In Missouri, Could a Switch to Caucuses Help Avert a January Start to Primary Season?

That the Missouri Republican Party is considering a switch from a non-compliant to a non-binding primary -- adopting a caucus/convention process as a means of allocating their presidential delegates -- has been discussed today. One interesting thing that has not been as widely discussed, however, is the timing of the Missouri Republican Party State Central Committee meeting/announcement to address the primary conundrum in the Show Me state: Thursday night. If that announcement on the eve of the Florida Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee's likely decision to shift the Sunshine state primary to January 31 pulls the Missouri delegate selection process back into compliance with RNC rules and out of Florida's way, does that also trigger a reconsideration of the primary date in Tallahassee?

Beyond that, is the presence of non-binding caucuses in Colorado, Maine and Minnesota in early February enough to keep Florida on January 31? Again, the special session stalemate over the presidential primary legislation in Missouri is the impetus for Florida's expected jump back into January after a brief summer respite. The rollercoaster ride of bill passage, vetoes and special session gridlock in the Show Me state throughout 2011 is seemingly the biggest roadblock now to the national parties' efforts to have a delayed start to the 2012 presidential primary calendar (relative to 2008).

A few other notes on the Missouri situation:
Some are questioning the legality of a potential move away from a primary to caucus in Missouri. As has been mentioned elsewhere, there is nothing in the Missouri Revised Statutes that requires the results of the state's presidential primary be used as a means of determining the allocation of delegates. There is a good reason for that: Delegate allocation is something that is left up to the parties to determine. Granted, most everything in the presidential primary process is left up to either the state or national parties to decide. A nomination is, after all, a party function not a state one.

What puts the states in conflict with the parties is the issue of most state parties opting into a state-funded primary election. Opting in brings with it state control over dates of the contests but not necessarily who can participate (see Tashjian v. Republican Party and California Democratic Party v. Jones). If a state party does not like the date of the state-funded primary it can opt out and pay for its own primary or caucus. That is what happened in Nebraska and Montana recently. In both cases, the state-funded primaries were only advisory. Republicans in Nebraska have merely used the May Nebraska primary as a beauty contest prior to a later caucus/convention process. The same was true for Montana Republicans in 2008. The June primary was merely for show following February caucuses that began the true delegate selection process. Washington Democrats likewise have also not utilized the state-funded primary as a means of allocating delegates since a voter initiative brought the presidential primary into existence in the 1990s. There are plenty of precedents Missouri can cite if challenged on a for-show primary along with a consequential caucus process.

The state is unlikely to object to the move other than, perhaps, on financial grounds. Millions of state taxpayer dollars will go to fund a meaningless election in February that likely won't go over well, but neither would further expenditures by the state for legal fees in a futile lawsuit. The RNC won't object either. A switch to a caucus system -- particularly one that is compliant with the party's timing rules -- would get the RNC closer to its ideal calendar. In fact, it is likely a safe assumption that the RNC has been leaning on the Missouri GOP to jump to a caucus system in the time since it became clear that the presidential primary legislation in the General Assembly was going nowhere. It keeps with the standard line the RNC provides to calendar questions; that the national party is working to keep all states in (or as close to) compliance with the timing rules.¹

--
Can the primary to caucus switch be made? Yes. Will it bring Florida back from the brink? Probably not. But we shall see.

--
¹ The initial Florida-to-January-31 story from CNN did make mention of the RNC attempting to broker a February 21 Florida primary. Those discussions likely included some mention of a Missouri switch. And that probably indicates, more than anything else, that the three non-binding caucus states are a problem to Florida because the reaction to the February 21 proposal was panned by those tied to the PPPDSC in Florida.

Recent Posts:

Georgia Presidential Primary to March 6

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (9/28/11)

Signs Point Toward a March 6 Presidential Primary in Georgia

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

Broken Invisible Fences and Scheduling the Missouri Presidential Primary

The AP's Chris Blank is up with a doomsday scenario article about the Missouri presidential primary situation; that the Show Me state nominating contest may be stuck on February 7 with legislation to move the primary to March 6 stuck in the state Senate. FHQ is no stranger to doomsday calendar scenarios. We were talking about Florida as a problem back when it was just one of twenty states with non-compliant contests entering 2011. We were there to shed light on the possibility of December in Des Moines and Manchester when the Florida legislature gave the Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee the ability to schedule the primary in the Sunshine state as early as January 3. Those were doomsday scenarios.

Missouri is not.

...yet.

The gridlock in Missouri has the presidential primary legislation being held hostage in the state Senate as a bargaining chip the Republican-controlled Senate is using against the Republican-controlled House in an effort to produce a jobs/economic development package closer to the Senate's position. That is an undoubtedly ominous situation, but to characterize the Missouri situation as such based on the fact that a meaningless October 1 deadline is approaching is misleading at best. As we have mentioned previously, there are no penalties associated with submitting to the RNC a delegate selection plan following the October 1 date. None. It is like a broken invisible fence. Most dogs don't know any better. They think the electric current is still on and act accordingly. But a few dogs know the circuit has been broken or was never working in the first place. Missouri has been in the former group as have most states during the post-McGovern-Fraser reform era. But now Missouri will potentially join the latter group and find out on Saturday that the RNC is powerless to sanction states with undetermined presidential primary and caucus dates.

If there is pressure on the states associated with October 1, then it is only symbolic. It is not real. As FHQ pointed out last night, the pressure -- to the extent there is any -- is on the Missouri legislature based on the late October-November candidate filing window on the horizon. The Missouri presidential primary may end up on February 7, but that has little or nothing to do with this Saturday's deadline. If need be, the Missouri General Assembly will continue to negotiate up to the statutory mandate ending the special session in November.

Doomsday? Maybe. Deadline? Nope.

Recent Posts:

Washington Republicans to Caucus on March 3

“Friday will be another significant day in this process.”

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (9/26/11)

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

Window Closing Sooner Rather Than Later on Moving Missouri Presidential Primary to March

Friday came and went, the Missouri General Assembly special session pushed on, and the date of the Show Me state presidential primary remained in limbo. The session was rumored to be coming to a close on Friday, but with many of the items on the special session legislative agenda splitting the Republican-controlled House and Senate, the session has devolved into technical sessions meant to do nothing more than keep the session going. The state Senate gaveled in a session this morning only to adjourn shortly thereafter to return next Monday.

Stuck in neutral, then, what does this mean for the Missouri presidential primary? For starters, the RNC deadline for setting primary or caucus dates is October 1 -- this coming Saturday. Of course, there are no penalties associated with missing that deadline (...from the RNC at least). On the state and local levels it means continued uncertainty for elections officials who must procede as if the primary will be on February 7. But this affects the candidates as well. The special session can go on into November, and it may, but it won't take the presidential primary with it.

Why?

Well, the candidate filing deadline -- according to Missouri Revised Statute Section 115.761.1 -- and the fee associated with it are due to the state in a window between 8am on the Tuesday fifteen weeks prior to the primary and 5pm on the Tuesday eleven weeks to the primary. If the primary is set on February 7, then that window stretches from October 25-November 22. The first part of that window could overlap with the continuation and close of the special session. This is particularly interesting considering that the House committee substitute to HB 3, in addition to altering the presidential primary date, also raises the filing fee.

The pressure, then, would be on the legislature to resolve its differences and get a bill off to the governor for his consideration on or prior to October 25. That is four weeks from Tuesday. The state House is set to meet next for a technical session on Thursday, September 29 and the state Senate on Monday, October 3. The result is that the Missouri primary date will be unknown until a time past the RNC-mandated deadline for having set a primary or caucus date.

Thanks to an FHQ reader for pointing out the filing deadline conflict.

Recent Posts:

New Jersey Presidential Primary to June 5

Colorado Republican Precinct Caucuses Shifted Up to February 7

Missouri Republican Party Takes a Proactive Approach to March Presidential Primary Bill

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

Missouri Republican Party Takes a Proactive Approach to March Presidential Primary Bill

The headline on the Missouri Republican Party blog pretty much says it all:

Action Alert! Presidential Primary Date Legislation

--
FHQ quick hit: Not only is there some tension over this bill between Republican-controlled chambers in the Missouri General Assembly, but the Missouri Republican Party has a preferred destination for the presidential primary as well: March 6. The state party aligns with the House-passed version and is at odds with the Senate. Recall, state parties have the ultimate say in this. If the primary is scheduled for a date that they are not in support of, the party can seek out other options; in this case a compliant, most likely, caucus.

Recent Posts:

Ga. weighs when to set presidential primary

Calendar Correction Corner: Florida -- Not Surprisingly -- Will Wait as Long as It Can Before Deciding on a Presidential Primary Date

On Non-Binding Caucuses and Straw Polls

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

Missouri Senate Adjourns; Presidential Primary Bill Saved for Supposed Last Special Session Day on Friday

After threatening earlier in the day to walk out of the Missouri General Assembly special session altogether, the Republican Senate majority came out of recess this evening to announce that it would adjourn until Friday, September 23. At issue was a deal reportedly cut between the state House Republican leadership and Governor Jay Nixon (D) on an economic development package that excluded the Senate Republican leadership input. What this means is that Friday becomes particularly important not only for that specific piece of legislation, but for all the other active bills yet to reconciled between the House and the Senate. That is a list that includes the presidential primary bill.  The pressure is raised even higher for Friday considering that many lawmakers are resistant to the special session extending past that point.

And that translates into a likely whirlwind afternoon and evening session in the Missouri General Assembly to finish up work on the economic package as well as square the differences -- if they exist -- in the chambers' versions of the presidential primary bill. The House has passed a version of HB 3 that shifts the date for the Show Me state presidential primary from February to March but also raises the candidate filing fee in the process. However, there is a Senate amendment to be considered that would eliminate the presidential primary election completely and push for early caucuses by the parties.

Now, it should be noted that the General Assembly had a similar marathon end to the regular session in May. The move of the presidential primary was equally in doubt in conference committee at that time given that committee substitutes to both the House and Senate bills called for the primary, among other things, to be anchored to the the New Hampshire primary, falling a week after the Granite state. In the end, the differences were reconciled in conference and agreed to in both chambers, though the deal was ladened with additional provisions.

The time crunch will potentially produce a similar result on Friday; decreasing the chance of the primary elimination amendment receiving a positive vote before the Senate while also decreasing the chance that the Senate and House enter separate veto sessions to override the Governor Nixon's veto of the regular session bill to move the presidential primary to March (SB 282). The Missouri presidential primary may or may not be moved, but an answer will likely be revealed once and for all on Friday.

In other words, by then it will be known whether Missouri will be stuck on February 7, thus triggering another forward shift in the dates Florida, South Carolina, Nevada, New Hampshire and Iowa -- in that order -- are likely to adopt. Oddly enough, that very likely pushes Florida back to January 31 where it was scheduled in the first place before the law was changed earlier in 2011.

Recent Posts:

Republican Legislators in Ohio Push Back Against Democrats on Buckeye State Presidential Primary

Michigan is a Rick Snyder Signature Away from Solidifying February 28 Presidential Primary Date

Additional Notes on the Missouri Presidential Primary Situation

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

Additional Notes on the Missouri Presidential Primary Situation

FHQ has stated already that we are not nearly as pessimistic about the proposed move of the Missouri presidential primary to March as we were when the news broke last week that the special session legislation (HB 3) to actually move the primary became lodged in the state Senate. That is because there is still one escape valve that the Republican majority can use that will also move the primary to March 6: a veto override of SB 282.¹

Of course, it would help if we had confirmation that this was actually an option. On that front, however, there are conflicting signals from the two chambers of the Missouri General Assembly. The House is saying on the one hand that the September 14 veto session was a one-day event and has concluded. The Senate, on the other, indicates that a veto override of SB 282 is still possible.

Which is right?

Procedurally, the legislature has a ten day window in which to consider overriding a gubernatorial veto. While the House has completed its veto override business for 2011, the Senate may yet send some more actionable bills its way. The veto session operates not unlike executive sessions in the US Senate. The Senate will basically hit the pause button on what it is working on to go into executive session to consider executive branch nominations to various posts. In listening into the session last Wednesday in the Missouri Senate, it appears that the mechanism is the same in the Missouri General Assembly. The Senate stopped off its discussion of a handful of House-passed special session bills and went into veto session for a couple of hours before returning to raise the issues that have come to the fore with the presidential primary bill (HB 3).

Technically, then, if the Senate successfully overrides Nixon's veto of SB 282 -- the seemingly only available option to move the primary to March 6 -- then the bill would presumably go over the House and that chamber could likewise enter a veto session to consider the bill. And that can take place within the ten calendar day window discussed above. In other words, since both chambers had veto sessions on September  14, each would have to act on a veto override on or before Friday, September 23 (this coming Friday).

Either the veto will be overridden by the end of the work week or the special session will or will not extend into next week to resolve the conflict over the special session legislation. One option will be off the table at the end of the week though. And the the viability of that veto override option will depend to a great degree on how ominous the passage of HB 3 is throughout the rest of this week as well. If a block of that bill is firmed up, the chances of a veto override increase. But if a deal can be cut on the primary or caucus -- via HB 3 -- then the override becomes a distant memory. The way Senate Republicans are playing this, however, makes it look like they are only giving Democrats in the legislature one escape route: the override.

The Republican majority will need four Democrats in the House to override any veto. The Democrats may feel the pressure to go along with the override if they are faced with a non-compliant presidential primary.²

--
¹ After a rather circuitous route through the legislature (follow the path via the Missouri tag), SB 282 was vetoed by Missouri Governor Jay Nixon (D). The governor did this not to keep the Show Me state presidential primary in a non-compliant February position on the calendar, but to prevent the legislative branch from curbing executive power in the area of statewide vacancy appointments. To kill the part the governor did not like, then, he had to kill the whole bill.

² Then again, Missouri Democrats could always lean on the already-scheduled March 29 caucuses as a means of allocating delegates to the Democratic convention. But that would mean potentially adopting a caucus/convention system long term; something with which the state party may or may not be comfortable.

Recent Posts:

Michigan Senate Presidential Primary Bill Passes House Committee

Maine GOP to Caucus Between February 4-11

NH's Gardner Indicates Granite State Presidential Primary Will Stay a Week Ahead of Other States

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

A Footnote to the Missouri Presidential Primary Situation

One thing that occurred to FHQ overnight is that there is one other alternative that should and very likely will be considered/reconsidered in the process of resolving the date on which the Missouri presidential primary will fall in 2012. We have gone to great lengths to include the possibility of a veto override of SB 282 in most special session Missouri posts, but failed to adequately consider that yesterday in light on the new snag in the Show Me state Senate. Suddenly, an override of the veto on the broad elections bill that included a provision to move the presidential primary to March.

Why?

Well, if the alternative to Republicans both chambers of the Missouri General Assembly and Democrats -- in the state House in particular -- is a non-compliant primary or caucus on February, those members may feel some pressure to reconsider an override of SB 282. That bill would obviously move the primary to March 6. Now, I know I was hard on Sen. Crowell and those writing this amendment in yesterday's post, but if that was merely a sideshow to wider attempt at pressuring at least four Democratic House members into joining forces with the House Republican majority, then perhaps I'm not giving them enough credit. The Republican majority in the Senate, you see, is large enough on its own to override Governor Jay Nixon's veto, but in the House the Republican majority would need the help of at least four Democrats for an override there.

If the Senate is trying to cut off every option but the veto override as a means of moving the primary, then they are off to a pretty good start of setting up a roadblock on this particular piece of legislation (HB 3). According to the Missouri Constitution (Article III, Section 32), a veto session can happen for up to ten days starting on the first Wednesday after the second Monday in September. That coincidentally enough will overlap with the remainder of the special session.

If, on the other hand, Democrats don't particularly care about a switch to a caucus -- and with the potential for a state mandate on that type of contest, they likely will -- then they can call the Republicans bluff and set up a potential fight between the Republican majorities in the General Assembly and the state and national Republican Parties.

Regardless, it will be interesting to see this one plays out over the next couple of weeks.

Recent Posts:

Strange Things Are Afoot in the Missouri Senate Concerning the Presidential Primary

The Post-Arizona Lay of the 2012 Presidential Primary Land

Wisconsin Assembly Concurs with Senate on April Presidential Primary Bill

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

Strange Things Are Afoot in the Missouri Senate Concerning the Presidential Primary

***Please also see the footnote FHQ has added to the Missouri presidential primary situation.

In the Missouri Senate today, the chamber took up HB 3, the bill to move the Show Me state presidential primary from the first Tuesday after the first Monday in February to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in March. Instead of considering and passing the measure to bring the state's primary back into compliance with the national party rules quickly, as the House had done last week, the process appears to have hit a snag in the state Senate -- a snag that will not be rectified until at least next Wednesday (September 21) when the Senate reconvenes.

At issue is proposed amendment to eliminate the separate presidential primary election -- saving the state $6 million -- and reverting to caucuses as a means of allocating delegates as was the custom in the state prior to 1988 (and again in both 1992 and 1996). The amendment would also call on the Missouri caucuses to be held on February 7 (something that is rarely covered by state law elsewhere across the country).

But this is where the wheels fell off of the wagon. The legislators carrying on the conversation on the floor of the now-adjourned Senate session this afternoon showed a fundamental lack of understanding about how the presidential primary process works.¹ Senator Jason Crowell (R-27th, Bollinger) demonstrated the very real disconnect that can exist in this presidential nomination process between the state legislature/state government and both the state party and particularly the national party.

[Forgive me for paraphrasing what I just overheard and attempted to transcribe from the online audio of the session this afternoon, but these do adequately point out the aforementioned disconnect.]

Sen. Crowell brought up things like:

I've never heard from anyone from the national party who asked us to move to March.
Why should the national party tell us how to run our primary?
This is nothing more than the national party trying to rig the system to pick the nominees they want.

Then there was this exchange between the bill's Senate handler, Kevin Engler (R-3rd, Farmington) and Sen. Crowell [These are direct quotes.]:

Engler: "Will the [national] party strip us of our delegates?" 

Crowell: "I don't care. I don't care."

There are so many things to discuss here that FHQ really doesn't know where to start. I'll quickly dispense with the fundamentals of this and then talk briefly about the implications moving forward.

First of all, there is an overlap on this issue in terms of the national party attempting to nominate presidential candidates and the fact that states have chosen, on the whole, to complete their end of the process through state-funded presidential primaries. Initially, why that came be was a matter of state-level convenience in the 1970s after the McGovern-Fraser commission reformed the Democratic process (and ultimately the Republican process, too). States moved to primaries as a means of fulfilling the desires of the new national party rules. It was easier to put an extra presidential primary line on the ballot of a pre-existing primary for state and local offices in some cases than it was for state parties to hold caucuses on their own dime. That overlap, though, has blurred the line between state action and national/state party function over time. The nomination process is party business, but that is a machine that happens to include a state mandated cog, the primary election. That connection only lasts as long as is convenient for the national and state parties.

And in this case, it is clear that at least some Republicans within the Missouri legislature have grown tired of the mandates from the national party. The interesting thing is that there was no discussion of how Republican legislative action in the Missouri General Assembly would affect the Missouri Republican Party's ability to allocated delegates to the national convention. There was absolutely no discussion of this. FHQ isn't clear if the senators talking to fill in the time while the amendment was being written are even considering this. There are implications for the state parties. The parties will have to pick up the tab for the caucuses in the event that the primary funding is eliminated. It isn't clear to me that the state parties have even been consulted on this matter. And the parties could very well take the issue to court if the legislature attempts to regulate when the caucuses could be held. That is party business and the courts have continually shown that they will side with parties over states on these issues. [Imagine a court battle to determine when the Missouri primary or caucuses will be held and the impact that would have on the finalization of the calendar. Look no further than the court battle over the Michigan primary in 2008.]

Again, I don't want to get to far into that sort of speculation. The more you look into it, the messier it gets. The very real impact that this has is that suddenly the Missouri primary scheduling is now in doubt. The roadblocks that are apparent in the Senate raise the specter of a February 7 primary or caucus which would obviously bring with it near-Arizona-style panic about the state of the final calendar.

What, then, are we left with? The amendment, if passed, could derail the process in any number of ways. It could make the overall bill unpalatable to first the entire Senate (unlikely since the whole chamber would have to have voted for the amendment's inclusion in the first place), the House or the governor. If the amended bill passes the Senate, the House could reject it. Conversely, the House could accept the changes -- signing on to the caucus scenario based on the savings -- and send the bill on to the governor. Governor Nixon would then face two options: Veto the legislation that would save the state $6 million and in the process keep the primary on its non-compliant date, or sign it, wash his hands of the matter and let the Missouri Republicans take the brunt of the heat for holding or attempting to hold a non-compliant caucus (something that would cost the state party half its delegation to the Tampa convention). But the question remains on that latter option of whether the Missouri Republican Party would be on board with the change; particularly if it entails the state government mandating when the caucuses -- party business, mind you -- can be held.

What would stop the state party from moving the caucuses where they want? Nothing would. But there could potentially be a fight over that between the state party and the state government. Of course, the state government would be unlikely to bring a suit to court considering the attorney general is a Democrat.

This Missouri situation just got ugly and we won't begin to have any answers on the matter until next Wednesday; a scant ten days before the RNC requires states to have notified the party of their delegate selection plans.

...but that isn't anything that would upset the members of the Missouri Senate's majority.

--
¹ Mostly, this was Senator Crowell, but it mirrors to some extent the actions of Sen. Brad Lager, who had previously offered an amendment to the regular session presidential primary bill to anchor the Missouri primary to one week after the New Hampshire primary. The amendment was accepted on that bill (SB 282) and ultimately passed by the Senate and then re-modified back in the House. That version, including a provision to move the primary to March was agreed to by both chambers and then vetoed by the Governor Jay Nixon (D) due to other provisions in the bill.

Recent Posts:

The Post-Arizona Lay of the 2012 Presidential Primary Land

Wisconsin Assembly Concurs with Senate on April Presidential Primary Bill

March Presidential Primary Bill from Missouri House Gets Thumbs Up from Senate Committee

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

March Presidential Primary Bill from Missouri House Gets Thumbs Up from Senate Committee

The Missouri state Senate Financial and Governmental Organizations and Elections Committee today voted in favor of the House-passed bill to move the Show Me state presidential primary from February to March. HB 3, unchanged from the committee-amended version that passed the House, now moves on to the floor of the Senate for consideration. Given the speed with which this bill has made it through the House and to this point in the Senate, and the fact that the originally-passed, but vetoed elections bill (with presidential primary move provision) is still not on the veto session agenda, indications are that this bill will be passed and sent on to Governor Jay Nixon (D). The question then would be whether the presidential candidate filing fee change -- something that was not in the governor's call for a special session -- would be a big enough change to force another veto.

...keeping Missouri on February 7.

Recent Posts:

Ohio House Democrats Threaten March to May Presidential Primary Move

Still Non-Compliant, Arizona's Now Locked into a February 28 Presidential Primary Date

Bill Introduced in Ohio Senate to Move Presidential Primary to May. ...again.

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

John Coltrane or Tommy Flanagan? The Missouri General Assembly Special Session and the March Presidential Primary Bill

There is an old story about the recording of John Coltrane's Giant Steps. Pianist Tommy Flanagan obviously struggled with the progressions in the tune and it shows in the recording. Compared to the other solos throughout, Flanagan's is, well (diplomatically), lacking. The way FHQ has heard this told in the past is that Flanagan was out a little too late the night before, came in to the session late and Coltrane punished him by keeping the best of the bad takes. That the song and record went on to be celebrated in and out of jazz circles only added insult to injury for the pianist.

Now, FHQ is never one to fall in to discussions of classic jazz -- not here anyway -- but this story is a nice metaphor for what is happening during the current Missouri General Assembly special session. The Republican-controlled legislature is essentially taking the call for the special session from Governor Jay Nixon (D) and improvising off of it. As Rudi Keller points out in this morning's Columbia Daily Tribune, a governor typically makes the call and includes items in it that the legislature will deal with expeditiously. After all, the taypayers of Missouri are picking up the tab. The coordination between the executive and legislative branches, however, looks to be minimal, raising the specter of a longer-than-necessary special session. That has led to the improvisation on the part of the legislature. The only question is:

Are they producing Tommy Flanagan or John Coltrane?

In other words, is the legislature augmenting the legislative items specifically called for by Governor Nixon in ways that will ultimately win his approval or have they made changes that will be met with a veto?

I'll pass on the discussion of the more controversial business tax break legislation -- a bill that may struggle to pass -- and focus on the presidential primary legislation instead. The governor's call presented the legislature with a clean bill -- move the Show Me state presidential primary to March or leave it in February in violation of the national party rules. The House last week, however, widened the scope of the legislation to include a increase in the presidential candidate filing fee for the primary. Now, whether that amounts to a flubbed Tommy Flanagan piano solo or a John Coltrane sax solo on the other extreme will depend to a great degree on Jay Nixon's interpretation of the improvisations the General Assembly has made. The filing fee change may not derail the process, but bear in mind that the Senate has yet to consider the bill either. That will happen this week as will the scheduled veto session on September 14. The House already has a veto session agenda out, but the Senate does not. That House calendar does not, as of now, contain SB 282, the original elections overhaul bill the legislature passed with a provision to shift the presidential primary back by a month. An override is possible, but SB 282 will have to be added to the agenda and the Republican majority will have to find four Democrats in the House to vote for the override to pull it off.

The point is that there are some obstacles to the passage of this legislation. Passage of the move to March will depend on how Nixon interprets the changes to the call already made and those the Senate may add -- requiring further House consideration to reconcile -- in the process. The situation is fluid, but the bill to move the Missouri presidential primary to March is through one chamber and will be taken up and referred to committee in the Senate today. This bears watching simply because if the bill falls apart, Missouri will be positioned on February 7 on the presidential primary calendar next year. That obviously has the effect of definitively pushing the first four states, Florida and possibly Georgia into January.

For now at least, that is the less likely outcome. Nixon is more likely to get something closer to Coltrane than Flanagan, but that may change as this week progresses.

Recent Posts:

Missouri House Passes March Presidential Primary Bill

Pair of Wisconsin Presidential Primary Bills Set for Tuesday Consideration in the State Assembly

Missouri House Committee OKs Presidential Primary Bill

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

Missouri House Passes March Presidential Primary Bill

The Missouri House this afternoon passed the House Committee Substitute of HB 3.¹ The special session bill would shift the Show Me state presidential primary from the first Tuesday after the first Monday in February to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in March. For our purposes, in 2012, that would mean a move from February 7 to March 6 (Super Tuesday).

The bill now moves on to the Senate for consideration there. Hypothetically at least, a non-controversial bill -- one defined as such based on the fact that a bill moving the primary to March has already been passed but vetoed by the governor for different reasons -- like the presidential primary bill should be able to move through the state Senate. However, there have been roadblocks in the Senate on other bills during this first week of the Missouri General Assembly special session.

As Bob Priddy at MissouriNet points out, a veto override of SB 282 could also move the primary back to March as well. Of course, as FHQ mentioned earlier, that would require the votes of at least four Democrats in the House to pass muster. The Republican majorities in both Houses likely won't want to gamble with the date like that. HB 3 seems like more of a sure thing.

...at this point.

Like Wisconsin, Missouri moved into February for the 2004 cycle and is seeking to move back to March where the primary was in 2000.

--
¹ The substitute bill inserted a clause raising the presidential primary filing fee to the bill that originally just shifted the presidential primary date and made a few other small changes to the state elections law. See more on the implications of the greater filing fee at Ballot Access News.

Recent Posts:

Pair of Wisconsin Presidential Primary Bills Set for Tuesday Consideration in the State Assembly

Missouri House Committee OKs Presidential Primary Bill

The Myth of Republican Presidential Primary Proportionality Revisited

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

Missouri House Committee OKs Presidential Primary Bill

The Missouri House Elections Committee today unanimously designated HB 3 do pass, sending the special session legislation to the Rules Committee to be placed on the floor calendar. By a 10-0 vote, the committee members advanced the bill to move the Show Me state presidential primary from February 7 to March 6 on the 2012 presidential primary calendar. There appears to be bipartisan support behind the idea of moving the Missouri primary to the later (relative to 2008) March Super Tuesday.

The Rules Committee has no hearings scheduled at this time.

Recent Posts:

The Myth of Republican Presidential Primary Proportionality Revisited

Senate-Passed Presidential Primary Bill is Withdrawn from Wisconsin Assembly Committee

Illinois Republicans Stick with Loophole Primary, Voting Down Resolution

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

Bill Moving Missouri Presidential Primary Introduced in House Special Session

The Missouri House during the short first day to its special session today, introduced a bill to move the Show-Me state presidential primary from the first Tuesday after the first Monday in February to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in March. Rep. Tony Dugger (R-144th, Hartville), as he did back in February, introduced the bill. HB 3 has the same sole purpose that its regular session House predecessor (HB 503) had: to move the presidential primary back to March. That bill passed the House but got stuck in the state Senate, as another broader elections bill was considered there and later passed by both chambers. That broader elections bill (SB 282) was later vetoed by Governor Nixon (D), laying the groundwork for the special session bill.

The expectation -- since a bill to move the primary to March among other elections matters already passed both legislative chambers -- is that this bill will pass and Missouri will move back to March 6 on the calendar.

NOTE: Keep in mind also, that the legislature has a veto session scheduled for next week and legislative Republicans -- the majority in both houses -- could opt to override the gubernatorial veto of SB 282 with the help of four House Democrats.

Recent Posts:

Arizona, Presidential Primary Calendar Chaos, and the Rules

Brewer Scratches January 31 Primary and Keeps Arizona's Options Open

Will Arizona Trigger a February "Dead Zone" on the 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar?

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

Delayed Call for Missouri Special Session Keeps Presidential Primary Date in Limbo

Over the weekend, FHQ cobbled together several bits of news concerning the situation surrounding the scheduling of the presidential primary in Missouri. Basically, there are two options for altering the date: a veto override of the previously passed presidential primary bill or a "clean" presidential primary bill to be introduced a special legislative session. We made the point then that the special session offered the path of least resistance.

That is still the case. However, Jessica Machetta of Missournet reported yesterday that Governor Jay Nixon (D) is taking his time in making the call for the special session:

Nixon spokesman Sam Murphy says the Governor’s office is finalizing the language of the call and working directly with members in both the House and the Senate with policy expertise to ensure that we have a crisp and focused special session to pass legislation to create jobs, finance disaster recovery and ensure that taxpayer dollars are invested responsibly.

Governor Nixon said a few weeks ago that he would call the legislature back into special session to take up a jobs bill, a change in the date for Missouri’s presidential primary and other possible key issues.

The Republican majorities in the General Assembly hope that session will be in early September:

Republican legislative leaders said they had hoped for a Sept. 6 start date, stated in their letter to Nixon that “the legislature has the hard task to pass (in a limited time) the most sweeping jobs and fiscal accountability legislation ever attempted.

Missouri Republicans leaders in the legislature also wonder about the short "official" notice of the session's details:

Senate Leader Rob Mayer of Dexter and House Speaker Stephen Tilley of Perryville have written Nixon a letter urging him to set a date, saying the citizen members of the Missouri legislature need advance time to plan with their families and employers.

Now, FHQ's intent here is not to cast doubt on the likelihood of either a special session or the passage of a "clean" presidential primary bill. Those are still, in our opinion, likely outcomes. That said, the back and forth between the legislative and executive branches continues to keep the scheduling of the presidential primary in an uncertain area for the time being.

NOTE: The Missouri General Assembly has a veto session scheduled for September 14.

Recent Posts:

Myth #2: Budgetary Constraints Have Driven 2012 Presidential Primary Movement

Clarification Needed: Article Seemingly Muddies the Michigan Presidential Primary Picture

Nevada GOP hasn’t kicked into caucus mode — yet

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