A Primer on When the Remaining States Might Decide on Presidential Primary/Caucus Dates

If you are willing to mark West Virginia off the list,¹ we are now down (up?) to 14 possible states that may go rogue and hold primaries or caucuses before March 6. That is the date the two national parties set in their respective delegate selection rules as the earliest date that states not named Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina could hold nominating contests during the 2012 cycle. As 2008 demonstrated, though, not all states are willing to go along with those rules. 2012, thus far at least, has proven no exception.

On top of it all, the kicker is that we only have a limited amount of information to guide in any attempt to determine when the actors in these states might decide on a timeframe of dates between possibly December 5 and March 5. What follows is a look at what we know and when we may have a better idea of when the ultimate 2012 primary calendar will be set.

First of all, the list of rogue states does not include Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina. With them on the list, that's nearly 40% of all states with primary or caucus states up in the air; a staggering number in July 2011. It should be noted that that statistic is somewhat misleading. With presidential primaries and caucuses, often we're talking about 102 contests and not 51 (50 states plus DC). Both parties have nomination spots to fill and in most states -- mostly primary states -- there is a uniform date for the state parties to conduct their delegate allocation. However, there are a handful of states and state parties that provide exceptions. Some states are strictly caucus states and either tend to have (eg: Minnesota, Colorado or Iowa) or don't have (eg: Wyoming, Nevada or North Dakota) uniform dates between the two parties. There are also states where one state party will opt for the caucus option while the other decides to take advantage of a state-funded primary election (eg: Idaho or Montana).

Given that reality, there are a couple of ways to look at this situation before we dive in. On the one hand, there is a partisan component. The Democratic primary calendar is largely set. Sure, decisions in Florida or Georgia may affect when Democrats in those states will allocate delegates, but outside of the exempt four early states, the Democratic calendar is more settled than the Republican version.

On the other hand, there is also a primary or caucus component that builds off of the partisan explanation. There are seven caucus states that are question marks at this point and each one has a date on the Democratic side but not on the Republican side. To some degree that is a function of an institutional difference between the parties. The Democratic Party requires the submission of a delegate selection plan for approval by its Rules and Bylaws Committee. The deadline for submission this year was May 2. There is no direct corollary in the RNC. The Republican Party rules merely set a deadline by which states must have settled on how delegates will be allocated in the next year's presidential race. For the 2012 cycle, that deadline is October 1. There are already, then, caucus dates for the Democratic contests in Alaska, Kansas, Maine, North Dakota, Washington and Wyoming, but not for the Republican contests.

What do we know about the possible landing spots for the caucuses in those states? Well, not much really. With the exception of Wyoming, there is nothing on the horizon -- at least not publicly -- in any of the other five caucus states. There is nothing akin to the executive committee meeting in West Virginia yesterday or the state central committee meeting planned in Wyoming next month in any of those states.

Here's what we know:

Moved 2/5/11 (March 6 district conventions) Alaska: In Alaska, state Republican Party rules specify that delegates must be allocated by a point at least 35 days prior to the opening of the Republican National Convention (Alaska Republican Party Rules, Article V, Section 15.b). Furthermore, the state central committee is charged with calling a state convention at least 75 days before it is to convene (Alaska Republican Party Rules, Article V, Section 1). Both of those conditions will easily be met for 2012, but that tells us little about when the Alaska Republican State Central Committee will meet -- at least quarterly according to the rules (Alaska Republican Party Rules, Article VI, Section 4.c).

Best guess on timeframe for a decision: some time before October 1

Threat level: Alaska Republicans attempted to hold early caucuses in 1996 but with little success. Other than that there is little evidence the party would hold non-compliant caucus meetings in 2012.

Moved 8/13/11 (March 10 caucuses): Kansas: Even less is known in Kansas. The Republican Party in the Sunflower state leaves much to the imagination. There is only one line in the Kansas Republican Party Constitution that is relevant to the discussion of the selection of national convention delegates (Article XIV, Section 4.C): "The state committee shall adopt the rules for the election of delegates to the Republican National Convention." That's it. The state committee meets "at least twice a year". Again, like Alaska, nothing is scheduled publicly.

Best guess on a timeframe for a decision: some time before October 1

Threat level: Kansas has never been a threat to hold early, non-compliant contests in the past. An early, non-compliant primary was discussed in the Kansas legislature in 2007, but that plan went nowhere.

Moved 9/10/11 (February 4-11 caucuses) Maine: Like many of the other Republican caucus states, the date of the Maine GOP caucus meetings is to be determined. Also like many other Republican caucus states, it is informative to look at the state party rules for some indication of the procedure by which the date of the municipal caucuses are set. According to the 2010 Rules -- those governing the 2012 Maine Republican convention -- the party has to, based on state law, hold a state convention between March 1 and August 1. Beyond that guideline outside of the state party's control, Rule 7 of the Maine Republican Party's rules further describes the guidelines imposed on the party's State Committee -- the entity charged with setting the municipal caucuses date(s). Rule 7 states that municipal caucuses will be held every two years according to state law and "upon [the] call of the Chairman of the Republican State Committee". In addition, Rule 7b encourages municipalities "to conduct their caucuses by March 1 or a single date if so specified by the State Committee". That gives us some idea of a window of time in which the Maine GOP may hold caucuses. If 2008 is a precedent -- and there is not necessarily a reason to believe it is -- the Maine Republican Party will seek to hold Sunday caucuses. In 2008, that was on the Sunday immediately prior to Super Tuesday. The Sunday just prior to the earliest date states are allowed by the national parties in 2012 -- a date FHQ will reluctantly call Super Tuesday -- is March 4. That obviously falls after the rules-encouraged pre-March 1 guideline. The Sunday prior to that is February 26. The Maine Republican caucuses are likely to fall into a window that begins with Sunday, February 26 and ends on, coincidentally enough, Sunday, March 11, the date on which the Maine Democratic Party caucuses are scheduled and the Sunday immediately following Super Tuesday.

Best guess on timeframe for a decision: According to the Maine Republican Party rules, the State Committee meets monthly. The party will, therefore, have a couple of opportunities -- in August and September -- to decide on a date prior to the RNC's October 1 deadline by which dates are supposed to be set.

Threat level: Low. Maine was quietly non-compliant in 2008 and if the Republican Party chooses to repeat similar scheduling of their caucuses in 2012, will likely see a similar level of attention (mainly because if the contest immediately precedes Super Tuesday, candidates will be focused elsewhere).

Moved 3/1/11 (February 7 caucuses) Minnesota: Minnesota Republicans have already indicated that they will utilize the February 7 date triggered by state law this past March.

Best guess on a timeframe for a decision: Decision made

Threat level: The Minnesota Republicans' precinct caucuses are already set for the day after the tentative date for the Iowa caucuses. Thus far this has been met with little or no reaction. The first step is non-binding and Minnesota's threat to the calendar has been viewed as minor when compared to other states like Arizona, Florida, Georgia or Michigan.

Moved 9/27/11 (March 6 caucuses) North Dakota: The one rule that directly addresses the creation of presidential caucus rules in the North Dakota Republican Party rules has apparently been repealed.² That is not helpful, but the fact that the party has set a date for the 2012 state convention is some consolation that gives us some idea of the timing of the North Dakota delegate selection process. The state convention is to take place March 30-April 1, 2012. That leaves North Dakota Republicans a window of March 6-March 29 in which to hold precinct caucuses. It may also be the case that the party opts to hold earlier, but non-binding precinct caucuses prior to the convention where delegate selection will take place.

Best guess on a timeframe for a decision: some time before October 1

Threat level: North Dakota Republicans may be forced to hold the first step of their caucus process before March 6. They will likely follow the lead of the Republican Party in Minnesota, which awards no delegates on the precinct level.

Moved (March 3 caucuses) Washington: Like Kansas above, little is known about what is happening in Washington state. The Washington State Republican Party web site does not seem to have been updated since April and the search function filters everything toward the national party site. In other words, I could not uncover any rules for the party. What we do know -- and it doesn't give us any indication of either when a decision will be made or when precinct caucuses will be held -- is that the 2012 state convention is scheduled for May 31-June 2 in Tacoma.

Best guess on a timeframe for a decision: some time before October 1

Threat level: Washington Republicans held early February caucuses in 2008, something that was within the delegate selection rules. The party has typically acted within the rules on timing in the past.

Moved 8/27/11 (March 6-10 caucuses) Wyoming: Rare among the other Republican caucus states, Wyoming Republicans have actually indicated that they will make a decision on the timing of their caucus at a state central committee meeting next month. That decision appears to be a choice between the second Tuesday in March (March 13) and some earlier non-compliant date.

Best guess on a timeframe for a decision: August 26-27 state central committee meeting

Threat level: Wyoming Republicans moved to January in 2008. The party actually had two January dates. The first followed a resolution that place the county caucuses on the same day as the original tentative date of the New Hampshire primary, January 22. Once it became clear that New Hampshire was not going to stick with that date Equality state Republicans jumped to January 5. There appears to be some dissension on an earlier caucus within the party now and it is questionable as to whether a date other than the second Tuesday in March will be used.

If you are looking that over and thinking to yourself that that isn't telling you much, you aren't alone. It doesn't. Wyoming provides the clearest picture and probably the best guide. The other states are likely to set the dates of their caucuses at their next state central or executive committee meetings. That alone is our guide at this point.

Where there is better or more information is in the primary states. Those states that have already come forward and said they are considering or planning to hold non-compliant events are easier to track and are, more often than not, primary states (Colorado is the exception.).

Finalized 9/12/11 (February 28 primary) Arizona: The revelation out of the Grand Canyon state this week provided yet another potential shake up to the 2012 presidential primary calendar. Governor Jan Brewer did more with one statement to remind the country of the power she has to move the Arizona presidential primary than anyone else has been able to do. Sure, we've talked about the governor's proclamation power around here at FHQ, but the fact that Arizona was essentially locked into February 28 at the latest much less that Brewer had the power to move the date up but not back has been underreported in the political press. That said, Governor Brewer, according to the law, has to allow a 150 buffer between her decision on a date and when the primary is actually scheduled. If she were to, for instance, decide today on a date, the governor could set a date as early as December 21. That date isn't likely to become the home of the Arizona primary, but it does give us an idea of the type of timeframe at which we're looking. To legally schedule the primary for the proposed January 31, Brewer would have to act on or before September 2. And while she has a bit of wiggle room between now and then to maybe inch up a bit further -- if Arizona Republicans were receptive to the idea -- states like Florida, Georgia and Michigan will likely not have resolved their primary situations by then. What that tells us is that the RNC has to act quickly if it wants to avoid, as FHQ speculated, a December start to the primary calendar (worst-case scenario), or more likely, some significant January compression with a gap in contests between late January and March 6.

Best guess on a timeframe for a decision: on or before September 2

Threat level: High. Governor Brewer and Arizona hold a lot of card right now. If she pulls the trigger on a January 31 primary, that likely moves Florida up to at least then if not earlier and pushes the early four states up against New Years.

Moved 9/24/11 (February 7 caucuses) Colorado: Colorado Republicans, like southwestern neighbor Arizona, this week made waves of their own. All along the party had the ability to choose between holding caucuses on the new first Tuesday in March date (It had been the third Tuesday in March.) or moving up to the first Tuesday in February. What was lacking before this past week was the willingness on the part of the Colorado Republican Party to use the provision in that law to move up to a non-compliant date. Given the apparent willingness to consider it, Colorado Republicans have now staked their own hypothetical claim. But when are we likely to get a decision. The article at the center of the Colorado news cites a fall decision. As is the case with the caucus states above, the Colorado Republican State Central Committee will be the one to make the change. FHQ was unable to uncover the rules for the state party, but the pattern of past meetings appears to follow a twice yearly, March and September meeting sequence.

Best guess on a timeframe for a decision: during the September State Central Committee meeting

Threat level: A week less threatening than Arizona. Yes, Colorado is a caucus state that carries less clout than a primary state, but its status as a likely battleground state in the general election is going to draw the candidates to Colorado despite the fact that delegates will not be directly on the line. Most importantly, Colorado is a bigger threat on February 7 than Minnesota is to the overall calendar.

Moved 9/30/11 (January 31 primary) Florida: What hasn't been said about Florida at this point? The state has been a threat to the calendar since the national parties set their delegate selection rules, calling on early 2008 states to move back to at least March 6. The legislature took the certainty of the state-instituted last Tuesday in January primary date and made the threat more uncertain by the creation of the Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee. The committee furthered the uncertainty of Florida's intentions by allowing a timeframe in which the primary could be scheduled (January 3-March 6).

Best guess on a timeframe for a decision: required by state law by October 1

Threat level: High. Florida can hold out longer than Arizona and has the ability to schedule and earlier primary with the result that the earliest four states get squeezed into the first half of January (or worse if another state threatens Florida's fifth position.).

Moved 9/29/11 (March 6 primary) Georgia: FHQ will be the first to admit that we have not done as thorough a job of describing just how much flexibility Georgia's new law handing the secretary of state the authority to set the presidential primary gave Secretary Kemp. From the introduction of the legislation, FHQ has discussed Georgia in terms of being able to go as early as January 31. That argument is one that is stuck in a Florida on January 31 (but without the PPPDSC) mindset. Georgia is actually a bit more flexible than that. The only guidelines that Brian Kemp has are 1) the primary has to be in the year of the presidential election, 2) it has to be no later the second Tuesday in June and 3) the decision has to be made 60 days prior to the date on which the primary is set. Georgia could go on January 31 and wait all the way up to the December 1 deadline to make that decision. Of course, Secretary Kemp could also schedule the primary for as early as January 3 -- the earliest Florida can hold a contest -- as long as the decision is made by November 3, 2011. That is still the latest deadline a non-exempt state has. Georgia has the ability to wait out the RNC-mandated deadline on October 1 but can also outlast all but maybe Michigan.

Best guess on a timeframe for a decision: November 3 is not a deadline Kemp is pinpointing, but he can wait that long or even up to December 1, though the Georgia decision is likely to closely follow the decision the PPPDSC makes in Florida on or before October 1.

Threat level: High. Secretary Kemp has indicated that he is considering not only going rogue and moving Georgia into the pre-window period but hinting at coupling with Florida in the process. What we don't know is if he is willing to follow Florida all the way up to as early as January 3. And we likely won't know that until Kemp announces the decision.

Michigan: Michigan is one the piece of this puzzle now that is the most unknown. [Well, among the primary states.] There is Republican-sponsored legislation in the Republican-controlled state legislature to move the Wolverine state primary to January 31. And pre-Arizona, the Michigan Republican Party telegraphed that it is looking at a window of February 28-March 6 for its primary. The contest is currently scheduled for February 28, so the Republicans in Michigan will need some help from the legislature to move it up or back. But what do we know about a timeframe for a decision? The consensus seems to think that since Michigan went rogue in 2008, it is likely to do so again in 2012. That is probably likely. Again though, we don't know how rogue. The party has expressed a range that it will vote on next month, but the legislature opens that window all the way to at least January 31 (with the legislation in its current form).

Let's set aside the state party's resolution for next month -- during the state committee meeting on August 13 -- and focus on what the legislature can do with the primary date assuming the recommended rules are agreed to unamended by the state committee. [Yes, the committee can amend those rules.] Assuming that Michigan Republicans and their brethren in the majority in the state legislature actually observe the RNC's October 1 deadline, the legislature will have a bit of time in which to work on moving the primary if necessary before then. According to the Michigan House calendar, the House -- not the Senate necessarily though a similar schedule is assumed but not known beyond September 1 -- will have limited time in August but be in session on Tuesdays-Thursdays from September 7-28. Assuming legislative Republicans in the legislature don't care about the October 1 deadline, they can also act as late as December 15. However, that is likely unworkable with candidate filing deadlines. The 2008 filing deadline in Michigan seems to have given a 12 week (84 day) cushion between the deadline and the primary itself. I cannot find that codified anywhere in the Michigan statutes, however. What is in the statutes is that the secretary of state before the second Friday in November (November 11, 2011) issues a list of candidates "generally advocated by the national news media to be potential presidential candidates". But that isn't tied, nor was it in 2008, to the timing of the presidential primary.

All we really have to go on as a guide in this instance is what happened in 2007. In 2007, though, the legislature was split between the parties and a Democrat was governor. In 2011, Michigan is under unified Republican control with only a contested Republican nomination ahead in 2012. Nonetheless, previously introduced legislation was amended and passed in late August and signed into law in early September. That doesn't seem possible in August in 2011, but September is wide open if Republicans in the legislature need to shift the date of the primary up or back.

Best guess on a timeframe for a decision: mid-August vote from the Michigan Republican Party and September action from the legislature.

Threat level: High. It is high, though it won't be known how high until we get some sort of an indication -- if we get an indication -- from the Republican state committee next month. They could stick with February 28 now that it looks like Arizona is clearing out of that date, or Michigan Republicans could make a more provocative plan with the help of the state legislature. Michigan Republicans in the state legislature will have the benefit of knowing, despite any rules from the state party, if Arizona has moved to January 31 by the time the legislature picks up after a recess on September 7.

Moved 9/29/11 (March 17 Republican caucuses) Missouri: Though Governor Jay Nixon's veto cast doubt on the fate of the Missouri primary, there are still two viable options to keep the Show Me state off the list of rogue states. Currently, the contest is scheduled for February 7, but the legislature will have an opportunity to override the governor's veto during a September 14 veto session and will also have clean bill with only the presidential primary date change to consider from the governor during the September special session. All this will likely be too much for the date to not be changed in some way. That said, Missouri Republicans may reconsider during September if Arizona and Michigan change their dates and move to January.

Best guess on a timeframe for a decision: September

Threat level: Low. As FHQ speculated the other day, Missouri Republicans risk raising the ire of the RNC if they back out on a planned move that the party within the legislature pushed in the first place. I reserve the right to be wrong, but Missouri will more than likely end up on March 6.

Moved 9/30/11 (April 3 primary) Wisconsin: Like Missouri, Wisconsin seems headed for a later date. But also like Missouri, Wisconsin Republican legislators may reconsider their sponsorship of legislation to move the presidential primary in the Badger state back to the first Tuesday in April if a host of states defy the national party rules. Bills from the early portion of the session are due to the governor by August 4, and if nothing happens with the presidential primary legislation by then, there will be a window from September 13-22 where the bills could be passed in the Assembly, the only legislative stumbling block at this point. The Senate already passed its version of the primary to April bill. If the legislature fails to act the presidential primary will remain on the third Tuesday in February. The figures have not been released, but holding the presidential primary in April with the spring primary will save the state some money. Whether that is enough of an enticement to move the primary is not known; not in the state Assembly anyway.

Best guess on a timeframe for a decision: September

Threat level: Low. Wisconsin may reconsider, but this bill looks to have been more a casualty of the extended budget bill debate and negotiation more than anything else. The primary just wasn't the priority the budget was. In September it should be.

If we tie all of the above together, there is a lot to look at in September. Arizona will serve as the first and most dangerous domino in early September. That will fundamentally affect every other undecided state's decision. Michigan, Missouri, Wisconsin and Colorado are likely to follow throughout the rest of September with Florida holding out as long as it can before setting a date on or just before October 1. That would leave Georgia as a free agent with a little more than a month to choose a date and simultaneously protect the ability to go as early as January 3. Secretary Kemp likely won't need that much time. That would put Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina in the position of setting dates -- dependent on what the others have decided -- throughout the end of October and into November.

Then, of course, there are the remaining caucus states. Though they carry less weight they can pick and choose their spots and whether they want to challenge the national party. Regardless, the decisions on dates within those state party organizations are likely to take place at summer meetings in August and September.

NOTE: This is an extremely long read, but I hope it's a super useful one all the same. A link to this guide will be added to the 2012 presidential primary calendar and will be updated as states continue to make their decisions.

--

¹ West Virginia Republicans voted in favor of allocating their 2012 delegates via a primary, but there has been some discussion in the Mountain state about moving the primary up. That said, the primary likely would not be moved to a date in violation of both national parties' delegate selection rules. The only way that West Virginia Republicans were a threat to go rogue was through the proposed caucus/convention system. The caucuses would have begun in January and culminated with a delegate-allocating convention on rules-compliant March 6.

² Though it is still listed the Rule 21 is tagged as repealed. This is likely due to the fact that the rule references consistency with state law. That rules repeal from the Republican Party is likely attributable to the North Dakota bill in 2009 that passed the legislature and was signed into law removing the link between the state and the party presidential caucuses.

Recent Posts:

Housekeeping: Minnesota Democratic Caucuses on March 6

May 8 Primary: Opposition Emerges & Quashes West Virginia Republicans' March 6 Presidential Convention Proposal

How Does Florida Respond to an Arizona Presidential Primary on January 31?

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

Housekeeping: Minnesota Democratic Caucuses on March 6

A while back FHQ wondered aloud about the fate of the Minnesota Democratic Farm-Labor Party's efforts to hold a February 7 caucus vote to allocate Democratic convention delegates, but to release the results on March 6. That delegate selection plan faced an uncertain future before the Democratic Rules and Bylaws Committee as we attempted to point out then. Obviously, any vote from a non-exempt state prior to March 6 is a violation of the 2012 Democratic delegate selection rules and would thus make any state in violation vulnerable to sanction from the national party.

FHQ brings this up now because Minnesota was among the states that gained delegate selection plan approval from the Rules and Bylaws Committee yesterday. We were, then, understandably curious to find out if the earlier plan had passed muster with the committee or if changes had been made in the interim in order to win committee approval. The answer from the Minnesota DFL appears to be the latter. A revised plan noting the incorrect nature of the February 7 caucuses has subsequently been posted on the DFL website.¹ The original post on the site has also been tagged "corrected version".

Now, there is no record of the original plan,^{2 3} and there's no real way of knowing the sequence of this change. The revised plan is dated April 16, just a couple of days following the closing of the public comment period. Again, there is no real way of knowing whether someone brought this to the attention of the DFL and they made the change under the guise of a "corrected version" or if there were at least two plans under consideration -- one of which was the vote-now-release-results-later plan -- and the wrong one was posted at the opening of the public comment period.

In the end, it does not particularly matter. What does matter is that the Minnesota DFL will hold caucus meetings on March 6 and not the February 7 date on which their Republican counterparts will initiate their delegate selection process. That, in turn, creates a change in the 2012 presidential primary calendar.

...and map:

[Click to Enlarge]

--

¹ Here is that note from the Minnesota DFL:

The draft with a February 7, 2012 Caucus date that was posed on March 17th was an incorrect version of the MN Natonal Delegate Selection Plan. The correct version is now available by clicking the below link. This version contains a March 6th, 2012 Precinct Caucus date to comply with National Democratic Committee Delegate Selection Rules.

² I'm kicking myself in retrospect for not stripping out that language from Section III.A in the mistaken delegate selection plan and posting it verbatim in my earlier comments.

³ Fabulous person that he is, Tony Roza at The Green Papers read this post and sent FHQ a copy of the originally-posted Minnesota DFL delegate selection play. Here is the language from Section 1.B.1 & 2 :

1. Minnesota will use a proportional representation system based on the results of the presidential preference ballots cast at the precinct caucuses for apportioning delegates to the 2012 Democratic National Convention. These ballot results will be announced on March 6, 2012.

2. The “first determining step” of Minnesota‟s delegate election process will occur on February 7, 2012, with precinct caucuses.

Major hat tip to Tony.

Recent Posts:

May 8 Primary: Opposition Emerges & Quashes West Virginia Republicans' March 6 Presidential Convention Proposal

How Does Florida Respond to an Arizona Presidential Primary on January 31?

What a January 31 Arizona Primary Does to the 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar

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

May 8 Primary: Opposition Emerges & Quashes West Virginia Republicans' March 6 Presidential Convention Proposal

The West Virginia Republican Executive Committee today decided the party will, unlike 2008, shun a caucus/convention system to allocate the majority of its presidential delegates in a May primary. Reports of a resolution to once again hold a Super Tuesday convention surfaced nearly two weeks ago, and in the time since at least a couple of county Republican Party chairs have voiced opposition to the state party repeating the delegate selection in a manner mostly consistent with 2008. Joselyn King at the Wheeling News Register aggregates some quotes from some among the anti-convention ranks:

"I am totally against the convention, and so is the Marshall County Executive Committee," Morris said. "I really believe it is the people's choice to select a president - not a person who is a delegate to the convention.

"I'm sure an awful lot of people feel differently," he added. "I got an awful lot of comments after from people who didn't like it. I didn't like it."

"It [May primary] may be too late - but then again, it may not," Morris continued. "It depends on where things fall. It may be a close election that goes later, and our vote will count. But what's the difference in having a convention to have an early voice if the people don't have a say? What's the difference?"

...and...

"I was at the convention before, and I felt uncomfortable about making a decision for the rest of the voters," she [Tyler County chairwoman, Rebecca Wells] noted. "It's not my place.

"It's nice to have candidates come into state and to hear them speak personally. But I wish more people in the state could have seen them," she added. "A convention is not in the best interest of the voters of West Virginia or of Tyler County."

The opposition case proved to be too strong and the resolution passed. The group of executive committee members was apparently sizable enough to threaten and take down the proposal. As such, the two county chairs (quoted above) out of 111 in attendance (or by proxy) and voting today were among those in the majority on the Executive Committee. The final vote was 77-25.

West Virginia will stay on May 8 on the 2012 presidential primary calendar. FHQ will have a link to any press release from the West Virginia Republican Party when and if it is made available.

Recent Posts:

How Does Florida Respond to an Arizona Presidential Primary on January 31?

What a January 31 Arizona Primary Does to the 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar

Arizona Governor Considering Moving Presidential Primary to at Least the Last Tuesday in December January

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

How Does Florida Respond to an Arizona Presidential Primary on January 31?

FHQ got a really good comment loaded with great questions in response to my "what impact will Arizona have on the calendar" post yesterday from regular reader, MysteryPolitico. What the questions and my response highlight is that Florida is still the one state to watch. The legislature, foreseeing this type of potential move from other states, gave the Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee the flexibility to absorb a threat such as Arizona to January 31 and still be able to go earlier. The likelihood, then, that Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina shift into December depends almost entirely on what Florida decides to do between now and October 1.

But before I get too far into that let's have a look at MysteryPolitico's comment:

I don't get the sense that Florida is looking to "break" the primary calendar, by which I mean, go so early that Iowa and/or NH are forced into December. Based on past public statements by the politicos in Florida, it seems like the important thing to them is that they go 5th, and they're willing to be "cooperative" on the exact timing.

Thus if Arizona (and possibly other states) move up to Jan. 31, then I figure Florida would probably aim for Jan. 24, but probably no earlier. You'd probably end up with something like this:

Jan. 5 IA
Jan. 10 NH
Jan. 21 NV, SC
Jan. 24 FL
Jan. 31 AZ (+maybe GA and/or MI?)

The scenario in which Iowa is forced into December is the one where Michigan goes earlier than Jan. 31. So I guess the relevant question is when will Michigan show its hand relative to when the other states have to decide? Brewer has to announce a primary date at least 150 days in advance (which means early September if she's aiming for Jan. 31), and Florida has to decide by Oct. 1. What's the likely timeframe for Michigan?

My response:

I'm generally sympathetic to the Florida argument. No, there is absolutely no evidence that anyone in Florida is seeking to move up any further than they have to. In other words, in the doomsday scenario, Florida is more likely to be later than earlier in that January 3-31 window. In fact, I've had a couple of off the record conversations with some well-positioned folks within the party that have indicated to me that there are some institutional/political factors involved that actually bolster this argument.¹ Florida is willing to slightly jostle the boat, but they don't seem to want to rock it. Unless some state, Michigan or Georgia, say, moves to January 10, Florida is not going to go on January 3, definitively pushing the early four states into December.

Now, I had that conversation before the Arizona revelation, but I think the same broad rules apply.

As to the alignment of the calendar, I'm at a point where I feel like a continuation of these sorts of moves is going to draw the ire of the RNC (again, see Rule 16.e.3). We are going to see some push back from the national party at some point. Actually, we may not "see" it since the RNC would very much like to handle this, in my opinion, in-house. To the extent that we hear about a push back from the national party, it seems to me that it will come from folks on the state party level.

That sounds ambiguous, so let me attempt to clear it up by laying out what the national party wants relative to what we're continuing to see from the handful of rogue states. In essence, we're entering a negotiations phase. When we see comments like this one:

"We are currently working with all states and state parties to abide by the rules of the Republican Party to ensure compliance," said Sean Spicer, communications director for the RNC.

...it increasingly, veiled though it may be, looks like two sides -- state parties and national parties -- trying to hammer out a deal. [And no, I don't think this hypothesis finds its root in the ongoing debt negotiations.] The RNC knows quite well that it is not going to get its desired calendar with Iowa kicking the process off on February 6. But the folks there also know that they don't have to sit idly by while a few states wreak havoc on the primary calendar. In fact, it has the means, as long as they ultimately enforce them, to decimate a state's delegation to the national convention. Of course, the RNC doesn't want to do that. The states know this, thus the apparent willingness to defy the rules.

That's why I say this is a negotiation. The RNC has the means to come down hard on the states, but doesn't want to use them. The states, recognizing this, are willing to slightly break the rules but not shatter them completely. The evidence is pretty clear here in both Florida and Michigan. The talk out of Florida lately has been about squeezing a technically non-compliant primary into a March 1-3 window. Similarly, Michigan's Republican Party has set a nearly equivalent, though slightly wider, February 28-March 6 window. Those are both, save the one compliant, March 6 date Michigan is considering, non-compliant, but only just so, relative to the RNC rules on delegate selection.

Obviously, Arizona has thrown a bit of a monkeywrench into the plans in Florida and Michigan much less at the RNC. But I'll go on record as saying that Arizona won't move up to January 31 and doesn't really want to. Why? It's a negotiation. Arizona is only trying to carve out its own spot early on the calendar, and has now submitted its initial offer to the RNC. Now arguably, Arizona already had its own spot early on the primary calendar on February 28. That week between February 28 and March 6, however, is beginning to look, tentatively mind you, compressed enough as to make most of the contests indistinguishable. From a candidate/media attention standpoint, all of those states within that window may as well go on the same date. That's not what Florida and Michigan and now Arizona want. No, they would rather have stand-alone primaries that give them the maximum attention.

It should be noted that the RNC, well, if I was there anyway, should want that too. That's why I think they are working toward this behind closed doors, but also waiting as long as they can -- to let the dust settle as much as possible -- before publicly "acting". If I was in a position at the RNC, and I'm not, the following is what I would be pushing:

Monday, January 9, 2012: Iowa

Tuesday, January 17: New Hampshire

Tuesday, January 24: South Carolina

Saturday, January 28: Nevada

Tuesday, January 31: Florida

Tuesday, February 7: Colorado

Tuesday, February 14: Arizona

Tuesday, February 21 or 28: Michigan

[Other states potentially likely to slip into February: Georgia, Wisconsin, Wyoming]²

Tuesday, March 6: Less-Super Tuesday

Not only does that give each one of the rogue states its own chance at the spotlight -- a week in nearly every case -- but it places on nearly every week a contest. That allows the RNC to avoid any gaps in the calendar like the likely February gap in the MysteryPolitico calendar above or similar to the gap that existed in the 2008 Democratic calendar between Mississippi on March 11 and Pennsylvania on April 22. That was a big hole in the calendar that, while it kept Democrats in the news, it also brought us the "clinging to guns and religion" tangent and the return of Jeremiah Wright. The RNC and the prospective candidates would rather have results in contests to talk about than idle time for opposition research fodder to emerge and dominate the news. That is especially true with an incumbent in the White House. The Republican National Committee doesn't want to afford Obama the opportunity to look and act presidential simultaneous with news being dug up about their own prospective candidates. Now, that is a fine line to tread since the field could be winnowed down to two rather quickly leading to a week-to-week, contest-to-contest sniping fest among the remaining candidates. Contest results, if there are any in that interim, would tend to trump any negative back and forth. At the very least contest results help to frame such exchanges better than in their absence.

As FHQ is apt to do, we have taken a series of questions, slightly answered them and proposed an alternative. The simple truth at this point is that we don't know what the calendar will ultimately look like. What we know is that no one wants the primary calendar to bleed over into 2011. We also know that the early four states and in addition Florida, Michigan, Arizona and maybe Colorado, Georgia, Wisconsin and Wyoming want a crack at early contests and still have the ability to move. Call it a hunch, but I'd bet the RNC also would like to retain some modicum of order to the process and not have a bunch of states compressed in January with a gap in February before March 6 opens the window in which non-exempt states should have been allowed to hold primaries and caucuses according to the rules. Finally, we also know that the RNC has the ability to stiffen the penalties on states if they go really rogue. Sure, that idealistic FHQ proposal above meets those criteria and might even make some sense. But we also know that that probably makes it much less likely that it will become a reality. As I said, if I was at the RNC that would be what I would be advocating now.

NOTE: FHQ began a post on the timeframe for the remaining states to decide on primary/caucus dates yesterday, but decided to wait and see how the events of today impact that before posting. Nonetheless, that post should answer the questions embedded in the final paragraph of MysteryPolitico's comment. Stay tuned. That should be up later today or sometime tomorrow.

--

¹ Directly from this conversation, this mainly consists of the idea that the RNC has a check on Florida. And believe it or not, it really doesn't have anything to do with the convention in Tampa. No, instead the national party has some sway in the Florida matter based on the fact that its co-chair, Sharon Day, is from Florida. Does Day have a significant say in where Florida ends up on the calendar? Yes and no. She will not necessarily be involved in the selection of a date for the Florida primary, but being that she aspires to move to positions other co-chair of the national party, Day would be, and indeed is, highly motivated to influence the decision-making there in an effort to save face. Again, this isn't a direct check. It is an indirect one based on someone who is connect to and in the Florida Republican Party political structure.

² Missouri is left off of this list. It will be very difficult for Republican legislators there to vote against a bill to move the primary to March 6 from the governor after already passing such a bill without risking further penalty from the RNC. Though some may like to stick to February 7, I think Missouri Republicans' hands are tied now.

Recent Posts:

What a January 31 Arizona Primary Does to the 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar

Arizona Governor Considering Moving Presidential Primary to at Least the Last Tuesday in December January

Members May Not Be Named to Florida Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee Until Late Summer/Early Fall

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

Missouri Governor to Add Presidential Primary Bill to Special Session

According to a press release from his office, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon (D) will include a "narrow" bill to address the timing of the Show Me state's presidential primary. The proposal would accomplish what the broader elections bill that included a provision to move the primary failed to after a gubernatorial veto: move the primary from the first Tuesday after the first Monday in February to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in March. The move would make the Missouri primary compliant with national party rules for delegate selection if passed and signed into law during the special session.

--

Nixon press release:

Gov. Nixon to include presidential primary legislation during special session

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- Gov. Jay Nixon today announced that he will ask the General Assembly to take up and pass a narrow bill specifically to move the date of Missouri's presidential preference primary to March 6 during a special legislative session in September.

During the regular session, the General Assembly passed legislation (Senate Bill 282) that would move the date of Missouri's presidential primary to comply with the rules of both the national Republican and Democratic parties. Gov. Nixon supported that change. However, the bill also contained provisions that would have eliminated write-in candidates in many municipal elections and would have imposed unnecessary costs for taxpayers to hold special elections. Because of those additional provisions, Gov. Nixon vetoed the bill.

The Governor's office has continued to communicate with legislative and party leaders about the importance of moving Missouri's presidential primary to March 6.

"I look forward to continuing to work with the General Assembly during the special session to pass narrow, bi-partisan legislation to make this important change," Gov. Nixon said.

Recent Posts:

What a January 31 Arizona Primary Does to the 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar

Arizona Governor Considering Moving Presidential Primary to at Least the Last Tuesday in December January

Members May Not Be Named to Florida Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee Until Late Summer/Early Fall

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

What a January 31 Arizona Primary Does to the 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar

The news last night out of Arizona is very likely to shake up the landscape on which the 2012 presidential primary calendar is forming. It is no real stretch to imagine how the various dominoes subsequently begin falling into place:

• Governor Jan Brewer moves the Arizona primary from February 28 (where the contest is currently positioned) to January 31.
• Florida takes going in the March 1-3 window off the table and begins looking more seriously at a primary on or before January 31 (in the January 3-31 window).
• Michigan becomes more of a question mark. The recent discussion out of the Wolverine state has centered in on a February 28 (where the contest is currently positioned) to March 6 timeframe for its presidential primary. That said, Michigan Republicans require some help from the Republican-controlled legislature to make anything other than the status quo (February 28) a reality. Currently, there is legislation active in the legislature to move the primary to, you guessed it, January 31.
• Missouri Republicans -- in the legislature and out -- seriously reconsider a veto override of the bill that would move the Show Me state's primary to March 6 and also the extent to which they will work in any special session to push a change that might move the state out of a prime February 7 position.
• Georgia remains a free agent throughout. The secretary of state has until December 31 to set a date for the Peach state primary.
• Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina wait it all out and go earlier than all the other states. But if Georgia remains a threat up until December 1, the four early states may be in a bind in terms of scheduling a primary/caucus and then having enough time to prepare for it.

With those guidelines laid out, let's look at some scenarios:

Scenario #1 (Doomsday):

Monday, December 5, 2011: Iowa

Tuesday, December 13: New Hampshire

Saturday, December 17: Nevada, South Carolina

January 3-31, 2012: Florida

Tuesday, January 31: Arizona, Michigan, Georgia (earliest date Georgia can hold a contest)

Tuesday, February 7: Missouri, Colorado

Tuesday, February 21: Wisconsin¹

Tuesday, March 6: Less-Super Tuesday

Analysis: This is that absolute worst case scenario -- well, unless some other states attempt to move into 2011 -- from the national parties' perspectives. I suspect, first of all, that the Democratic parties in any rogue states will hold later and compliant (post-March 5) caucuses should the above calendar become reality, and secondly, that the RNC would come down severely on any states taking part in the violation. According to the rules (Rule 16.e.3), the RNC Standing Committee on Rules can levy additional penalties on states found to be in violation of the delegate selection rules. And this may include the early four states as well. ...may.

Scenario #2 (Pragmatism):

Monday, January 16, 2012: Iowa

Tuesday, January 24: New Hampshire

Saturday, January 28: Nevada, South Carolina

Tuesday, January 31: Florida

Tuesday, February 7: Missouri

Tuesday, February 14: Arizona²

Tuesday, February 28: Michigan

Tuesday, March 6: Less-Super Tuesday

Free agent: Georgia

Analysis: This is what I call pragmatic for a couple of related reasons. No, it is not what the national parties want, but it doesn't stretch into 2011 either. For starters, this alignment is not as compressed overall. That's debatable, but allow me to explain. It is very compressed up front; probably more compressed than it would be in reality if Florida ends up on January 31. The early four states may shift up a week to combat that. Of course, Florida could follow them (all the way up to January 3). Overall, though, this allows most of these states to go not only early, but early and on their own. That combination is a recipe for having influence; just ask the group of states who moved up to February 5 in 2008 hoping to have some influence. Early and concurrent with other states -- especially bigger and more significant states -- is not how you gain influence over the nomination process, not directly anyway. If you can carve out a position for your state that is early and allows for a stand-alone contest, then you have provided your state with the greatest opportunity to have an impact on the nomination.

Certainly, I could come up with any number of permutations for how the calendar may end up given this Arizona news, but these two scenarios represent the two extremes that we're dealing with at this point in July 2011. Neither party, especially the RNC, is going to like it, but they can opt for "not what we want" or as I've heard it described "all hell breaking loose". Again, pragmatic will carry the day and is something that, while it does not follow the letter of the law, would be at least moderately palatable to the party.

As always, we shall see...

--

¹ The Wisconsin legislature is still deliberating on the date of the Badger state's primary. A plan to move the primary to April 3 has bipartisan support, but if there is a march to January and February by other states happens, Republicans in control of the legislature may reconsider their sponsorship of that legislation.

² This date is based on a rumor I have heard. Arizona celebrates its centennial on February 14, 2012 (exactly 100 years after the state gained statehood). Again, this is just a rumor. Staying on February 28 may end up being advantageous to Arizona as well

Recent Posts:

Arizona Governor Considering Moving Presidential Primary to at Least the Last Tuesday in December January

Members May Not Be Named to Florida Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee Until Late Summer/Early Fall

Conditional on Other States, Colorado GOP May Move Caucuses to February 7

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

Arizona Governor Considering Moving Presidential Primary to at Least the Last Tuesday in December January

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer is looking closely at the moving the Grand Canyon state's presidential primary from February 28 to at least the final Tuesday in December January according to a report from Howard Fischer of Capitol Media Services. The power of proclamation that was granted to the Arizona governor earlier in the 2000s was used by Brewer's predecessor, Janet Napolitano (D) in both 2004 and 2008 to move the state's presidential nominating contest up to the earliest date allowed by the two major parties, the first Tuesday in February. Brewer, however, is upping the ante significantly over that precedent. Said Brewer (via Fischer):

"Arizona is at the forefront of advancing solutions to national issues such as immigration and border security, Medicaid spending, and the financial crisis,'' Brewer said.

"It only makes sense that our state be positioned to have its voice heard loud and clear when it comes to the presidential nomination process,'' she continued. "Moving Arizona's presidential preference primary election into January would ensure that our citizens are major players in the 2012 campaign.''

The Arizona legislature failed to act to move the non-compliant primary during its session earlier this year. It is currently set for February 28. In essence, then, Arizona has nothing to lose. The state is already in violation of the rules and has no recourse. The proclamation power the governor has allows her to move the primary up but not back on the calendar.

Let the talk of November (or earlier) December caucuses and primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina begin! continue.

...in earnest.

Here's another item on the potential move in Arizona from Mary Jo Pitzl of the Arizona Republic.

Recent Posts:

Members May Not Be Named to Florida Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee Until Late Summer/Early Fall

Conditional on Other States, Colorado GOP May Move Caucuses to February 7

West Virginia Republican Chair Calls for Presidential Primary to be Moved Up

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

Members May Not Be Named to Florida Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee Until Late Summer/Early Fall

In a "Whatever happened to that presidential primary committee?" post, Kathleen Haughney of the Orlando Sentinel follows up with Florida Speaker of the House Dean Cannon's spokesperson, Katie Betta. Obviously, not much has been going on or news would have broken by now -- naming the committee members, setting a date, etc. -- on the Florida primary date front. But what Betta had to say about the time frame for the decision-making on the membership alone is fairly telling.

“We are currently monitoring the decisions made by other states with regard to their dates,” said Cannon spokeswoman Katie Betta. “Ultimately, Speaker Cannon supports choosing a date that will allow Florida to remain a relevant player in the process. For him, that requires selecting a date that is both early and unique to Florida. We will have a better picture of what that date might be as other states begin to make their decisions.”

No, that is not entirely newsworthy either. The reason the Florida legislature created the committee in the first place was to maximize the Sunshine state's powers-that-be the ability to set an advantageous (EARLY!) date. No, what was important was something else that came out of the discussion:

A spokeswoman for House Speaker Dean Cannon said the speaker would likely not name anyone to the committee until late summer or early fall.

If this is true, that the members of the committee will not be named until the late summer or early fall, then the committee is going to have to act pretty quickly. At the very latest, early fall is going to the last third of September; only a matter of days before the October 1 deadline by which the Presidential Preference Primary Date Selection Committee to set a date. To me that says that the committee phase is more a formality than anything else -- that a decision has already been mostly made and can be made seemingly on the fly prior to October 1. FHQ has certainly been apt to play both sides of this Florida story -- to game the entire world of possibilities in terms of the overall primary calendar. But in my eyes, this lends at least some credence -- that as well as some recent conversations I've had -- to the idea that Florida will indeed try and squeeze a primary into the oft-talked about March 1-3 window. I still say that Arizona and Michigan and maybe even Missouri will have something to say about that.

But then again, that's why Florida is waiting it out until those other states decide. October 1 will likely be late enough for them to achieve that. Well, except for Georgia.

Recent Posts:

Conditional on Other States, Colorado GOP May Move Caucuses to February 7

West Virginia Republican Chair Calls for Presidential Primary to be Moved Up

Sigh: Cite Your Sources, CNN

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

Conditional on Other States, Colorado GOP May Move Caucuses to February 7

Ernest Luning of The Colorado Statesman is reporting that the Colorado Republican Party is entertaining the idea of moving up its presidential nominating caucuses to February 7 depending on how other states position themselves on the calendar. Said state Republican Party chair, Ryan Call:

“We’re waiting to see what Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada do,” Call said. “The law permits us to move up to the first Tuesday in February, and we might consider that if a number of other states depart and (Republican National Committee) rules permit us to do so.”

When FHQ described the Colorado legislature's successful attempts earlier this year to move the Centennial state's caucuses up two weeks to the first Tuesday in March from the third Tuesday in March, we failed to discuss the portion of the law Call mentioned. Mainly, that was a function of the fact that that particular passage in the law was not being altered in the legislation considered and ultimately passed. And Colorado, never a threat to go rogue in the past, further did not seem likely to defy national party rules by invoking that part of the law. All the while, though, the possibility was always there.

That segment was added ahead of the 2008 cycle, giving both parties in Colorado the option of moving up to what was -- in 2008 -- the earliest date the national parties were allowing non-exempt states to hold contests.

I have said many times in the past that there would not be a stampede of states to the front of the calendar, and while FHQ still maintains that that is the case now, there are a handful of caucus states that may decide to up the ante and move into February. And they may or may not be compliant with the RNC rules as a result. Much will depend on how those states decide to allocate delegates. If the precinct level is non-binding, then the contest will be compliant (see Iowa and Nevada on the GOP side in 2008). If delegates are allocated during the initial phase of the caucus/convention process (see Wyoming, 2008), those states would be in violation of the rules. In the case of the Colorado Republican Party, those delegates are left unpledged (or were in 2008).

All this means is that we are getting closer and closer to a January (if not December) start to the primary calendar.

Recent Posts:

West Virginia Republican Chair Calls for Presidential Primary to be Moved Up

Sigh: Cite Your Sources, CNN

Michigan Republicans Eye Late February/Early March Primary

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

West Virginia Republican Chair Calls for Presidential Primary to be Moved Up

In a press item released on the heels of West Virginia Republican Party chairman, Mike Stuart, detailing the plans for a caucus/convention system of allocating 2012 presidential delegates, he also called on the acting governor and legislature to act quickly and move the Mountain state's presidential primary to an earlier date. Said Stuart in the news release:

“It is time to move up the WV Presidential Primary to ensure that West Virginians have more say in picking the presidential nominees," said Mike Stuart, Chairman of the West Virginia Republican Party. “We owe it to our coal miners and West Virginia families to ensure that the issues that are critical and unique to the future of West Virginia are reflected in the selection of a President of the United States.”

...and...

“Today, Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada lead the process of picking the next President. Those states have little in common with the drivers of West Virginia’s economy,” said Stuart. “By the time West Virginia picks its nominee for president, the selection is generally irrelevant and West Virginia families and coal miners get left behind in the process.”

...and...

“[Acting Goveror Earl Ray] Tomblin and the Legislature can very easily change the WV Presidential Primary and make a bold statement to the nation that a candidate for President has to go through and to West Virginia before getting to the White House. West Virginia is too important to the nation for it to continue to be irrelevant in the selection of a President.”

Stuart invoking the ease with which the acting governor and legislature could act piqued my interest. It would have been helpful to have had the mechanism by which this change could be made included in the release. Beggars, however, cannot be choosers.

The bottom line is that there at least a couple of complicating factors. First off, the West Virginia legislature adjourned for the year on March 18. That fact does not preclude the legislature from acting on such a change in the state's elections law. The legislature does hold regular joint, interim meetings throughout the time the legislature is technically out of session, and the legislature can act on legislation in those settings. From the West Virginia legislature's web site:

Interim Committees
Approximately once a month during the period between regular sessions - the interim - the Legislature gathers in Charleston (or another location in the state) for three days of committee meetings.

The Interim Committees usually are joint committees, with members of both the Senate and House of Delegates working together as single groups. For example, the Joint Standing Committee on Government Organization is made up of members of both the Senate Government Organization Committee and the House of Delegates Goverment Organization Committee.

The interim committees’ primary purpose is to provide a forum for the continuing study of issues relevant to the future of the state. During each interim gathering, members discuss and hear public comment on issues which may be addressed during an upcoming regular session. The joint nature of these interim committees allows members of the Senate and House of Delegates to consider issues and legislation which may affect both bodies in a similar manner.

Many times, bills to be introduced during the next regular session are drafted, studied and rewritten long before the session begins. Also, bills that did not pass during the previous session may be revisited during the interim period for reworking.

Some bills previously rejected by the Legislature still need some fine-tuning before the Legislature passes them into law. Hence, the interims allow for reconsideration, reworking and possible reintroduction at the next formal gathering of the Legislature.

The interim meetings also allow the Legislature to monitor the effects of current and recently-passed legislation. For example, if a bill has passed which alters the state’s environmental policies, an interim committee may be assigned to study its continuing effects on the state’s economy, our citizens’ health, and other related issues.

If the governor and legislature are so inclined, then, they could introduce, consider, pass and sign into law a change in the primary date during one of the monthly interim sessions. But that leads to the second issue that may stand in the way of the move (presumably to March 6 or earlier): money. The Democratic-controlled legislature would obviously have to help out Republicans during a political season that will find Democrats on the sideline with Obama the likely Democratic nominee. That said, there are partisan concerns here, but legislators would have to decide on either creating an all-new and entirely separate presidential primary election or move up the federal, statewide and local primaries from May -- and the state has held a May or June primary throughout the post-reform era -- to an earlier date. The former is going to cost a significant amount during a time in which the economy is not in the best shape. This is something that has been confronted in other states with varying results, but is no less pertinent here. The alternative would be to move everything up which would have an effect on not only the traditional date West Virginia voters are used to, but could also impact the filing deadlines and cause problems with the federal mandates of the MOVE act.

In reality, Stuart is likely fine with the caucus/convention system from 2008 being used again in 2012. The true aim is very likely to get the legislature to consider a move in the future. ...for 2016 or beyond. FHQ may be off base here, but because of the partisan implications in West Virginia, I don't think I am.

Time will tell. And at least we now know the mechanism by which the elections law could be altered while the legislature is adjourned.

Recent Posts:

Sigh: Cite Your Sources, CNN

Michigan Republicans Eye Late February/Early March Primary

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (7/19/11)

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

Sigh: Cite Your Sources, CNN

Now CNN is getting in on the act.

[Click to Enlarge]

Again, I don't want to bite the hand that sometimes feeds FHQ, but seriously, if you are going to stop by the site and then write a story, you could at least bother to say, "Hey, I read this somewhere else earlier today." And in CNN's case, they popped in with a specific "cuomo signs presidential primary bill" Google search at 12:45 this afternoon, and the CNN story on something that happened last week appeared at 5:21.

Strangely enough my initial post calling out CBS appeared immediately after the New York bill post. I don't particularly want to keep doing this, but as long this keeps happening, I have to stick to my word to continue calling out news outlets when they do this.

Recent Posts:

Michigan Republicans Eye Late February/Early March Primary

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (7/19/11)

Idaho Republicans Drop Presidential Primary in Favor of Super Tuesday Caucuses

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

Michigan Republicans Eye Late February/Early March Primary

This is technically old news -- from last week -- but I wanted to make note of it on FHQ and tie a couple of things together before making a broader point on the calendar.

For starters, the Michigan Republican State Central Committee's Policy Committee met last week and formalized a set of resolutions regarding the allocation of presidential delegates to bring up for a vote at next month's State Central Committee meeting. Michigan's Republican National Committeeman, Saul Anuzis, though, gives the better, inside picture of what is truly on the table. Unlike what was widely reported, Michigan Republicans are looking not just at February 28 and March 6 as possible landing spots for the Wolverine state presidential primary, but instead are using that as a range. In other words, like Florida, a non-Tuesday primary is a possibility.

What's more, Michigan Republicans may opt to defy the RNC delegate selection rules and take the 50% delegate deduction, but the Policy Committee recommendations are letter perfect in following the new proportionality requirements. As Anuzis puts it:

The Committee also recommended using the 2008 Apportionment method to allocate delegates. That is winner take all by congressional district and proportional for the at-large delegates based on the overall statewide vote. A candidate would have to get a minimum of 15% to qualify for any delegates.

Those congressional district delegates comprise the majority of delegates in any state's total and those can still be allocated in a winner-take-all fashion in 2012 -- even ahead of the April 1 winner-take-all cutoff. Well, to be clear, that cutoff is being reported as the point after which states can begin allocating delegates on a winner-take-all basis. In reality and in practice, that April 1 date merely separates states that can use winner-take-all allocation for all delegates (post-April 1 states) and those states that can only use that method for the congressional district delegates. Anyway, the Michigan plan is compliant with the RNC rules and could even move the threshold for receiving delegates from 15% of the primary vote to 20% (the maximum) if they so chose. [There is no indication that they will.]

--

What does all of this mean for the calendar?

Well, we are potentially looking a domino effect with this group of "rogue" states. FHQ has said this all along, but what happens in Michigan affects what happens in Florida affects what happens in Iowa/New Hampshire/Nevada/South Carolina. If Michigan carves out a space in between February 28 and March 6 that is very likely to impact Florida's decision-making in terms of a March 1, 2 or 3 primary. Florida Republicans have consistently voiced a desire for the fifth position on the primary calendar, and Michigan, not to mention Arizona on February 28, compromise Florida's ability to find a defiant, but not-too-defiant primary date.

Regardless, Michigan Republicans can only do so much at their State Central Committee meeting next month. The rest will depend on the Republican-controlled state government -- like actually moving the date from where it is scheduled currently: February 28. Should the legislature not act -- and recall there is legislation to move the primary to January -- Michigan would hold its primary on February 28.

Recent Posts:

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (7/19/11)

Idaho Republicans Drop Presidential Primary in Favor of Super Tuesday Caucuses

Gardner Speaks: New Hampshire Might Not Stick with Feb. 14 Presidential Primary Date

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