Missouri bill prefiled to reinstate presidential primary

If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. 

Missouri state Senator David Gregory (R-15th, St. Louis) has prefiled legislation -- SB 1139 -- in the upper chamber to reestablish the presidential primary election in the Show-Me state. The bill is exactly the same as the legislation the senator filed in February 2025 to bring back the primary that was eliminated by an act of the legislature in 2022. 

Here is an edited FHQ summary of the early 2025 legislation:

[L]egislation has also been introduced in the Missouri state Senate to bring back the state-funded presidential preference election eliminated by the General Assembly in 2022. SB 670, introduced by Senator David Gregory (R-15th, St. Louis), would basically reset conditions to where they were with respect to the parameters of the presidential primary prior to 2022. That is to say that the primary election would revert to a position on the presidential primary calendar following Super Tuesday. 

However, Gregory's SB 670 would schedule the presidential preference election for the second Tuesday in March as opposed to the second Tuesday after the first Monday in March as was the case prior to 2022. 

That is a small difference and would not have any impact on the positioning of any Missouri presidential primary reinstated under this bill for 2028. 

Efforts to reestablish the primary prior this latest bill have fallen short since 2022, often victims of the logistics of scheduling the presidential primary either concurrent with or in addition to primaries for other offices. Several possible proposed dates have emerged because of that: Super Tuesday, the week after Super Tuesday or the first Tuesday in April (alongside local primaries). None of them have passed muster with a majority of both the Missouri House and Senate. 

Perhaps 2026 will be the year.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

The 2028 Presidential Primary Calendar Plus 

Tracking the evolution of the timeline of delegate selection events that will determine the next presidential nominees

"Scoop: S. Carolina Dems enlist influencers for primary fight"

Holly Otterbein at Axios has the latest on South Carolina Democrats ramping up their defense of an early calendar spot:

"South Carolina will host a "creator" briefing alongside the national party's meeting in Los Angeles this week — a reflection of the growing importance of Democrat-friendly influencers as the party seeks to recapture young voters from the GOP.

"It's part of an increasingly hot battle within the party over which states will get the earliest slots on the 2028 primary calendar — and likely have outsized sway in determining who wins the Democratic nomination."

...

Noteworthy: One's mileage may vary on just how significant it is that South Carolina Democrats are turning to influencers in the state party's effort to retain an earlier (or the first) spot on the 2028 presidential primary calendar. More notable I would argue is the fact that Palmetto state Democrats are taking this approach in a public way ahead of and concurrent with the upcoming DNC meeting. No decisions will be made on the calendar this week, but South Carolina Democrats are following in the footsteps of their counterparts from New Hampshire who lobbied the Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) during the panel's October meeting. 

This activity will likely only escalate between now and when waiver requests to the RBC are made by state parties in the lead up to (and very likely after) the January 16 deadline. 

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Are Democrats really considering putting Michigan's primary first for 2028? 

The early answer appears to be yes. But why when the Great Lakes state is not a perfect fit for the national party's selection criteria?

"Iowa Democrats split on defying DNC in 2028 presidential calendar fight"

The Des Moines Register's Brianne Pfannenstiel has the summary of the Iowa Democratic Party survey on the 2028 caucuses:

"Most Iowa Democrats who responded to a state party survey want to be in the early voting window when it comes to presidential primaries, but they’re split over whether they should defy national Democrats to make it happen.

"The Iowa Democratic Party’s State Central Committee voted Saturday, Dec. 6, to release the results of a survey the party conducted to gather feedback about the future of its presidential nominating caucuses.

"The results offer insight but no clear consensus for a party that is continuing to grapple with the fallout of major shifts in the national presidential nominating calendar."

--

Survey of 750 Iowa Democrats (results):

Timing of the Iowa caucuses

Iowa should go first: 

44.7 percent

Iowa should go early: 

20.6 percent

Iowa should go on Super Tuesday (or later): 

12.6 percent

Don't care (where Iowa is on the 2028 calendar): 

22 percent

Following DNC timing rules

Work within the early state selection rules and accept the DNC's decision on timing (even if Iowa is not early): 

51.1 percent

Work within the rules but flout them if Iowa is not granted a waiver for an early contest: 

34.4 percent

Go rogue without regard for the decisions on Iowa's scheduling at the DNC level: 

14.4 percent

...

Noteworthy: The state central committee also voted at its December 6 meeting to not surprisingly move forward in the DNC's early state selection process. Those waiver proposals -- state party cases for why their contest should be early in the 2028 Democratic presidential primary calendar -- are due to the Rules and Bylaws Committee by January 16. 

The split results on the two questions above will not necessarily make it any easier for the Iowa Democratic Party (IDP) either in the state or with the national party. It is not the united, near-consensus front IDP Chair Rita Hart would otherwise like to present to the DNC and it means that no matter what the state party opts to do for 2028 with respect to the caucuses, that some sizable enough faction is going to be less than happy with the direction the party chooses. 

--

Much more on the results to the survey from on the ground in Iowa from John Deeth.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

How long will Democratic presidential contenders keep going to Iowa? 

Possible 2028 Democrats keep trekking to the Hawkeye state but those visits aren't guaranteed to last. Here's why.

"New York lawmakers aim to move 2028 primaries up to Super Tuesday"

Edward-Isaac Dovere at CNN has the latest 2028 calendar news from Albany:

"James Skoufis, a New York state senator who previously ran for Democratic National Committee chair, told CNN he will introduce a bill Thursday to move the Empire State’s 2028 presidential primary to Super Tuesday, traditionally the first time a large batch of states votes on the same day and often the day that presidential front-runners separate themselves from the also-rans.

"Skoufis has already lined up what he believes will grow into enough support to pass. His proposal has the potential to reshape the next White House race for Democrats, who would need to put together larger-scale campaigns early, given the size and diversity of New York’s electorate and the expense of the state’s media markets."

...

Noteworthy: The New York primary was a Super Tuesday regular from 2000-2008, even moving up to the at-the-time new February Super Tuesday for 2008. When both parties restricted February primaries for 2012, New York legislators moved to the current protocol they have used in every cycle since. Basically that has entailed leaving the primary in February until June-ish of the year prior to a presidential election at which time the legislature (in coordination with both state parties) sets the date and the delegate allocation rules for the cycle. The date of the primary then reverts to February at the end of the presidential election year and the process starts all over again. 

Skoufis' proposed legislation would break from that established post-2008 protocol. 

--

More at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

New York? On Super Tuesday?

It has happened before and history may repeat itself in 2028. What are the implications?