the June 23 Democratic presidential primary is back on, it means that elections officials in the state have lost a week of preparation with fewer than 50 days until the election. And throw on top of that a likely appeal of the decision from the state. Much of this creates more uncertainty that cuts into the time to get the ballots ready and printed and applications for absentee ballots out to eligible voters (much less returned, processed and actual ballots mailed out as well). That is a heavy lift even without considering any issues with recruiting poll workers, training them for new conditions and getting them comfortable with showing up to administer the election.

--
But push the state government implementation issues aside for a moment. There still is no answer to how the New York Democratic Party is or has responded to the primary back and forth. Should the presidential primary now go off as planned under the original delegate selection plan and the new court injunction, then the revisions the state party will have to make to the plan will be minimal.

However, there was no alternate scenario publicly shared on how the party would allocate delegates should there be no primary. Under the current plan, the party allocates all of the delegates to the candidate in an uncontested primary. But that rule hinges on (and cites) the traditional New York state election law that cancels a primary if only one candidate qualifies for the ballot. There is no contingency in the rule in the delegate selection plan that accounts for the new law, the law that eliminates candidates from the ballot who are no longer running.

A change has to be made there if the primary is canceled again under appeal.

But that is not the only change under the cancelation contingency. There also likely has to be something written into the plan -- the revisions of which will have to be reviewed and approved by the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee (DNCRBC) -- to account for the deal struck between the Biden campaign and the suspended Sanders campaign. Yes, that deal allowed Sanders to keep his statewide delegates instead of having them reallocated, but it also included a provision about the New York process in the event that there was no primary. That deal says Sanders will get some share of the delegates in the Empire state. But how that process is conducted, who is doing the selecting (especially with district delegates no longer directly elected on the primary ballot) and how to determine Sanders's share remain open questions that likely have to be dealt with in any changes the New York Democratic Party hypothetically makes to its delegate selection plan before it submits it to the DNCRBC.

In the end, there is some uncertainty that surrounds the delegate selection process in New York while Judge Torres's decision is appealed. But that uncertainty extends beyond just the state government and its administration of an election that is less than seven weeks off. It affects the state party's plans for how it will handle the delegate selection process itself with the clock ticking down to the start of a delayed national convention.


--
¹ Yes, Governor Cuomo issued an executive order on April 24 ensuring that absentee ballot applications would be mailed to every eligible New York voter in the June 23 primary. That decision came just days before the primary was canceled by the State Board of Elections on April 27.

Cuomo Executive Order Confirms New York Presidential Primary Will Move to June 23

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo during a coronavirus press conference on Saturday, March 28 signaled that the New York presidential primary would move to June 23. His actions were not official at the time but Cuomo later in the evening issued an executive order postponing the April 28 presidential primary and rescheduling it for June 23.

New York now joins other Acela primary states -- Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland and Rhode Island -- in abandoning the late April primary date and doing so through executive emergency action. Pennsylvania also shifted away from April 28 but changed its primary date via the legislative process. Regardless of the path to change, New York becomes the last of six Acela primary states to leave behind what had been at the start of primary among the most delegate-rich states on the 2020 presidential primary calendar. Now, only Ohio's vote-by-mail primary -- new to the calendar position once legislation is signed -- will fall on April 28.

But back in New York, Cuomo's executive order  would seemingly end the legislative process that had been in the works. A pair of identical bills in each chamber of the New York Assembly, consolidating the presidential primary with those for other offices on June 23, best lined up with Cuomo's intentions but those and a competing bill to keep the primary on April 28 but to make the primary an all-absentee election all are ostensibly to be left by the wayside.

While this buys New York election administrators some time to implement the changes, it does put the state Democratic Party directly in the crosshairs of the Democratic National Committee. A June 23 primary runs afoul of the DNC rules on the timing of primaries and caucuses. The party sets a June 9 -- second Saturday in June -- deadline for conducting the first step in the delegate selection process.

And while the DNC has signaled that anything after June 9 breaks the rules, it is hard to imagine the national party not bending in the face of the unprecedented challenges the coronavirus has presented. However, June 23 is less than three weeks before the Democratic National Convention is set to gavel in, and that presents challenges in an of itself.


--
Governor Cuomo's executive order postponing the presidential primary and rescheduling it for June 23 is archived here.



--
Related Posts:
New York State Legislature Begins Working on Alternatives to April 28 Presidential Primary

New York State Legislature Begins Working on Alternatives to April 28 Presidential Primary

Over the last few days the New York state assembly began work on an effort to plan for an alternative to its April 28 presidential primary amid the coronavirus threat. Thus far that has taken a couple of different forms.

The first is a bill -- A 10207 -- sponsored by 16 Democrats in the Assembly. It would keep the date on April 28 but move to an all absentee election. Voters would not be asked to submit any request for an absentee ballot. Instead, the local board of elections would send out ballots to voters at least 15 days before the late April primary. That would put a significant burden on local elections officials in a short window of time. April 13 -- 15 days before the planned primary on April 28 -- is less than three weeks away. Even with more time, a transition to an all-absentee process would be expensive and challenging for local elections officials. With a time crunch, it would likely be worse. And with New York the epicenter of the coronavirus spread and social distancing being stressed/enforced, it would be even more difficult.

While the absentee bill may not see the light of day due to implementation conflicts, the second set of bills may. There are identical bills -- one in the Assembly (A 10173) and one in the Senate (S 08108) -- that call for the April 28 New York primary to be consolidated with the primary for other offices on June 23. While that would certainly provide New York with a lot of time to get out from under the shadow of this coronavirus outbreak, it would put both state parties squarely in the crosshairs of national parties' rules. June 23 would come after the date on which the DNC requires states to have conducted delegate selection events (June 9) and also after a similar RNC deadline (June 13). That would make both state parties vulnerable to penalties associated with timing violations, a 50 percent reduction in the Democratic delegation and a more than 90 percent delegation reduction under the Republican super penalty.

The DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee has already issued a memo cautioning states about shifting to dates that fall outside of the window in which states are to hold delegate selection events. And this is not exactly overly harsh in the context of the coronavirus. Yes, the states need some more time, but the national committee also needs time to finalize the delegate selection process and prepare for a convention that will gavel in just around three weeks after any June 23 contest. That is a quick turnaround. And would represent one more loose thread in a sea of them as the coronavirus continues to affect electoral implementation in the context of the nomination process in both parties.