"New Mexico’s push to move to the front of the line — or at least close to it — in the 2028 presidential primary calendar could place the state in the national political spotlight, while also causing some logistical headaches.
"While a Democratic National Committee panel recently voted to include New Mexico among the first six states in the 2028 calendar, shifting the state’s primary from early June to mid-February would require lawmakers to approve legislation during next year’s 60-day session.
"And it’s not yet certain whether such a change would mean moving up all state primary races — or just the state’s presidential primary."
...
"Lindsey Bachman, the communications director for Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver, said an analysis of the proposed date change’s impact is being conducted in the wake of the DNC’s recent vote. That review will include what laws would need to be updated and the associated costs, she added.
"But Bachman also confirmed at least some statutory changes will be required if the DNC approves the proposed schedule."
--
Noteworthy: These are common refrains in the primary movement space. Both the move-everything-from-June-to-February option or the one creating a separate presidential primary have price tags. The former would move state legislative primaries into the window in which the legislature in Santa Fe is still in session in 2028. That is a matter that has derailed more than a few proposed primary moves in the past. And obviously, establishing a new and separate presidential primary election comes with a hit to the state's budget, something that New Mexico Republican gubernatorial nominee, Greg Hull, raised in his reaction to the possibility:
"Before this Legislature votes on anything, the people of New Mexico deserve to know what it costs and who’s paying for it,” Hull said in a statement. “If the answer is that taxpayers get stuck funding two statewide elections in the same year so a national party committee in Washington, D.C., can hit its calendar — that’s a bill sent to New Mexico families for someone else’s convenience."
Hull added this to KOB 4 in Albuquerque last week:
"If this was just bringing one party primary forward, and not every party primary forward then I’d have to object to it, because it would become very expensive and very confusing on New Mexico voters,” Hull said. “Because if you had one primary in February and then you didn’t have another primary until June, that puts things into a real tailspin."..."I don’t see either party just saying, 'Yeah, if you move, we’ll move' and just acquiescing to that,” Hull said.
Left unmentioned by Hull or Republicans associated with the state party? Anything about the possibility of either the need for a waiver from the RNC or the potential RNC penalties associated with a February New Mexico presidential primary. It is early but there could also be a push for Republicans in the Land of Enchantment to shift to caucuses, a repeat of 2024.
--
No comments:
Post a Comment