The Alabama legislation to shift the presidential primary in the state up a week to March 1 passed the state Senate on Thursday, April 9. SB 240, a bill sponsored by a Senate Democrat, passed with bipartisan support by a decisive 27-3 vote. The proposed move has been billed as an economic stimulus to the state of Alabama, coordinating the presidential primary with other southern states on March 1 in an SEC primary as a means of attracting the would-be presidential candidates (and the influx of cash and spending they bring) into the state.
The bill now heads to the state House for consideration.
Thursday, April 9, 2015
The Presidential Primary Impasse Between Chambers in the North Carolina General Assembly
The looming standoff between the North Carolina state House and Senate over the scheduling of the 2016 presidential primary is not anything new. However, Adam Wollner at the National Journal does add some depth to the story. The main cog in the Senate machinery blocking any effort to more clearly define the date of the presidential primary (move it back into compliance with national party rules) in the Tar Heel state is Senator Bob Rucho (R-39th, Mecklenburg), and Wollner found no lack of people willing to come forward to voice their opinion on the Matthews Republican.
A sampling:
--
A few additional thoughts:
Rucho mentions in Wollner's piece that the RNC created an arbitrary rule -- the super penalty -- after the North Carolina primary law was changed. However arbitrary that rule may or may not be, it was in place before the North Carolina presidential primary law was altered in 2013, anchoring the contest to South Carolina's. The late Bob Bennett, former chairman of the Ohio Republican Party, devised the more severe penalty -- often called the Bennett Rule in RNC circles -- and saw it passed with the rules package for 2016 at the Tampa convention in 2012. That clearly precedes the late addition of the presidential primary amendment to the 2013 omnibus elections bill that passed through the General Assembly in the waning moments of a special session. The potential run-in with the Bennett Rule/super penalty was something that FHQ raised immediately upon hearing that the North Carolina primary could change positions in July 2013.
So, there is a stand-off between the North Carolina House and Senate. So what? We know that. If reporters nationally or in North Carolina want to advance this story in a meaningful way here are some interesting questions to ask:
...and itself.
A sampling:
"Senator Rucho is kind of a legend here for being one of the most cantankerous and hard-to-get-along-with senators," said Nathan Babcock, the political director at the North Carolina Chamber of Commerce. "He's not a 'go along to get along' type person."
"Others have told me behind the scenes, 'Hey, we're going to move it,'" one senior North Carolina Republican official said, referring to the state senators who support a February primary. "But Rucho's never cracked. He's always said we're not going to move it unless we get something out of it."Fair enough.
--
A few additional thoughts:
Rucho mentions in Wollner's piece that the RNC created an arbitrary rule -- the super penalty -- after the North Carolina primary law was changed. However arbitrary that rule may or may not be, it was in place before the North Carolina presidential primary law was altered in 2013, anchoring the contest to South Carolina's. The late Bob Bennett, former chairman of the Ohio Republican Party, devised the more severe penalty -- often called the Bennett Rule in RNC circles -- and saw it passed with the rules package for 2016 at the Tampa convention in 2012. That clearly precedes the late addition of the presidential primary amendment to the 2013 omnibus elections bill that passed through the General Assembly in the waning moments of a special session. The potential run-in with the Bennett Rule/super penalty was something that FHQ raised immediately upon hearing that the North Carolina primary could change positions in July 2013.
So, there is a stand-off between the North Carolina House and Senate. So what? We know that. If reporters nationally or in North Carolina want to advance this story in a meaningful way here are some interesting questions to ask:
- The North Carolina law does not account for the fact that South Carolina Republicans and Democrats do not always or even often hold presidential primaries on the same date. In the event that there are separate dates for those primaries in the Palmetto state, to which primary is the North Carolina contest tethered? The North Carolina law provides no guidance. If the interpretation is that it has to follow the likely February 20 Republican primary in South Carolina, it is much more problematic than if it were to follow the February 27 Souther Carolina Democratic primary. The former would force the North Carolina primary into a non-compliant February 23 primary, triggering the super penalty. But the latter would mean the North Carolina presidential primary would fall on March 1, in compliance with the national party rules. If Rucho wants to maintain the status quo, this is probably the best argument to make: that there is nothing to worry about.
- But let's assume this story continues down the same road, straight into a roadblock. Furthermore, let's assume the North Carolina General Assembly is unable to pass legislation -- either in the regular 2015 session or a special session later this year -- and the primary is non-compliant. Well, how willing is the North Carolina Republican Party to stand idly by and just take the super penalty? Would they like Missouri Republicans before them in 2011 be open to switching to caucuses within the permitted timeframe in order to avoid the penalty?
...and itself.
Wednesday, April 8, 2015
Maryland Senate Bill to Push Presidential Primary to the End of April Passes House with Amendment
Yesterday, the Maryland state Senate unanimously passed the House version of legislation to move the presidential primary in the Old Line state back to the fourth Tuesday in April. Today, the Maryland state House returned the favor. The lower chamber passed by a 138-1 vote a slightly amended version of the the Senate-passed bill -- SB 204 -- that mostly lines up with the amendment added in the Senate on Tuesday.
Circularity of all of this aside, both bills to move the 2016 Maryland presidential primary back to April 26 have overwhelmingly passed both chambers now. Yes, there are small differences across the two versions, but those could be solved either in conference or by again bringing the bills into sync with each other in the originating chamber. Given how the bills have passed -- with just one lone dissenting vote in the House on both bills -- this is not a situation similar to Mississippi where a small difference between chambers killed the effort to move the presidential primary in the Magnolia state into the SEC primary position.
This legislation would schedule the Maryland primary for the same date as the contests in neighbors, Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Circularity of all of this aside, both bills to move the 2016 Maryland presidential primary back to April 26 have overwhelmingly passed both chambers now. Yes, there are small differences across the two versions, but those could be solved either in conference or by again bringing the bills into sync with each other in the originating chamber. Given how the bills have passed -- with just one lone dissenting vote in the House on both bills -- this is not a situation similar to Mississippi where a small difference between chambers killed the effort to move the presidential primary in the Magnolia state into the SEC primary position.
This legislation would schedule the Maryland primary for the same date as the contests in neighbors, Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Maine Democrats Plan for Sunday, March 6 Caucuses in 2016
The Maine Democratic Party at the end of March made available to the public its draft 2016 delegate selection plan.1 This further clarifies where the caucuses states will fall on the 2016 Democratic presidential primary calendar. Though the method of delegate allocation remains unsettled in the plan, the Sunday, March 6 date for municipal caucuses seems firmer.
Actually, the March 6 is the same date as the state party's "first determining step" (county caucuses) in 2012. The party held municipal caucuses primarily on February 26, but there was no binding presidential preference vote that took place. It would have been out of compliance with national party rules. Though it was the second step in the caucuses/convention process, the March 6 county caucuses were the stage where the presidential preference vote took place.
Sunday caucuses are not unusual for Maine Democrats. The party last caucused on Sunday during the 2008 cycle.
NOTE: FHQ will pencil these dates in on the 2016 presidential primary calendar, but please note that the plans are not finalized and are still subject to change. With very few exceptions, though, the dates in the 2012 draft plans for caucuses states did not change.
--
1 The above link is to the plan on the Idaho Democratic Party site. FHQ will also keep a version of the plan here.
Actually, the March 6 is the same date as the state party's "first determining step" (county caucuses) in 2012. The party held municipal caucuses primarily on February 26, but there was no binding presidential preference vote that took place. It would have been out of compliance with national party rules. Though it was the second step in the caucuses/convention process, the March 6 county caucuses were the stage where the presidential preference vote took place.
Sunday caucuses are not unusual for Maine Democrats. The party last caucused on Sunday during the 2008 cycle.
NOTE: FHQ will pencil these dates in on the 2016 presidential primary calendar, but please note that the plans are not finalized and are still subject to change. With very few exceptions, though, the dates in the 2012 draft plans for caucuses states did not change.
--
1 The above link is to the plan on the Idaho Democratic Party site. FHQ will also keep a version of the plan here.
Connecticut Republicans Looking Toward 2016 Caucuses with Presidential Primary Seemingly Anchored in Late April?
Two Republican-sponsored bills to move the Connecticut presidential primary to the first week in March have been bottled up in committee within the Democratic-controlled state legislature since being introduced in late January. Republicans in the Nutmeg state, however, are apparently not content to conduct the party's delegate selection process in a primary on the last Tuesday in April. The impasse has the Connecticut Republican Party considering a switch to caucuses at an earlier point on the 2016 presidential primary calendar.
Neil Vigdor from Hearst Connecticut Media:
Democrats in the Nutmeg state would/could continue with the primary. That would allow Connecticut Democrats to align their nomination contest with the primary in neighboring Rhode Island. If New York moves back into April that would connect Connecticut, Rhode Island and New York with contests in Pennsylvania, Delaware and likely Maryland.
Republicans, assuming the state party moves to a date in March, could caucus on March 1 which would group them with other primaries in the region in Massachusetts and Vermont.
Though there would appear to be an appeal to going earlier, even among Democrats, that is balanced by the fact that Connecticut Democrats stand to gain delegates for having an April primary and, if New York joins the discussion, for clustering its contest with two or more regional partners. [This was something that Joe Lenski and FHQ discussed in a Twitter back and forth back when the aforementioned Connecticut bill were introduced.] The Democratic nomination race is also shaping up to be far less competitive than the Republican race, decreasing the urgency to move up to an earlier calendar position among state Democrats.
--
FHQ really wishes Mr. Vigdor had not recycled some of the problematic material from his article two months ago on the two bills to move the Connecticut primary. We dispensed with that already.
Neil Vigdor from Hearst Connecticut Media:
A task force created by the Connecticut GOP is seeking legal opinions on whether Republicans could bypass the Legislature to adopt the caucus model, an alternative that the group's chairman, Bridgeport's Michael Garrett, said is intriguing to party.
"They're open-minded," said Garrett, a Republican State Central Committee member.
Based on preliminary discussions, a GOP caucus would be held in each of the state's 36 state senatorial districts, with the state party printing out standard ballots and local Republican Town Committees shouldering election administration costs, according to Garrett. If a change in the law is required, Garrett acknowledged that the plan doesn't stand much of a chance.Connecticut Republicans would be on firm ground legally if the state party voted to switch to a caucuses/convention system. That is a matter -- the rules behind the nomination of a party's candidate or in this case reflecting presidential preference in the state for that purpose -- that is left up to party discretion. Republican candidates would still appear on the April primary ballot, but the primary would be a beauty contest for Connecticut Republicans, falling after the proposed earlier caucuses that would have initiated the delegate selection/allocation process.
Democrats in the Nutmeg state would/could continue with the primary. That would allow Connecticut Democrats to align their nomination contest with the primary in neighboring Rhode Island. If New York moves back into April that would connect Connecticut, Rhode Island and New York with contests in Pennsylvania, Delaware and likely Maryland.
Republicans, assuming the state party moves to a date in March, could caucus on March 1 which would group them with other primaries in the region in Massachusetts and Vermont.
Though there would appear to be an appeal to going earlier, even among Democrats, that is balanced by the fact that Connecticut Democrats stand to gain delegates for having an April primary and, if New York joins the discussion, for clustering its contest with two or more regional partners. [This was something that Joe Lenski and FHQ discussed in a Twitter back and forth back when the aforementioned Connecticut bill were introduced.] The Democratic nomination race is also shaping up to be far less competitive than the Republican race, decreasing the urgency to move up to an earlier calendar position among state Democrats.
--
FHQ really wishes Mr. Vigdor had not recycled some of the problematic material from his article two months ago on the two bills to move the Connecticut primary. We dispensed with that already.
Tuesday, April 7, 2015
Maryland House Bill to Move Presidential Primary Back Three Weeks Unanimously Passes State Senate
The state House version of a bill to shift the Maryland presidential primary three weeks deeper into April passed the state Senate by a unanimous vote (47-0) on Tuesday, April 7. HB 396 got the thumbs up last week from the Maryland Senate Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee but with an amendment. That minor tweak does not affect the fourth Tuesday in April date described in the current version of the legislation, but was a part of the version that passed the Senate today.
Presumably the bill will now return to the state House for it to consider the changes made by the Senate. Similar amendments have been added to the Senate-passed version currently before the state House.
--
Overall, there seems to be sufficient support for moving the Maryland primary back to the fourth Tuesday in April to not only avoid the 2016 presidential primary conflicting with religious holidays next year, but to align the Maryland primary with contests in neighboring Delaware and Pennsylvania.
Presumably the bill will now return to the state House for it to consider the changes made by the Senate. Similar amendments have been added to the Senate-passed version currently before the state House.
--
Overall, there seems to be sufficient support for moving the Maryland primary back to the fourth Tuesday in April to not only avoid the 2016 presidential primary conflicting with religious holidays next year, but to align the Maryland primary with contests in neighboring Delaware and Pennsylvania.
For 2016, Idaho Democrats Opt for March 22 Caucuses
Like Washington, the state legislature in Idaho has been considering the merits of a stand-alone presidential primary during the 2016 cycle. But whereas Washington has a divided legislature, Idaho Republicans control both the legislative and executive branches. To this point in the 2015 state legislative session, that difference has affected how smoothly presidential primary legislation has moved though those bodies. Idaho is now a gubernatorial signature away from a March 8 primary. In Washington state, the state Democratic Party (and Democrats in the legislature) have held up legislation to also move into a March 8 position on the primary calendar. That is mostly due to the fact that, throughout the post-reform era, Washington Democrats have maintained a caucuses/convention system for allocating and selecting delegates to the national convention (even once a primary was established through the state initiative process in 1989).
Idaho Democrats have had a similar tradition over much of that same period. Even with a primary option available to them, Democrats in the Gem state have caucused as a means of indicating their presidential preference. Now that the Idaho Democratic Party has released the draft of their 2016 delegate selection plan, it appears -- just as is the case further west with Washington state Democrats -- as if that tradition will continue.1 The plan outlines the details of a delegate selection process that begins with Tuesday, March 22 county caucuses.
Of note is that the primary election legislation in both Idaho and Washington would align those states' primaries on the same March 8 date. However, Democrats in both states have opted for caucuses in lieu of the (potentially) available primary options. Republicans in Washington and Idaho are attempting to coordinate a regional primary, and Democrats may be trying the same thing with caucuses. But those caucuses will not fall on the same date and will happen with different partners. Whereas Washington Democrats have assembled a March 26 regional caucus with Democrats in Alaska and Hawaii, Idaho Democrats are opting into a potential subregional clustering of contests with Arizona and Utah on March 22.2
That would make for a week of Western primaries and caucuses on the Democratic primary calendar. All would fall into an area on the calendar -- on or after the fourth Tuesday in March -- where the delegations from those states would receive a 15% bonus for putting together regional clusters of primaries or caucuses.
NOTE: FHQ will pencil these dates in on the 2016 presidential primary calendar, but please note that the plans are not finalized and are still subject to change. With very few exceptions, though, the dates in the 2012 draft plans for caucuses states did not change.
--
1 The above link is to the plan on the Idaho Democratic Party site. FHQ will also keep a version of the plan here.
2 That depends on Arizona Democrats opting into the March 22 state-funded primary and Utah Democrats ironing out the details of their caucuses proposed for the same date.
Idaho Democrats have had a similar tradition over much of that same period. Even with a primary option available to them, Democrats in the Gem state have caucused as a means of indicating their presidential preference. Now that the Idaho Democratic Party has released the draft of their 2016 delegate selection plan, it appears -- just as is the case further west with Washington state Democrats -- as if that tradition will continue.1 The plan outlines the details of a delegate selection process that begins with Tuesday, March 22 county caucuses.
Of note is that the primary election legislation in both Idaho and Washington would align those states' primaries on the same March 8 date. However, Democrats in both states have opted for caucuses in lieu of the (potentially) available primary options. Republicans in Washington and Idaho are attempting to coordinate a regional primary, and Democrats may be trying the same thing with caucuses. But those caucuses will not fall on the same date and will happen with different partners. Whereas Washington Democrats have assembled a March 26 regional caucus with Democrats in Alaska and Hawaii, Idaho Democrats are opting into a potential subregional clustering of contests with Arizona and Utah on March 22.2
That would make for a week of Western primaries and caucuses on the Democratic primary calendar. All would fall into an area on the calendar -- on or after the fourth Tuesday in March -- where the delegations from those states would receive a 15% bonus for putting together regional clusters of primaries or caucuses.
NOTE: FHQ will pencil these dates in on the 2016 presidential primary calendar, but please note that the plans are not finalized and are still subject to change. With very few exceptions, though, the dates in the 2012 draft plans for caucuses states did not change.
--
1 The above link is to the plan on the Idaho Democratic Party site. FHQ will also keep a version of the plan here.
2 That depends on Arizona Democrats opting into the March 22 state-funded primary and Utah Democrats ironing out the details of their caucuses proposed for the same date.
Alaska Democrats to Caucus on March 26 But With a Caveat
The Alaska Democratic Party on March 17 released for public comment its draft 2016 delegate selection plan.1 Democrats in the Last Frontier have caucused throughout the post-reform era but have been all over the map in terms of when those precinct meetings have been scheduled. For half of the ten cycles since 1972 Alaska Democrats have begun their delegate selection process in early to mid-March. But the party has also chosen a smattering of February and April start points as well. It is a trendless pattern. The party does not, for example, caucus earlier in years when there is a competitive Democratic nomination race.
After mid-April caucuses in 2012, Alaska Democrats plan on Saturday, March 26 caucuses in 2016. Like 2012, Alaska will align the first determining step of its caucuses/convention process with those of Washington Democrats. Unlike 2012, those states will be, at least according to the available draft delegate selection plans, joined by Hawaii Democrats on March 26. The Alaska plan even states that the clustering of the three contests is by design; to form a Western Regional caucus. Though the three state parties would not be eligible for timing bonuses with a late March date, they would meet the requirements in the Democratic Call for the Convention for the (sub)regional clustering bonuses tacked onto the base delegation. The 15% increase is something that FHQ mentioned in the discussion of the North Dakota Democrats' plan.
Interestingly though, Alaska Democrats have planned ahead and provided themselves with an out should Washington and Hawaii be unable to participate in the proposed regional caucuses. If for whatever reason -- say, perhaps, a switch to a primary in Washington -- the March 26 cluster falls apart, then Alaska Democrats will caucus on March 1, the earliest date on which non-carve-out states can conduct delegate selection events. It should be noted that the Washington delegate selection plan is more definitive about the date of the caucuses, adding no such contingency in the event that the legislature provides for an earlier primary. Then again, Washington Democrats were the exception to the rule in 2012. The party changed the date of their caucuses after the draft delegate selection plan was released four years, pushing back a week to align with Alaska.
But Washington Democrats seem less likely to flip flop on the caucuses or primary question. That makes it more likely that this noncontiguous regional caucus will actually occur on March 26.
NOTE: FHQ will pencil these dates in on the 2016 presidential primary calendar, but please note that the plans are not finalized and are still subject to change. With very few exceptions, though, the dates in the 2012 draft plans for caucuses states did not change.
--
1 The above link is to the plan on the Alaska Democratic Party site. FHQ will also keep a version of the plan here.
After mid-April caucuses in 2012, Alaska Democrats plan on Saturday, March 26 caucuses in 2016. Like 2012, Alaska will align the first determining step of its caucuses/convention process with those of Washington Democrats. Unlike 2012, those states will be, at least according to the available draft delegate selection plans, joined by Hawaii Democrats on March 26. The Alaska plan even states that the clustering of the three contests is by design; to form a Western Regional caucus. Though the three state parties would not be eligible for timing bonuses with a late March date, they would meet the requirements in the Democratic Call for the Convention for the (sub)regional clustering bonuses tacked onto the base delegation. The 15% increase is something that FHQ mentioned in the discussion of the North Dakota Democrats' plan.
Interestingly though, Alaska Democrats have planned ahead and provided themselves with an out should Washington and Hawaii be unable to participate in the proposed regional caucuses. If for whatever reason -- say, perhaps, a switch to a primary in Washington -- the March 26 cluster falls apart, then Alaska Democrats will caucus on March 1, the earliest date on which non-carve-out states can conduct delegate selection events. It should be noted that the Washington delegate selection plan is more definitive about the date of the caucuses, adding no such contingency in the event that the legislature provides for an earlier primary. Then again, Washington Democrats were the exception to the rule in 2012. The party changed the date of their caucuses after the draft delegate selection plan was released four years, pushing back a week to align with Alaska.
But Washington Democrats seem less likely to flip flop on the caucuses or primary question. That makes it more likely that this noncontiguous regional caucus will actually occur on March 26.
NOTE: FHQ will pencil these dates in on the 2016 presidential primary calendar, but please note that the plans are not finalized and are still subject to change. With very few exceptions, though, the dates in the 2012 draft plans for caucuses states did not change.
--
1 The above link is to the plan on the Alaska Democratic Party site. FHQ will also keep a version of the plan here.
Monday, April 6, 2015
House Passage Clears Way for Idaho Presidential Primary Funding Bill to Head to Governor
With a bill to reestablish a presidential primary in Idaho already off to Governor Otter's (R) desk, the lower chamber has now also quickly passed "trailer" legislation to fund the election. Last week the Idaho state Senate passed SB 1178 and on Monday, April 6, the state House followed suit, voting to send the measure to the governor for approval by a 51-18 vote.
The previous 2015 bill, SB 1066, reversed the 2012 repeal of the presidential primary law, but created a separate presidential primary that will be held in early March as opposed to May, consolidated with the other primary elections in the Gem state. Now, that election can be carried out since funds have been appropriated via SB 1178. This bill only applies to the 2016 presidential primary cycle. Funding of future presidential primary elections will be considered by legislatures on a cycle by cycle basis.
The previous 2015 bill, SB 1066, reversed the 2012 repeal of the presidential primary law, but created a separate presidential primary that will be held in early March as opposed to May, consolidated with the other primary elections in the Gem state. Now, that election can be carried out since funds have been appropriated via SB 1178. This bill only applies to the 2016 presidential primary cycle. Funding of future presidential primary elections will be considered by legislatures on a cycle by cycle basis.
March 26 Caucuses for Hawaii Democrats in 2016
The Democratic Party of Hawaii on Friday, April 3 released for public comment the draft of its 2016 delegate selection plan.1 As FHQ has done with several other caucuses states so far, the focus here will be on the proposed date of the Hawaii Democratic caucuses. These draft plans must first be opened to public comment before being submitted to the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee for final approval or requested changes.
Like Washington state before it, Hawaii Democrats have zeroed in on Saturday, March 26 precinct meetings as the "first determining step" in its delegate selection/allocation process. The late March date is approximately three weeks later than the Wednesday, March 7 calendar position Aloha state Democrats used for its precinct meetings in 2012. Such a late March caucuses date would represent the latest date on which the Hawaii Democrats have begun their delegate selection process in the post-reform era. During that period, Hawaii Democrats have caucused no later than the second Tuesday in March.
NOTE: FHQ will pencil these dates in on the 2016 presidential primary calendar, but please note that the plans are not finalized and are still subject to change. With very few exceptions, though, the dates in the 2012 draft plans for caucuses states did not change.
--
1 The above link is to the plan on the Democratic Party of Hawaii site. FHQ will also keep a version of the plan here.
Like Washington state before it, Hawaii Democrats have zeroed in on Saturday, March 26 precinct meetings as the "first determining step" in its delegate selection/allocation process. The late March date is approximately three weeks later than the Wednesday, March 7 calendar position Aloha state Democrats used for its precinct meetings in 2012. Such a late March caucuses date would represent the latest date on which the Hawaii Democrats have begun their delegate selection process in the post-reform era. During that period, Hawaii Democrats have caucused no later than the second Tuesday in March.
NOTE: FHQ will pencil these dates in on the 2016 presidential primary calendar, but please note that the plans are not finalized and are still subject to change. With very few exceptions, though, the dates in the 2012 draft plans for caucuses states did not change.
--
1 The above link is to the plan on the Democratic Party of Hawaii site. FHQ will also keep a version of the plan here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)