"Virginia Democrats push for earlier spot on 2028 presidential primary calendar"

Brandon Jarvis at Virginia Scope has the story on Old Dominion Democrats' bid to become an early state on the DNC's 2028 presidential primary calendar:

"Most of Virginia’s Democratic congressional delegation is making the case for Virginia to be one of the early primary states in the 2028 presidential race.

...

"In making the case for an earlier primary, party leaders pointed to the state’s election infrastructure and track record.

"'Virginia seeks inclusion in the early nominating process based on its demonstrated capacity to administer a rigorous, fair, and transparent presidential nominating contest and its consistent record of national leadership within the Democratic Party,' the letter continues. 'The Commonwealth conducts elections through a professional, statewide system that is continuously active, uniform across jurisdictions, and capable of supporting a high-profile early contest in compliance with national party rules.'

"The letter also referenced the Virginia Democratic Party’s diversity and how it is more reflective of the national party than competitors like South Carolina, which typically holds an early primary but is a conservative state."

--

Noteworthy: The bid by Virginia Democrats for an early slot on the 2028 presidential primary calendar has something that most of those other state parties vying for the honor from the South do not: newly-minted, unified Democratic control of state government. Democrats in the commonwealth, then, can facilitate a date change today that their counterparts in Georgia, North Carolina and Tennessee cannot (and may ultimately not be able to). 

Maybe that will change after the 2026 midterm elections. Perhaps Democrats in neighboring North Carolina and Tennessee will overcome significant (gerrymandered) barriers and win control of state legislatures in one or both states. It is possible, though not probable depending on the extent of any blue wave that could materialize. And Georgia could elect a Democratic secretary of state (the actor that sets the date of the presidential primary in the Peach state). Maybe. 

But Virginia Democrats can make that happen now and that is seemingly why party leaders turned their focus toward contrasting an early primary in the Old Dominion with one from early state stalwart, South Carolina:

"Virginia’s electorate reflects the breadth of the modern Democratic coalition and provides a meaningful test of presidential candidates’ ability to build durable support across diverse constituencies and regions,” the letter states. “Candidates competing in Virginia must demonstrate organizing capacity, coalition-building skill, and governing readiness across urban, suburban, and rural communities that closely resemble the national electorate Democrats must assemble to prevail in a general election." 

Of course, South Carolina Democrats might counter -- in fact, they already have -- that the Palmetto state is a smaller and less expensive state and is the better option in the early window. 

Regardless, it seems worth pointing out that the southern region by far had the most applicants (five [5]) for early slots on the calendar. That does not guarantee that any additional (fifth) slot would go to a state from the region, but it does not hurt. Virginia might -- might -- not be competing with South Carolina.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Deadline day approaches for would-be early Democratic states for 2028 

Some thoughts from FHQ now that the deadline has drawn the attention of the media

"South Carolina Democrats file formal bid to keep first-in-nation presidential primary spot in 2028"

The Post and Courier's Caitlin Byrd takes a look at South Carolina Democrats' application to retain an early window slot in 2028:

"The national Democratic Party’s deadline to submit proposals to be part of the so-called “early window” of states in the 2028 presidential primary field expired Friday with South Carolina Democrats filing a bid they hope keeps it first.

"The competition is expected to be fierce. Other states are submitting their own packages, among them battlegrounds like Michigan and Nevada, and historic leadoffs like Iowa and New Hampshire.

"State Democrats say the Palmetto State has a strong case to remain at the front of the nominating process: It’s a smaller state that makes campaigning here cheaper, meeting voters easier and reaching a turnout bloc long seen as crucial for the party’s future success."

--

Noteworthy: It is interesting. All of the usual arguments are here for South Carolina being first. As state Democratic Party Chair Christale Spain told Byrd:

"We will again make the case that Black, rural, urban and Southern voters must lead the way in the First in the Nation primary."

It is a familiar diversity argument. But one other consistent theme in some of the arguments for a first-in-the-nation 2028 South Carolina primary from folks in and associated with the state party is that they do not see the 2024 primary in the Palmetto state as having been first. No, that is not a reflection of New Hampshire Democrats opting into the noncompliant state-run presidential primary and holding an unsanctioned primary before South Carolina's. Rather, it is a function of 2024 not being a competitive nomination race. 

This argument basically boils down to, "we have not really seen what the nomination system looks like with South Carolina as the lead." In other words, some in and around the state party see 2024 as something of a dry run, but a practice run and not a true test. 

South Carolina DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee member Carol Fowler made that argument:

"We haven't seen how it works with South Carolina first, because I truly did not count the last time,” Fowler said of the 2024 contest where Biden faced no serious primary challenger and months later suspended his bid. “We deserve a chance to see if Joe Biden was right."

And so did state party Executive Director Jay Parmley:

"We're making the case that the primary in 2024 was not an open primary,” said state Executive Director Jay Parmley. “There was an incumbent president on the ballot, and the current calendar has not been tested in a true competitive open primary system."

Neither is wrong. But it also is not clear how successful the party will be in advancing that particular part of the case to be first with the national party. 

What South Carolina Democrats continue to have on their side in all of this -- whether being first or merely among the early states -- is that it is among the easiest pieces to move around on the calendar. That may not pay dividends with respect to the competition for the first slot, but it is a feather in Palmetto state Democrats' caps that none of the other southern state party applicants can boast. 

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Deadline day approaches for would-be early Democratic states for 2028 

Some thoughts from FHQ now that the deadline has drawn the attention of the media

"Nevada Democrats push to host first 2028 primary, highlighting battleground advantages"

Kenzie Margiott at KRNV News 4 (Reno) shares the news of Nevada Democrats officially applying for a spot among the early states on the 2028 Democratic presidential primary calendar:

"The Nevada State Democratic Party has submitted a proposal to the Democratic National Committee requesting to host the first presidential nominating contest in the 2028 election cycle."

...

"Nevada Democrats argue the state’s majority-minority population, large working-class electorate, and status as a competitive battleground make it a strong testing ground for Democratic presidential candidates. Party leaders also point to Nevada’s relatively small size, two major media markets, and expanded voting access as meeting the DNC’s criteria for rigor, fairness, and efficiency."

--

Noteworthy: Similar to the situation in Michigan, Democrats in Nevada already have an early primary for 2028. In 2021, legislation established a presidential primary in the formerly caucus state and scheduled the election for the first Tuesday in February. That election will occur then unless there is a change triggered by the state legislature. Regardless, neither the state party nor the legislature may be inclined to make a change unless it is to move the primary even further up to secure the first position on the calendar. 

If Nevada does not make the DNC's cut at all, then there may be resistance to changing the current law regardless of what happens in the midterm elections with respect to control of state government. Unlike Michigan, the incumbent governor in the Silver state is a Republican who may balk at any changes to the status quo. [NOTE: Nevada Republicans opted out of the state-run presidential primary in 2024, choosing instead to conduct caucuses.]

--

Nevada Democratic Party statement on the application:

NV DEMS SUBMITS PROPOSAL TO HOST FIRST IN THE NATION PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATING CONTEST

As a majority-minority, working-class, battleground state, Nevada is best poised to nominate a candidate who can win in November

Today, the Nevada State Democratic Party submitted a proposal to the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee to be included in the early presidential primary nominating calendar and earn the first spot in 2028.

Nevada State Democratic Party Chair Daniele Monroe-Moreno released the following statement:

“There’s no better proving ground for any Democratic presidential contender than a union-strong, majority-minority, competitive battleground state. Putting a state that looks like America at the front of the calendar will put our party in the strongest position to win back the White House.”

In the proposal, we outline selecting Nevada as first is a strategic decision for the future of the party:

“The Democratic Party is facing a critical moment where we must be strategic in our efforts to earn back Latino support, craft an economic message that resonates across the country, begin the work to reach working-class voters, and turn out diverse communities … As a diverse, working-class, battleground state, Nevada is best poised to nominate a candidate who can win in November.”

Additionally, we underscore that Nevada is best positioned to be first in the nation because we fully meet all metrics outlined by the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee:

Rigorousness: “Nevada is the most working-class and most diverse battleground state in the nation. We have a majority-minority population, and we have the highest concentration of non-college educated voters of all battlegrounds. We are also home to urban, suburban, and rural communities, making us geographically diverse. Nevada looks like America and best represents the coalition we need to win in 2028”

Fairness: “Nevada is a small and accessible state of just over three million people with two media markets where presidential contenders can still meet voters face to face, and retail politics with a strong grassroots organization can make a real difference.”

Efficiency: “Nevada has some of the most progressive voting laws in the country, making both registration and voting widely available.”

This proposal has garnered support from prominent leaders and organizations including Nevada’s federal delegation, Culinary Union 226, Nevada State AFL-CIO, and Somos Votantes.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Deadline day approaches for would-be early Democratic states for 2028 

Some thoughts from FHQ now that the deadline has drawn the attention of the media

"Michigan Democrats apply to vote early in 2028 presidential primary"

Craig Mauger and Melissa Nann Burke at The Detroit News have the latest on Michigan Democrats officially applying with the DNC to be among the early states in 2028:

"Michigan Democrats submitted an application Friday in hopes that the battleground state will be chosen to be among the first to vote in the 2028 presidential nominating contest.

"In 2024, the rulemaking arm of the Democratic National Committee picked Michigan to be the fifth state to hold its presidential primary. Michigan's primary took place on Feb. 27 in 2024. State law currently says Michigan's presidential primary will be on the fourth Tuesday in February going forward.

"In an interview Friday, Curtis Hertel, chairman of the Michigan Democratic Party, said the new application would allow Michigan to potentially keep its late February date, which would be Feb. 22 in 2028, and make Michigan a place for early investment in 2028. Hertel said he's not expecting Michigan to move to the front of the line, where South Carolina was in 2024.

"'I have said several times that we are not pushing for first,' Hertel said of the order."

--

Noteworthy: It is worth noting that the Michigan presidential primary is already in the early window of the 2028 Democratic presidential primary calendar. Further action on the part of legislators in the Great Lakes state, then, would not be necessary so long as the state party secures a slot among the early states. Additional action would only be required if either 1) Michigan is granted the first (or an earlier) position or 2) the state is left out of the early state lineup. 

The DNC would, depending on control of Michigan state government following the 2026 midterms, likely encounter a far more motivated state party/state government in the event that Michigan is bumped up the order rather than left out of the early window entirely. Odds are not in favor of the latter happening at this point, but should Michigan be left off the list, then legislators may not find incentive to change the date to comply with the changes. That would raise the specter of a potential rogue primary and/or a battleground state party having to opt out of the state-run contest in favor of a compliant (later) state party-run contest (party-run primary or caucus).

I am not a betting man, but I would not bet on that scenario. It would not be in the interest of any of the parties concerned.

--

Michigan Democratic Party statement on the application:

STATEMENT: MDP Submits Application for Michigan To Be in 2028 Early Primary Window

Today, the Michigan Democratic Party formally submitted its application to the Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) for Michigan to hold an “early window” primary for the 2028 Democratic presidential nominating convention. Applications to the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee are due today.

Last year, the RBC established the process through which Democratic State Parties may apply to be in the early window for 2028. The resolution established that the RBC must select between four and five states for the early window and must include one state from each of the DNC’s four geographic regions (Midwest, East, South, and West). The RBC requires State Parties to hold their nominating contests after the first Tuesday in March unless specifically exempted. In 2023, Michigan passed legislation moving our presidential primary to the fourth Tuesday in February.

“For Democrats to have the strongest presidential candidate, the early nominating states should closely mirror Democratic voters nationwide and be representative of America. Michigan is the most diverse battleground state in the country and investments made on the ground early are beneficial to electing a Democratic president in the general election,” said Michigan Democratic Party Chair Curtis Hertel. “Michigan is a perfect candidate to be in the lineup of early nominating contests, and it’s crucial that our new national calendar for selecting the next president includes Michigan in an early position.”

“We like to say that ‘the road to the White House goes through Michigan.’ As the most diverse battleground state, Michigan embodies all the constituencies that will be key to winning the presidency. The middle class was built right here in Michigan, and our two biggest industries – manufacturing and agriculture — employ millions of hardworking people across our state,” said Governor Gretchen Whitmer. “Michigan is an ideal state to be included in the early window for the 2028 presidential primary process, and I wholly support the application submitted by the Michigan Democratic Party.”

“All roads to the White House go through Michigan. Key groups that Democrats need to persuade and turn out to win national elections are the backbone of our state. In addition to racial and cultural diversity, we have both industrial urban centers with manufacturing and more rural agricultural areas than many other states,” said Congresswoman Debbie Dingell. “A Michigan presidential primary is a down payment on the general election, giving us a head start on critical organizing efforts that pay huge dividends in November. I don’t think that any one state should have a lock on going first, but Michigan will always fight for a battleground state to be a part of the early primary process.”

“Teeing off our nation’s elections in Michigan will show the strength and relevance of the Democratic party and will remind people of every political persuasion across the country that, even in challenging times, progress is possible when we have the courage to show up and use our voice,” said Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks.

“Michigan is a decisive battleground state. In the last five presidential elections, Michigan voters have cast their ballots for the winning candidate-demonstrating that success here requires building the same coalition needed to win in November,” said House Democratic Leader Ranjeev Puri. “An early primary in Michigan ensures Democratic nominees are tested with the voters who will ultimately decide the presidential election.”

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Deadline day approaches for would-be early Democratic states for 2028 

Some thoughts from FHQ now that the deadline has drawn the attention of the media

And Michigan Democrats may not be pushing for the first-in-the-nation slot, but...

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?

"Democrats battle over who votes first in 2028, a proxy for the party’s future"

Maeve Reston and Dylan Wells at The Washington Post provide the latest on deadline day as state parties scramble to apply to be among the early states on the 2028 calendar:

"The lobbying campaign is one of the most aggressive in a battle royal among states seeking to get early spots in the party’s 2028 nominating calendar. The fight over the order formally begins Friday when about a dozen states are expected to submit proposals to the Democratic National Committee to get early spots, a privilege that gives their voters and politicians added influence and attention.

"The contest is not only important to the party and individual states involved but also exemplifies the broader debate among Democrats over how — both in its policies and its process — to improve their positioning for presidential contests.

"Many Democratic insiders argue that their viability could hinge on designing an early state gauntlet that better pressure-tests their 2028 nominee and more accurately reflects the racial, socioeconomic and geographic makeup of the party. The decisions of where to campaign affect which voters get to shape the conversation and the set of issues that candidates prioritize. Iowa’s longtime hold on the nation’s first caucuses, for example, is credited with helping farmers preserve subsidy programs, while South Carolina’s large population of Black Democrats helped Joe Biden overcome earlier losses in Iowa and New Hampshire in 2020.

This year, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina are among the states pushing hardest for the first spot, according to interviews with more than a dozen DNC members, party strategists and state chairs. Michigan, Georgia, North Carolina, Iowa and Virginia are also vying for either the first spot or at least a spot in the early window, before a busy day of state contests known as Super Tuesday. And the lobbying — which includes a fair amount of state-on-state jousting — has been going on behind-the-scenes for several months."

--

Noteworthy: One thing that is consistent across this round of news dispatches ahead of the Democrats' early state application deadline is that the group of states listed as "fighting hardest for" and/or likely to end up first in the order of states on the 2028 presidential primary calendar has shifted. It is a slight shift, but it is a shift. 

Calendar news trickled out in 2025, but what little there was tended to be dominated by mentions of three states likeliest to be at the head of the queue for Democrats in 2028: Michigan, Nevada and New Hampshire. In addition, the reporting throughout 2025 also painted a bleak picture of the prospect of the first state on the 2024 calendar, South Carolina. 

It is different now on both fronts. 

Michigan and South Carolina have seemingly reversed roles. The former is now seemingly to repeating the "just happy to be in the early window" line that was earlier associated with South Carolina. Meanwhile, the latter in now more often mentioned as a distinct possibility for the first slot. 

Why? What changed? [There is a question for you, reporters.]

Some of the explanation, FHQ suspects, boils down to the combination of timing and sources. It was early enough in the process in the summer that the notion of which state would lead the calendar in 2028 was still theoretical and sources were willing to speculate. Now that state parties are starting to actually apply for the honor of being sanctioned the first contest, there are some actual states in the mix, no longer just theoretically so. 

Earlier sources tended to have been DNC members as well and they often discussed which states could go first. This go-round of reporting ahead of the deadline appears to have incorporated more state-level voices in the discussion, voices that are actively lobbying to go first. There is a difference there in what is being covered.

Anyway, it should not be lost on anyone that regardless of the above distinctions between Michigan and South Carolina, the two states that are in both sets of reporting -- summer 2025 and now -- are Nevada and New Hampshire. That is not by mistake. Read into it what one might, but there is a signal in there and folks following the 2028 calendar process should probably take heed. 

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Deadline day approaches for would-be early Democratic states for 2028 

Some thoughts from FHQ now that the deadline has drawn the attention of the media

"Inside Democrats’ Brewing Debate Over Which States Should Vote First in 2028"

Shane Goldmacher at The New York Times has an update on the Democrats' consideration of the 2028 primary calendar as the early state application deadline approaches:

"Democratic Party insiders are beginning to puzzle over one of the more consequential decisions for the party’s future: which states should vote first in the 2028 presidential primary elections.

...

"The Democratic National Committee has set a Friday deadline for states to apply to be placed in the so-called early window, the month leading up to Super Tuesday.

"The debate has only just begun. But early whisper campaigns about the weaknesses of the various options already offer a revealing window into some of the party’s racial, regional and rural-urban divides, according to interviews with more than a dozen state party chairs, D.N.C. members and others involved in the selection process."

...

Noteworthy: Honestly, there is not much news in this piece. Goldmacher is merely providing a refresher on where things stand early in the DNC's consideration of the 2028 pre-window states. And things stand about where they have for some time: still at or very near the starting gate. That said, a couple of things...

1) Goldmacher spoke with sources from the usual suspect states: Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina and Michigan. In addition there were the obligatory (for the 2028 cycle anyway) quotes from party officials in Georgia and North Carolina, two neighboring states vying to theoretically replace South Carolina in the early window. Thus, it is the same seven states that have been routinely mentioned in these conversations since the 2024 election. 

In Goldmacher's telling of where the process is to name the early states on the Democratic presidential primary calendar for 2028, it is a status quo story. In other words, there may be a shake up to the order of states in the early window relative to 2024, but it will not see much change in terms of the actual states in that window outside of a piece or two (which is not nothing!).

2) Minnesota, which was in the mix in 2022 for the slot that ultimately went to Michigan on the 2024 calendar is not applying for an early window position for the 2028 cycle. It was not raised in Goldmacher's piece, but one has to imagine that this has much to do with former Minnesota DFL Chair Ken Martin now being at the head of the Democratic National Committee and wanting to avoid any appearance of playing favorites in the process.  

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Deadline day approaches for would-be early Democratic states for 2028 

Some thoughts from FHQ now that the deadline has drawn the attention of the media

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?

"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?

"Michigan lawmakers weigh moving primary date ahead of 2026 campaign"

Craig Mauger, Beth LeBlanc and Melissa Nann Burke at The Detroit News detail a bipartisan legislative push in the Great Lakes state to move the date of the primaries for state and federal offices:

"Michigan lawmakers, from both sides of the aisle, are weighing a new push to move the state's August primary to May, a change that could shake up next year's fight for control of state government.

"While there's been little bipartisan cooperation in the divided Legislature so far this year, members of the Democratic-led Senate and representatives within the Republican-led House have both been considering yet-to-be-unveiled proposals to alter the traditional August primary date."

--

Noteworthy: Could any change on this front in Michigan affect the scheduling of the 2028 presidential primary in the state as well? I'm glad you asked. Let's walk through some of the possibilities at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Would Michigan primary consolidation stop at state/federal and municipal offices?

Puerto Rico bill would create new avenue to canceling presidential primary

Legislation has been introduced in Puerto Rico to allow for the conditional cancelation of future state-run and funded presidential primary elections. 

Rep. José Varela Fernández (PPD-32nd) introduced PC 76 in January 2025. The measure would grant the government in the US territory the ability to cancel a presidential primary in the event that a presidential candidate has received the minimum number of delegates necessary clinch a nomination at least 30 days before the preference vote is scheduled on the island. 

The intent is twofold. First, the objective is to save money, not funding a choice-less primary vote. But also Varela Fernández's legislation would give the government the flexibility to call off a presidential primary vote should a repeat of the circumstances of 2024 arise again in future cycles. President Joe Biden faced only token opposition for the Democratic nomination and former President Trump wrapped up the Republican nomination well in advance of the late April vote. Both coasted to nominations that were decided well in advance of the two Puerto Rico primaries in 2024.

In the absence of the state-funded option, territorial parties would left to devise a method for conducting a presidential preference vote and electing delegates -- they are elected on the state-run primary ballot in Puerto Rico -- on their own. Both parties did as much in 2024 after the primary was canceled by the government in the territory.

Companion bill introduced in Ohio House to move presidential primary to May

Rep. Daniel Troy (D-23rd, Willowick) has for a second consecutive legislative session introduced a bill to move the presidential year primaries in the Buckeye state to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in May. Currently, Ohio statute calls for the consolidated primary, including the presidential preference vote, to be conducted on the third Tuesday after the first Monday in March.

HB 197 is similar to legislation that Rep. Troy proposed and failed to move during the 2023 legislative session. The aim is to eliminate the presidential year exception to the timing of primaries in the Buckeye state, making the scheduling uniform across all years. 

The measure is identical to legislation introduced on the Senate side earlier in the 2025 session.

Missouri House passes Super Tuesday primary bill

The Missouri House on Monday, April 14 passed HB 126, a measure that would reestablish a state-run presidential primary in the Show-Me state and schedule the election for Super Tuesday. 43 Republicans from the majority, including four of five from leadership, joined all but one Democrat present (42 of 43) in voting in favor of the bill. The majority of Republicans -- 64 in total -- voted against HB 126.

Moving forward there is both a short term prognosis for the legislation but some longer term implications involved. For starters, HB 126 was merged with HB 367 at the committee stage. Together the combined bill not only restored the presidential primary but it also expanded the window for early voting from two to six weeks. That expansion remains in the final bill passed on Monday by the Missouri House. In discussions with the lead sponsor of similar legislation in the state Senate, however, the expanded early voting window will ultimately be scratched, squaring the two visions of the legislation across chambers and, perhaps, easing the path of HB 126 in the upper chamber. Yet, that would likely require a similar coalition of some majority Republicans banding together with all or most of the Senate Democrats. 

Over a longer time horizon, however, there are some additional roadblocks to Missouri becoming a presidential primary state (rather than a caucus and/or party-run primary state) again in 2028. HB 126 does not include any appropriation for the presidential primary election. That was left to future legislatures that may or may not be as open to the election itself and/or the fiscal tag required to implement it. Even if HB 126 passes the state Senate and is subsequently signed into law, there still may not be a presidential primary in Missouri for 2028 and beyond. 

The set up would be similar to that which existed in neighboring Kansas for years. The Sunflower state had a presidential primary on the books for two decades before it was eliminated for 2016. But Kansas legislatures during that period routinely refused to fund the election and had to go through the process of "canceling" it every four years

--

Final vote on HB 126: 85 in favor, 64 opposed, 2 present (one from each party)

--

Related: 

4/1/25: Missouri House tees up final passage on Super Tuesday presidential primary bill

2/26/25: Missouri House presidential primary bills merged, deemed "do pass" in committee

2/14/25: From Missouri, a competing bill to restore the Show-Me state presidential primary

Missouri House tees up final passage on Super Tuesday presidential primary bill

The Missouri House on Monday, March 31 put the final touches on legislation to reinstate a state-run presidential primary in the Show-Me state. HB 126 would set the primary election for the first Tuesday in March -- one week earlier than the primary had been in presidential cycles of the recent past -- and widen the in-person absentee voting window.

The floor amendments added during the "perfection" session on Monday clear the way for a third reading and final passage of the measure in the state House. This is as deep into the legislative process that a bill has moved since a similar effort was defeated on the floor of the House in April 2023. None of the primary reinstatement legislation introduced during the 2024 session moved beyond the committee stage. 

--

Related: 

2/26/25: Missouri House presidential primary bills merged, deemed "do pass" in committee

2/14/25: From Missouri, a competing bill to restore the Show-Me state presidential primary

Missouri House presidential primary bills merged, deemed "do pass" in committee

Two bills -- HB 126 and HB 367 -- pertaining to the reinstatement of the presidential primary in Missouri got an initial green light in the state House Elections Committee on Tuesday, February 25. 

Functionally, the two bills have been merged. The language from Rep. Banderman's HB 367, reestablishing a presidential primary in Missouri, scheduling the contest for Super Tuesday and broadening no-excuse in-person absentee voting was presented as a committee substitute to Rep. Veit's HB 126. Veit will now be the sponsor of the vehicle as it continues to wind through the legislative process. 

In executive session on Tuesday, the House Elections Committee voted "do pass" on the newly merged bills by a 7-4 tally. All Democrats in attendance (3) supported the measure while committee Republicans were evenly split.

The committee's action removes one scheduling option from the table: the one that sought to exactly replicate the parameters around the Missouri presidential primary as it existed prior to being eliminated in 2022. Although the first Tuesday after the first Monday in March option is now gone, there remains a Senate version that would revive the presidential primary in the Show-Me state and place it on the second Tuesday in March. 

West Virginia legislator angles for February presidential primary

West Virginia state House Delegate Michael Hite (R-92nd, Berkeley) has again introduced legislation to create a separate presidential primary election in the Mountain state and schedule the contest for earlier on the primary calendar. HB 2440 would break up the consolidated May primary in West Virginia, creating a separate presidential primary to be conducted on the third Tuesday in February.

The measure is identical to legislation -- HB 5288 -- Hite put forth during the 2024 legislative session. That bill languished in committee and died without action at the conclusion of the session. 

Such a move would put both major parties in the Mountain state at odds with the rules that have existed for presidential nomination processes dating back to the 2012 cycle. A February primary would cost the state parties national convention delegate under DNC and RNC guidelines for being earlier than March.

Iowa House measure would create first-in-the-nation presidential primary option

After Iowa Democrats lost their privileged position atop the presidential primary calendar in 2024, at least one Democrat in the Hawkeye state is pushing back. Rep. David Jacoby (D-86th, Coralville) has introduced HF 484 to establish a state-run presidential primary option alongside the state's long-running first-in-the-nation caucuses. 

On the one hand, Jacoby's legislation would align Iowa with the aims of national Democrats. The DNC has made a point over the last several cycles of encouraging increased participation in the presidential nomination process by nudging state Democratic parties toward primaries (state-run if possible) over state party-run caucuses. This bill successfully navigating the legislative process in Des Moines and being signed into law would shift Iowa Democrats closer to that national party goal. 

However, that one step forward is made in conjunction with another provision that runs counter to the national party rules with respect to the presidential primary calendar. On that front, Jacoby's bill would set the date for the state-run presidential primary for "at least four days earlier than the scheduled date for any meeting, caucus, or primary which constitutes the first determining stage of the presidential nominating process in any other state, territory, or any other group which has the authority to select delegates in the presidential nomination."

Now, no final decisions have been made by the DNC about which states will comprise the early window contests on the 2028 presidential primary calendar. That will not be settled until the late summer/early fall of 2026 at the earliest. Therefore, this bill would not necessarily put Iowa Democrats in the crosshairs of the national party with regard to the timing of this proposed state-run presidential primary. But nor does the potential law provide much statutory leeway either. If HF 484 becomes law and Iowa Democrats do not secure an early slot on the calendar -- and not just early, first -- then the state party would run afoul of national party rules, incurring sanctions. 

Indeed, Iowa would not only run afoul of the DNC rules under those circumstances, but that primary would also trigger the similar state law in New Hampshire (the seven days before any similar contest provision). And that would set off a race to see which state could organize the earliest (unsanctioned) contest the fastest, all under the auspices of state law in both cases. 

Those are all concerns that are layered into this particular bill. But there are issues back home in the Hawkeye state as well. Chief among those issues is that Democrats are locked out of power from the decision-making positions in Iowa. In other words, Jacoby would have to get at least some, if not a lot of buy-in from Republicans who hold the reins of power in both the legislative and executive branches in the state. It is not clear that Iowa Republicans, in or out of the legislature, would go for this bill. After all, the Republican Party of Iowa stuck with the first-in-the-nation caucuses in 2024 -- it was consistent with Republican National Committee calendar rules -- while state Democrats abandoned them for a vote-by-mail party-run presidential primary to stay within their national party's guidelines. 

An all new, state-run primary would also ostensibly require state funds to implement the legislation. There is no fiscal note included in this legislation, but any price tag would likely be met with some resistance from Republican legislators, who may or may not prefer the caucuses to a primary option. However, keeping Iowa first, as this bill does, would potentially win over some support for a primary option. Yet, given the presence of the caucus option already, it would likely be minimal. 

Some Iowa Democrats have been clamoring for a presidential primary option since 2023-24, and while this bill may meet that wish, it faces an uphill climb for a host of reasons.

--

NOTE: Counter to the reporting from KAAL TV in southern Minnesota, this legislation would not "end the [presidential] caucus system" in Iowa. Rather, it would provide for a state-run primary option if a state party chair requested such an election from the state commissioner of elections. The caucuses would remain an option, the default option in fact.

An early update on presidential primary movement in 2025

There are likely much larger fish to fry at the moment, and besides, it remains very early in the 2028 presidential nomination cycle. But actors on the state level in state legislatures across the country are laying the groundwork for the next round of (state-funded) presidential primary elections now. 

But as was the case during the 2024 legislative sessions in state capitols around the nation, much of the work is predominantly of two different varieties. First, legislators in states with recently eliminated presidential primary elections have attempted to bring those elections back. Much of the 2024 activity on that front was in an effort to rescue the elections for 2024. 

As it turned out those efforts were for naught. Legislators in neither Idaho nor Missouri were successful during the early months of the presidential election year in reviving state-funded presidential preference elections. And so far, only a handful of bills in Missouri have been introduced in 2025 to reverse the elimination of the primary in the Show-Me state.

The other grouping of legislation at the state level is a series of bills that have been raised in the past and have gone nowhere. Whether that changes in 2025 is yet to be determined, but if past is prelude, then many of these measures will gather dust in committee before dying at the end of legislative sessions. Count bills in Hawaii, New York, Ohio and Oregon among this group. 

In total, this is about what one should expect of legislation to shift presidential primaries around on the calendar this far in advance of another series of nomination contests. Very simply, the urgency is just not there this far out, nor is the attention with other more pressing matters before legislators at both the national and state levels. And that is reflected in the figure above: The success rate of primary legislation in the year following a presidential election is very low. It is low anyway, regardless of year, but the activity is at its nadir in the year after and typically at its peak during the session in the year immediately prior to a presidential election year. 

--

For more on the 2028 presidential primary calendar see the bare bones up-to-date calendar here and the 2028 presidential primary calendar plus here at FHQ Plus. Last update here.

Alternate Missouri Senate bill would reestablish presidential primary and schedule for April

The fourth of four bills currently before the Missouri General Assembly in its 2025 state legislative session would also bring back the presidential primary nixed in 2022 but schedule the election for yet another -- a fourth -- distinct date on the calendar. 

SB 417, introduced by Senator Jill Carter (R-32nd, Jaspar/Newton), resurrects ideas first brought forth in discussions over similar legislation in 2023. Namely, the objective, then as now, would be to consolidate the presidential preference primary with the general election for municipal offices on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in April. Only, the 2025 version contains a twist. 

The catch to conducting concurrent presidential primaries with a general election for municipal offices is an administrative one. The consolidation would require election administrators to simultaneously print both partisan primary ballots and effectively nonpartisan general election ballots as one across all municipalities (and the offices contained therein) together. It was that issue that played at least some role in derailing the push to reinstate the presidential primary in the Show-Me state before 2024: Administrators balked at the potential complexity introduced into the process. 

However, there is a fix to that snag in Carter's SB 417. The senator would have all presidential candidates regardless of party listed on the ballot for the presidential primary/municipal general election. There would be no Democratic ballot, no Republican ballot, no ballot for those wishing to simply vote in municipal elections. Instead, everything would be on one ballot that all Missouri voters turning out in early April would receive. Results would then be delivered to state party chairs who would in turn allocate delegate slots to candidates identified with the respective parties. 

Left unspecified is how the uncommitted line (or lines) on the ballot would be treated. If there is merely one uncommitted option, then it could serve as a catch-all that is difficult to parse out along partisan lines for the purposes of allocation. That problem could potentially be solved by placing an uncommitted (Democratic) line in addition to an uncommitted (Republican) option on the ballot. But it is not clear in Carter's legislation which is the prescribed protocol. 

So, one leftover administrative issue is addressed, but in so doing, a possible unintended consequence is introduced. 

On the Missouri Senate side, bill would schedule a reinstated presidential primary in March

There are two bills currently in the Missouri state House to reinstate a presidential primary in the Show-Me state, but there is also action on the matter in the upper chamber in Jefferson City. 

In fact, legislation 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. One measure, SB 670 introduced by Senator David Gregory (R-15th, St. Louis), is more in line with HB 126 which 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. 

But the two are not identical. The House version replicates the pre-2022 language in state law. In it, the primary would fall on the second Tuesday after the first Monday in March. However, Gregory's SB 670 strips out the latter portion and simply schedules the presidential preference election for the second Tuesday in March. In most years, including 2028, there is no difference between the two: the second Tuesday after the first Monday in March is often the second Tuesday in March. 

The exception is when March begins on a Tuesday. When March 1 falls on a Tuesday, then the second Tuesday in March is March 8. But the second Tuesday after the first Monday in March is not until March 15. It is the same reason it appears as if the Missouri presidential primary moved up a week from 2016 to 2020. In the former year, March began on a Tuesday. 

In the grand scheme of things, none of this is all that consequential. Yet, it is meaningful that none of the three Missouri bills discussed in this space thus far in 2025 are aligned on what the date of any reinstated presidential primary would be. And that is part of what derailed the 2023 efforts to revive the presidential primary in the Show-Me state.