Race to 1144: MD, DC & WI Primaries

Source:
Contest Delegates (via contest results and rules, and RNC, Georgia Secretary of State)
Automatic Delegates (Democratic Convention Watch)

Delegate breakdown (post-MD, DC & WI):

Changes since Louisiana (3/24/12):

• Romney: +92 delegates (Maryland: +37, Washington, DC: +16, Wisconsin: +33, North Dakota: +5, Tennessee: +1)
• Santorum: +10 delegates (Wisconsin: +9, North Dakota: +1)
• Gingrich: -1 delegate (Tennessee: -1)

Notes:
1) Mitt Romney won all of the at-large and automatic delegates in both Maryland and Wisconsin, all eight congressional districts in Maryland, five of eight districts in Wisconsin and all of the at-large delegates from DC. Rick Santorum won the remaining three congressional districts in Wisconsin.

2) Of the slate of 25 delegates selected at the North Dakota Republican state convention on March 31, five are pledged Romney supporters and one is a known Santorum advocate.

3) The Tennessee Republican Party finalized the congressional district vote count and delegate allocation this week. The effects were minimal. One delegate shifted from Newt Gingrich's total in Tennessee to Mitt Romney's column.

4) The allocation of the delegates in Georgia is based on the most recent vote returns published online by the office of the Georgia Secretary of State. The allocation here differs from the RNC allocation in Georgia. The above grants Gingrich one additional delegate (which has been taken from Romney's total). ***UPDATE*** Due to the way the Georgia Republican Party rounds fractional delegates, the FHQ count was off by one delegate (+Romney/-Gingrich). The congressional district count is unaffected (Gingrich 31, Romney, 8 and Santorum 3), but the way the at-large delegates are allocated to Gingrich and Romney -- the only candidates over 20% statewide -- is a bit quirky. Gingrich's portion of the vote would have entitled him to 14.6 delegates and Romney's 8.0. Under Georgia Republican rules, Gingrich is given 14 delegates and Romney 8. That leaves nine delegates unclaimed because the remaining candidates did not clear the 20% threshold. The candidate with the highest "remainder" is awarded the first delegate and the candidates over 20% trade turns until all of those delegates are allocated. Remember, Gingrich did not round up to 15 delegates (14.6), but that 0.6 gives him a larger "remainder" than Romney. The former speaker, then, is allocated the first of nine delegates. With an odd number of delegates leftover, Gingrich would have a fifth turn after Romney's fourth and that would end the allocation of those "extra" delegates. Gingrich would claim five to Romney's four. Of the 31 at-large delegates, Gingrich is allocated 19 and Romney 12. Please note that for winning the statewide vote, Gingrich is allocated the three automatic delegates. That makes the final allocation Gingrich 53, Romney 20 and Santorum 3.

5) The Alabama primary results by congressional district have not been released by the Alabama Republican Party. The allocation above is based on the RNC interpretation of the allocation.

6)  Iowa Republican Party Chairman Spiker was a part of the Paul campaign in Iowa and resigned his position upon taking up the post of party chair. While he has expressed his intent to side with whomever the Republican nominee will be, Spiker has not also directly signaled any neutrality in the race. The door is open for his support of Paul at a potential contested convention. While FHQ includes Spiker in Paul's delegate total, it is necessary to make note of the possible future subtraction of one delegate that would bring the Texas congressman's total to 26.

Recent Posts:
2012 Republican Delegate Allocation: Maryland

2012 Republican Delegate Allocation: Washington, DC

Americans Elect and the Electoral College

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

2012 Republican Delegate Allocation: Washington, DC

This is the twenty-eighth in a multipart series of posts that will examine the Republican delegate allocation by state.¹ The main goal of this exercise is to assess the rules for 2012 -- especially relative to 2008 -- in order to gauge the impact the changes to the rules along the winner-take-all/proportionality spectrum may have on the race for the Republican nomination. As FHQ has argued in the past, this has often been cast as a black and white change. That the RNC has winner-take-all rules and the Democrats have proportional rules. Beyond that, the changes have been wrongly interpreted in a great many cases as having made a 180º change from straight winner-take-all to straight proportional rules in all pre-April 1 primary and caucus states. That is not the case. 

The new requirement has been adopted in a number of different ways across the states. Some have moved to a conditional system where winner-take-all allocation is dependent upon one candidate receiving 50% or more of the vote and others have responded by making just the usually small sliver of a state's delegate apportionment from the national party -- at-large delegates -- proportional as mandated by the party. Those are just two examples. There are other variations in between that also allow state parties to comply with the rules. FHQ has long argued that the effect of this change would be to lengthen the process. However, the extent of the changes from four years ago is not as great as has been interpreted and points to the spacing of the 2012 primary calendar -- and how that interacts with the ongoing campaign -- being a much larger factor in the accumulation of delegates (Again, especially relative to the 2008 calendar).

For links to the other states' plans see the Republican Delegate Selection Plans by State section in the left sidebar under the calendar.


WASHINGTON, DC

The wand that is the RNC delegate selection rules has been waved. April 1 has come and gone and the Republican nomination race is now firmly entrenched in the "states can choose to be winner-take-all" zone. Nevermind Arizona and Florida.² Those two rules-violators aside, the Republican Party in Washington, DC becomes the first "state" to officially -- and without sanction -- allocate all of their delegates to the winner by majority or plurality the the District's primary today.³

Washington, DC delegate breakdown:

• 19 total delegates
• 16 at-large delegates
• 3 automatic delegates

First of all, this completely takes the fun out of this exercise. The winner receives all of the delegates!?! That's all? C'mon. Give us some gray area, DC Republicans. FHQ's readers demand it.

At-large allocation: Well, the allocation of the at-large delegates is winner-take-all. Once the DC Board of Elections certifies the primary results, the slate of 16 delegates and 16 alternates submitted by the winning candidate becomes the bulk of the DC delegation to the Republican National Convention in Tampa. [Recall that Rick Santorum did not file a slate of delegates and is not even on the ballot in DC today.]

Automatic delegate allocation: And while the three automatic delegates are like the automatic delegates in most other states -- free to endorse/pledge to a candidate of their choosing at any point in the race -- there is some need for clarification as to who these folks are. If you took the time to scroll down and peruse the draft of the primary rules you will see that races for the national committeeman and national committeewoman are also on the primary ballot. That said, as Matt from Democratic Convention Watch informed FHQ via email, the newly elected RNC committee members from DC will not assume their positions until the Friday following the national convention. That means that both Anthony Parker and Betsy Werronen (pledged to Romney) will be delegates to the RNC convention. Neither is on the ballot today seeking reelection to the Republican National Committee.

Fun fact (Well, some may view it as fun.): Current DCGOP chair, Bob Kabel, is on the ballot today running for the post of Republican National Committeeman from DC.

--
¹ FHQ would say 50 part, but that doesn't count the territories and Washington, DC.

² ...or Idaho and Puerto Rico. Am I right, Red White & Blue Fund?

³ DCGOP Rule II(G)(1) from a draft of the primary rules:

The Executive Director and/or Republican Board Member of the  DC Board of Elections shall certify the results of the Presidential Preference Primary to the DCRC's  Chairman. Upon such certification, the Chairman of the DCRC shall then certify to the Republican National Committee the elected slate of Delegates and Alternates pledged to the Presidential candidate who received the greatest number of votes at the Primary. [Emphasis FHQ's]

DCRC Draft 2012 Primary Plan

Recent Posts:
Americans Elect and the Electoral College

Romney Turns the Tables on Santorum/Paul at North Dakota Republican Convention

2012 Republican Delegate Allocation: Wisconsin

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

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (5/3/11)

Washington, DC and Oklahoma are on the move as is the presidential primary calendar.

[Click to Enlarge]

Reading the Map:

As was the case with the maps from past cycles, the earlier a contest is scheduled in 2012, the darker the color in which the state is shaded. Florida, for instance, is a much deeper shade of blue in January than South Dakota is in June. There are, however, some differences between the earlier maps and the one that appears above.

1. Several caucus states have yet to select a date for the first step of their delegate selection processes in 2012. Until a decision is made by state parties in those states, they will appear in gray on the map.
2. The states where legislation to move the presidential primary is active are two-toned. One color indicates the timing of the primary according to the current law whereas the second color is meant to highlight the most likely month to which the primary could be moved. [With the exception of Texas, the proposed movement is backward.] This is clear in most states, but in others -- Maryland and Tennessee -- where multiple timing options are being considered, the most likely date is used. Here that is defined as a bill -- or date change -- with the most institutional support. In both cases, the majority party leadership is sponsoring one change over another (February to March in Tennessee and February to April in Maryland). That option is given more weight on the map.
3. Kentucky is unique because the legislation there calls for shifting the primary from May to August. As August is not included in the color coding, white designates that potential move with the May shade of blue. Georgia, too, is unique. The state legislature is considering a bill to shift primary date-setting power from the legislature to the secretary of state. The effect is that the Peach state has a dark blue stripe for its current February primary date and a gray stripe to reflect the fact that a change from that based on the bill in question would put the future 2012 primary date in limbo until December 1 at the latest.
4. Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina are shaded on the map according to the latest possible date these states would have if Florida opts not to move their primary into compliance with the national party rules. Iowa Republicans and Nevada Republicans and Democrats have decided to accept the party-designated dates, but FHQ operates under the assumption that both will move to a point ahead of the earliest exempt state should one or more move or maintain a February or earlier date.
5. States that are bisected vertically are states where the state parties have different dates for their caucuses and/or primaries. The left hand section is shaded to reflect the state Democratic Party's scheduling while the right is for the state Republican Party's decision on the timing of its delegate selection event.

Reading the Calendar:

1. Caucus states are italicized while primary states are not. Several caucus states are missing from the list because they have not formalized the date on which their contests will be held in 2012. Colorado appears because the caucuses dates there are set by the state, whereas a state like Alaska has caucuses run by the state parties and as such do not have their dates codified in state law.
2. States that have changed dates appear twice (or more) on the calendar; once by the old date and once by the new date. The old date will be struck through while the new date will be color-coded with the amount of movement (in days) in parentheses. States in green are states that have moved to earlier dates on the calendar and states in red are those that have moved to later dates. Arkansas, for example, has moved its 2012 primary and moved it back 104 days from its 2008 position.
3. The date of any primary or caucus moves that have taken place -- whether through gubernatorial signature or state party move -- also appear in parentheses following the state's/party's new entry on the calendar.
4. States with active legislation have links to those bills included with their entries on the calendar. If there are multiple bills they are divided by chamber and/or numbered accordingly.
5. Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina appear twice. The earlier entry corresponds with the latest possible date these states would have if Florida opts not to move their primary into compliance with the national party rules. The second, later entry for each of the non-exempt states reflects the position the national parties would prefer the earliest states to hold their delegate selection events.

2012 Presidential Primary Calendar

January 2012

Monday, January 16:

Iowa caucuses¹

Tuesday, January 24:

New Hampshire¹

Saturday, January 28:

Nevada caucuses¹

South Carolina¹

A note on the placement of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina.

Tuesday, January 31:

Florida (bills: House 1, 2/Senate)

February 2012

Monday, February 6:

Iowa caucuses (moved: 2/8/11) (based on national party rules)

Tuesday, February 7 (Super Tuesday):

Alabama (bills: House 1, 2)

Arkansas

California (bills: Assembly)

Connecticut (bills: House)

Delaware

Georgia (bills: House)

Illinois

Minnesota caucuses (+28) (moved: 3/1/11)

Missouri (bills: House 1, 2, 3/Senate)

Montana Republican caucuses

New Jersey (bills: Assembly 1, 2/Senate)

New York

Oklahoma

Tennessee (bills: House 1, 2, 3/Senate 1, 2, 3)

Utah

Saturday, February 11:

Louisiana (bills: House)

Tuesday, February 14:

Maryland (bills: House/Senate 1, 2)

New Hampshire (based on national party rules)

Virginia

Washington, DC

Saturday, February 18:

Nevada Republican caucuses (-28) (moved: 12/16/10) (based on national party rules)

Nevada Democratic caucuses² (-28) (moved: 2/24/11) (based on national party rules)

Tuesday, February 21:

Hawaii Republican caucuses (+87) (moved: 5/16/09)

Wisconsin

Tuesday, February 28:

Arizona³

Michigan⁴ (bills: House)

South Carolina (based on national party rules)

March 2012

Tuesday, March 6:

Massachusetts⁴ (bills: House)

Ohio

Oklahoma (-28) (bills: House 1, 2, 3/Senate 1, 2) (moved: 5/3/11)

Rhode Island

Texas (bills: House)

Vermont

Virginia (-21) (bills: House 1, 2/Senate) (moved: 3/25/11)

Sunday, March 11:

Maine Democratic caucuses (-28) (moved: 3/27/11)

Tuesday, March 13:

Mississippi

Utah Democratic caucuses (-35) (moved: 3/25/11)

Tuesday, March 20:

Colorado caucuses⁵ (bills: House)

Illinois (-42) (bills: Senate) (signed: 3/17/10)

April 2012

Tuesday, April 3:

Kansas (bills: House/Senate -- cancel primary)

Washington, DC (-49) (bills: Council) (moved: 4/27/11)

Saturday, April 7:

Hawaii Democratic caucuses (-46) (moved: 3/18/11)

Washington Democratic caucuses (-56) (moved: 3/26/11)

Wyoming Democratic caucuses (-28) (moved: 3/16/11)

Saturday, April 14:

Nebraska Democratic caucuses (-60) (moved: 3/5/11)

Sunday, April 15:

Alaska Democratic caucuses (-70) (moved: 4/4/11)

Tuesday, April 24:

Pennsylvania

May 2012

Saturday, May 5:

Michigan Democratic caucuses (-111) (moved: 4/13/11)

Tuesday, May 8:

Indiana

North Carolina (bills: Senate)

West Virginia

Tuesday, May 15:

Idaho (+7) (bills: House) (signed: 2/23/11)

Nebraska

Oregon (bills: House)

Tuesday, May 22:

Arkansas (-107) (bills: House) (signed: 2/4/09)

Idaho

Kentucky (bills: House) (died: legislature adjourned)

Washington (bills: House 1, 2/Senate -- cancel primary)

June 2012

Tuesday, June 5:

Montana (GOP -121) (moved: 6/18/10)

New Mexico⁶ (bills: Senate) (died: legislature adjourned)

North Dakota Democratic caucuses (-121) (moved: 4/21/11)

South Dakota

¹ New Hampshire law calls for the Granite state to hold a primary on the second Tuesday of March or seven days prior to any other similar election, whichever is earlier. Florida is first now, so New Hampshire would be a week earlier at the latest. Traditionally, Iowa has gone on the Monday a week prior to New Hampshire. For the time being we'll wedge South Carolina in on the Saturday between New Hampshire and Florida, but these are just guesses at the moment. Any rogue states could cause a shift.

² The Nevada Democratic caucuses date is based on both DNC rules and the state party's draft delegate selection plan as of February 24, 2011.

³ In Arizona the governor can use his or her proclamation powers to move the state's primary to a date on which the event would have an impact on the nomination. In 2004 and 2008 the primary was moved to the first Tuesday in February.
⁴ Massachusetts and Michigan are the only states that passed a frontloading bill prior to 2008 that was not permanent. The Bay state reverts to its first Tuesday in March date in 2012 while Michigan will fall back to the fourth Tuesday in February.
⁵ The Colorado Democratic and Republican parties have the option to move their caucuses from the third Tuesday in March to the first Tuesday in February.
⁶ The law in New Mexico allows the parties to decide when to hold their nominating contests. The Democrats have gone in early February in the last two cycles, but the GOP has held steady in June. They have the option of moving however.

--

Recent Posts:

The Links (5/3/11): Quick Presidential Primary Hits

Has the Clock Struck in Arizona on the Timing of the Presidential Primary?

Colorado House Passes Senate Bill to Move Presidential Nominating Caucuses Up

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

DC to April 3

Slightly contrary to the immediately prior post, Washington DC mayor, Vincent Gray, signed B19-90 on Wednesday, April 27, moving both the presidential primary and the primaries for district-wide offices to the first Tuesday in April. The mayor had acted on Wednesday unbeknownst to FHQ -- and other media outlets -- but the DC Council's web page for the legislation had yet to be updated to reflect that as of Thursday of last week.

DC, then, moves to April 3, 2012.

[Click to Enlarge]

And for the record, we are awaiting gubernatorial action on several other bills across the country, including:

Move to March 6:

Oklahoma

Tennessee

Move to April 3:

Maryland

Give the Secretary of State the power to set the primary date:

Georgia

Cancel the 2012 Presidential Primary:

Washington

See the updated 2012 presidential primary calendar here.

Recent Posts:

Barring a Mayoral Veto, DC Will Move Primaries to April 3 Tomorrow

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (4/26/11)

Alabama House Votes to Move Presidential/Other Primaries to March

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

Barring a Mayoral Veto, DC Will Move Primaries to April 3 Tomorrow

The deadline for Washington DC mayor, Vincent Gray, to act on B19-90, the bill to move both the presidential primaries and the primaries for district offices to the first Tuesday in April in presidential election years is tomorrow, Friday, April 29. The DC Council passed the bill back on April 5 and transmitted the legislation to the mayor on April 14. After that point, the mayor has three options: 1) sign the bill in which case it becomes an act, 2) do nothing in which case it becomes an act, or 3) veto the bill in which case the council can choose to override the veto.

Given that the mayoral review period has almost concluded, the most likely action -- inaction, really -- is for the mayor to do nothing, thus enacting the law. Now, technically, the act would then go to the US Congress for review as well, but on non-controversial legislation like this, that should prove to be nothing more than a formality. That has been the case in the past anyway.

For our purposes here at FHQ, DC will move to the April 3 line on the calendar should Mayor Gray fail to act on B19-90 tomorrow.

Recent Posts:

The 2012 Presidential Primary Calendar (4/26/11)

Alabama House Votes to Move Presidential/Other Primaries to March

North Dakota Democrats Choose June Caucuses for 2012

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

DC Council Passes Bill to Move Primaries to April

The Washington DC City Council on Tuesday passed B19-90, a bill to move the presidential and local primaries to the first Tuesday in April. The presidential primary would shift from the second Tuesday in February and the local primaries would move up to April from September. The former brings the District in line with the national parties' rules on the timing of the presidential primary there while the latter move is in accordance with the federal mandate handed down in the MOVE act.

If signed by the mayor, this legislation would align DC with the Maryland presidential primary. Interestingly, both bills passed -- council or legislature -- a year to the day before the date on which the bills propose the primaries in each be held: April 3.

Thanks to Richard Winger at Ballot Access News for passing this information along.

Recent Posts:

National Democrats Urging States to Move Primaries Back?

Maine Democrats Propose March 11 Caucuses for 2012

"No new ground was broken" in RNC/FL Legislature Meeting over Presidential Primary

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

More on the Possible Mid-Atlantic Primary

FHQ is late to this, but we did want to document what happened late last week with the development of the so-called Mid-Atlantic Primary that would coordinate the primaries in Delaware, Maryland and Washington DC. Maryland and DC are moving ahead with plans to shift their respective primaries to the first Tuesday in April, but as of now, despite the mentions of it in press reports on what is happening in both Maryland and DC,¹ Delaware has remained quiet. Now, that doesn't mean that nothing is going on in the First state, but the progress on moving the presidential primary date there is lagging compared to their neighbors to the south.

And really there was no direct mention of either Delaware or DC in the testimony from Linda Lamone from the State Board of Elections last week in the hearings (March 16, 2011) on the state Senate bills before the Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee last Wednesday. There was instead talk of coordination with other, unnamed states and an overwhelming sense -- given the comments from the committee -- that the bipartisan support behind the move to April among the Maryland Senate leadership (SB 820) trumped the alternative bill (SB 501) to move the date to the first Tuesday in March. Meanwhile, the state House bill (HB 671) to move the presidential primary to April -- having had a similar hearing the week before -- was reported favorably from the House Ways and Means Committee and is on its way to being voted on soon after a second reading on the floor.

In Washington, the story is similar. An amended version of the introduced bill to change the dates of the presidential primary and that for local primaries in the District as well emerged from committee and received its first reading and vote last Tuesday. The 10-2 vote on the 13 member Council is indicative of the level of support the bill (B19-0090) has on the Council. The bill would now move those primaries to the first Tuesday in April as opposed to the second Tuesday after the first Monday in June.

And now Delaware the nation tuns its lonely eyes to you.

--

¹ From the AP:

Maryland political leaders, including U.S. House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, have been coordinating with Delaware and D.C. to hold their presidential primaries on the same day, to gain more national recognition, [Gov. O'Malley's lobbyist, Stacy] Mayer said. No agreement has been reached yet, she said.

Recent Posts:

Tennessee Senate Subcommittee Hearings Show Support for Primary Move to March over May

The 2012 Candidates: Pawlenty's In (...exploring mode)

Feb. 7 Minnesota Caucuses with March 6 Results?

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

Goodbye Potomac Primary. Hello Mid-Atlantic Primary?

Freeman Kloppot at the Washington Examiner:

The D.C. Council moved forward with a bill Tuesday to set the presidential and local primary for the first Tuesday in April 2012.

There's one more vote on the bill before it becomes final. On Tuesday, as they discussed the bill, several councilmembers raised the idea of teaming up with Maryland and Delaware to hold their primaries on the same day. And a potential "Mid-Atlantic Primary" is not beyond reach: Both Maryland and Delaware are considering the first Tuesday in April as well.

There are hearings this week in the Maryland Senate over the two competing bills there to move the Old Line state's primary back to the first Tuesday in either March or April. The latter seemingly has more institutional support. That in conjunction with what is happening with the DC Council appears to put some movement behind the idea of an early April primary for Maryland and DC. But this Delaware twist is a new one. There may have been some interstate discussions between Democratic Party officials on the state party level, but that has yet to materialize in Delaware in the form of legislation to alter the date on which the First state's primary is held. That said, as FHQ mentioned a couple of weeks ago, we are right around the same time period in the cycle in which the Delaware legislature proposed legislation to move the primary ahead of the 2004 primaries.

The only observation one can take from this subregional cluster is that it lacks -- with Delaware substituting for Virginia -- some of the same punch the Potomac primary had in terms of delegates at stake in 2008. The Democratic bonuses for going in April and as a group will help make up some of that difference. And the state Republican Parties will have the option of allocating delegates on a winner-take-all basis as well. The move, then, is not without merit.

Developing...

Recent Posts:

Oklahoma House Passes Bill to Move Presidential Primary to March

2012 Presidential Primary Movement: The Week in Review (March 7-13)

More Evidence of Florida's Willingness to Move Primary to Late February

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

A Two-Thirds Potomac Primary? DC Might Try to Align Primary with Maryland

A public hearing today by the DC Board of Elections and Ethics brought another 2012 primary date option there to the fore. Freeman Klopott from the Washington Examiner has more:

"I've taken the temperature of other council members and there seems to be some consensus around April 3," Ward 3 Councilwoman Mary Cheh told The Washington Examiner on Wednesday before a hearing on the city's 2012 primary date. Cheh heads the council committee that has oversight over D.C. elections. "We want to have a vote which serves as a presidential primary and a primary for local candidates," she said.

The options for this one have been all over the place. Early on there was talk of a July primary for local district offices and later when a bill was proposed, the talk shifted to holding concurrent presidential and district primaries in June on the closing date of the window in which the national parties allow states and territories to hold primaries or caucuses. With there being support among the leadership of both parties in both houses in Maryland to move the Old Line state's primary to April, though, and that being the likely destination for the primary there, council members in DC are reconsidering their date again. Both Maryland and DC would benefit from holding later (after March) primaries and, with the Democratic Party, by clustering together as the two did with Virginia in 2008.

Recent Posts:

The Clock is Ticking on States to Change 2012 Primary Dates: Delaware

Kentucky Bill to Move Presidential Primary to August Appears to Have Died in Committee

The Clock is Ticking on States to Change 2012 Primary Dates: Connecticut

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

DC Bill to Move Primaries to June

Early last week, we discussed the possibility that Washington, DC would shift both the district's presidential primary back and its primaries for other offices up on the calendar for 2012 elections. The next day (February 1) Councilwoman Mary Cheh introduced B19-90 which accomplishes just that. The legislation moves both sets of primaries to the first Tuesday after the second Monday in June (In 2012, that's June 12.); as opposed to the June or July possibilities mentioned before the bill was introduced. The presidential primary would move back from the second Tuesday in January and the primaries for local offices up from the first Tuesday after the second Monday in September.

Yeah, that's right, from January to June. The council moved the presidential primary from May to January for the 2004 cycle and moved the primary to February to coincide with Maryland and Virginia on the second Tuesday in February in 2008. And either there was a sunset provision on the move to February for 2008 that is not apparent in the resulting law or the current legislation incorrectly identifies the date of the presidential primary as the second Tuesday in January. Well, that or there was an effort during the 2009-2010 council session to move the primary from February back to January with no one noticing. FHQ is guessing sunset.

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

"New rules threaten region's 2012 primary clout"

Over the weekend, Freeman Klopott penned a nice piece in the Washington Examiner on the apparent break up of the 2008 Potomoc Primary, the subregional primary the brought the primaries in Washington, DC, Virginia and Maryland together (see full article below). The outcome was attractive enough that the Democratic Change Commission recommended to the Rules and Bylaws Committee that the 2012 Democratic Delegate Selection Rules include some provision that would entice state to hold similar "clustered" contests. From the looks of it, the addition of extra delegates was not enough to keep the model regional primary together for the 2012 cycle. There is still time in the legislative session, but with Virginia already close to moving its primary to March and DC considering a later primary that would coincide with those for state and local offices, it doesn't necessarily look good for the Potomac Primary in 2012.

Regional primaries are difficult to coordinate across states and especially state governments and even when they are successfully managed the initial intention is rarely met. Just ask the southern participants in the Southern Super Tuesday in 1988.

--

New rules threaten region's 2012 primary clout

by Freeman Klopott, Washington Examiner

New presidential primary rules passed by the Democrat and Republican national committees are busting the bonds that made the 2008 "Potomac Primary" possible and threatening the Washington region's clout in 2012.

In 2008, Virginia, D.C. and Maryland all held their primaries on Feb. 12. It was just one week after "Super Tuesday," when 24 states voted on presidential candidates. But there were no clear front-runners for the party nominations following the Feb. 5 votes, and the Washington region became key for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Forming the Potomac Primary guaranteed the Washington region electoral pull.

"We'd like to have a regional primary again to help make sure we remain important to the candidates," said David Meadows, executive director of the D.C. Democratic Committee.

But "right now both parties have coordinated what they want to do with the primary calendar because things got out of hand in 2008, " said political scientist Josh Putnam, who tracks the primary calendar on his blog Frontloading HQ. "Now states with primaries scheduled for February are stuck having to change that."

On Feb. 1, Virginia broke ranks. Its Senate passed a bill to set the commonwealth's primary for March 6. If that's the final date, then under the new party rules Virginia's Republican Party will have to change its delegate apportionments from its winner-take-all model to one that distributes them based on the number of votes each candidate receives. If the party doesn't, Virginia risks losing half its delegates at the Republican National Convention.

Meanwhile, Ward 3 D.C. Councilwoman Mary Cheh has introduced a bill tentatively setting the District's primary for June 5. Gov. Martin O'Malley is "likely" to introduce s bill setting Maryland's primary for April 3, spokesman Shaun Adamec said.

That's the first day new party rules allow for winner-take-all states to vote and, Meadows said, "we're hoping D.C. will join Maryland."

Adamec said, "we'd like to have a regional primary again, and hope the other states join us in April."

Down in Virginia, though, "we didn't think about a regional primary," said Sen. Jill Vogel, R-Winchester, who introduced the March 6 bill. "We wanted to have it on the earliest day we could."

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

DC to Move Back? Up?

Early indications from the Council of the District of Columbia are that a bill will be introduced to move the district's primary to early July 2012. No, not the presidential primary necessarily, but the primaries for other local and district-wide offices. There has been some push by the DC Board of Elections and Ethics to hold the presidential primary concurrently with the other primaries -- more than likely as a cost-saving measure like what California and New Jersey are attempting to do.

The problem with a July presidential primary is that it falls outside of the party-designated window in which primaries and caucuses can be held. Either the two sets of primaries will continue to be held separately or the two will be held together but slightly earlier so as to fall inside the window. And while the presidential primary may remain separate from the other primaries, the move to July (from the traditional September timing) is fairly significant. It would keep DC in line with the federally-passed MOVE act.

Regardless, this July timing is seen as a starting point.

[It should also be noted that DC held its 2008 presidential primary in conjunction with Maryland and Virginia on February 12, the week after Super Tuesday. Virginia has three bills proposed in its state legislature to move the commonwealth's primary back to March and Maryland has yet to act, though there has been some talk about when the 2012 primary will be held.]

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