Another one bites the dust: Missouri Senate bill stripped of provision to reestablish a presidential primary

Same story, different chamber. 

Last week, a sprawling elections bill passed the Missouri state House Elections Committee, but saw a provision reestablishing a presidential primary in the Show-Me state and scheduling the election for Super Tuesday stripped out in the process. 

Later on in the week, the Senate Local Government, Elections and Pensions Committee held a hearing on a similar legislation on its side of the capitol. And then the same thing happened in the upper chamber this week that happened to the House version a week ago: A substitute version of the bill passed the committee but without the presidential primary measure included.

Granted, comments from the Senate bill's sponsor in the initial hearing did not exactly bode well for the presidential primary section of the legislation. Sen. Sandy Crawford (R-28th, Buffalo), via Sarah Kellogg at St. Louis Public Radio:

"Crawford said that she wasn’t a fan of reinstating the primary, but that a lot of people want it back.

"'One of the things that I did hear that I thought was legitimate, if we don't have the presidential preferential primary, there's no way for military overseas to have any kind of a voice in the process,' Crawford said."

This notion of military personnel being disenfranchised by caucuses is not a new one in the on-again, off-again presidential primary dialog in the Missouri General Assembly. Rep. Rudy Veit (R-59th, Wardsville), who has a primary bill of his own still active on the House side, has raised it with regularity in the time since the Missouri presidential primary was eliminated in 2022.

However, once again, those concerns took a back seat to the price tag associated with the presidential primary. As Kellogg reported on the recent committee hearing on SB 836:

"Sen. Jamie Burger (R-27th, Benton), expressed concern over paying to conduct the presidential primary, especially with the necessity of a tighter state budget."

And those cost issues are often tied up with others in the context of these discussions, from the binding of national convention delegates to Missouri's open primary. 

--

Noteworthy: At the start of the 2026 session in Jefferson City there were five bills that had presidential primary provisions appended to them. Two of those bills, one in the state House and another very similar to it in the state Senate, have moved out of committee but without the sections devoted to bringing the presidential primary back in the Show-Me state. The sponsor on the House side has said that she will try to add the primary back to the legislation on the floor via amendment. Yet, it is not clear that the Senate sponsor will follow that path in the upper chamber. 

Still, there are three other bills that remain active, two in the state House and one other in the state Senate.

--

See also: 

12/10/25: Missouri Senate bills prefiled to reinstate presidential primary

12/18/25: Missouri House again tees up host of bills to resurrect the defunct Show-Me state presidential primary

1/28/26: "House committee kills plan to reinstate Missouri presidential primary"

3/5/26: Missouri House Elections Committee reports amended Super Tuesday primary bill "do pass"

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

The 2028 Annotated Presidential Primary Calendar

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

"DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee Votes to Advance 12 States to Next Phase of 2028 Presidential Calendar Selection Process"

The following is a press release from the DNC on the January 31 Rules and Bylaws Committee that began to consider the submission materials from state parties applying for early state waivers in the 2028 presidential nomination process:

Today, at the January meeting of the Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC), the RBC reviewed applications for the early nominating window of the 2028 presidential calendar. The RBC received 12 applications for the early window and voted to advance all 12 of those states to the next phase of the process, which is an opportunity for states to deliver presentations to the Committee.

The states invited to present are: Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia.

RBC Co-Chairs Minyon Moore and James Roosevelt, Jr. released the following statement:

“Today, the Rules and Bylaws Committee took another crucial step forward to create a nominating calendar that delivers a strong, battle-tested Democratic nominee to take back the White House in 2028. The RBC remains committed to running a rigorous, efficient, and fair selection process and looks forward to states presenting their cases directly to the Committee in the coming months.”

DNC Chair Ken Martin released the following statement:

“As the Rules and Bylaws Committee continues their work to set the Democratic Party’s 2028 presidential nominating calendar, I commend the Committee for their commitment to a transparent and fair process that produces the strongest possible Democratic nominee.”

Background on the 2028 Calendar Process:

At the October 27, 2025 RBC meeting, the Committee passed a resolution outlining the next steps in determining the early window of the 2028 presidential nominating calendar. The Resolution established that the fundamental goal for the 2028 calendar process is to “produce the strongest possible Democratic nominee for president” and included the following requirements:

• 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 (East, Midwest, South, and West).
• The Committee will execute the calendar process “in the most transparent, open, and fair manner feasible,” while providing “adequate, clear, and timely notice on major milestones and requirements.”
• Three pillars will be used to evaluate early state applicants:
• Rigorousness: the lineup of early states must be a comprehensive test of candidates with diverse groups of voters that are key to winning the general election;
• Fairness: the lineup of early states must be affordable, practical for candidates, and not exhaust their resources unreasonably, precluding them from effectively participating in future contests;
• Efficiency: the practical ability to run a fair, transparent, and inclusive primary or caucus.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee moves all 12 states vying for early state status for 2028 to next stage 

State parties will now make in-person presentations to the panel for inclusion in the early window

"KS GOP, Democratic leaders agree on state-run [presidential] primary"

Melissa Brunner at WIBW (Topeka) on a bill before the Kansas House Committee on Elections:

"The chairs of the state’s Democratic and Republican parties say they agree that the state’s presidential preference primaries should be state-run.

"The House Elections Committee held a hearing Tuesday afternoon on a bill that would make a test-run in March 2024 a permanent policy.

"Before that, the parities each held their own statewide caucuses or primaries to decide the preferred candidate for their delegates.

"GOP chair Danedri Herbert and Democratic chair Jeanna Repass both say state-run primaries will ensure Kansans have their voices heard."

--

Noteworthy: HB 2447 would reinstate a state-run presidential primary in the Sunflower state and permanently schedule the election for the first Tuesday in March every four years. 

Kansas legislators passed legislation in 2023 to reestablish a state-run presidential primary in the state, but it was a one-off, applying only to the 2024 cycle. As I wrote over at FHQ Plus around the time a number of bills were making the rounds in the statehouse...

Kansas has an interesting history with the presidential primary. Actually, Kansas has very little history with a presidential primary as the means of allocating delegates to the national conventions. Only twice in the post-reform era has the state officially held a primary: in 1980 and again in 1992. And from 1996 until 2012, the dance that the Kansas legislature would perform would be to not appropriate funds for a presidential primary election and change the date in the statute referencing the election to the next cycle. That routine ended for the 2016 cycle when the presidential primary was struck from the Kansas statutes altogether, eliminating the contest and the need to (not) fund it.

The current bill was brought forth on the request of the Kansas Republican Party Chair Danedri Herbert, is sponsored by the House Committee on Elections and has the support of both major parties in the state.

--

This legislation will be added to the annotated 2028 presidential primary calendar over at our sister site, FHQ Plus.

"SC Republicans likely to keep coveted first-in-the-South presidential primary spot in 2028"

Anna Wilder of the Charleston Post & Courier updates the 2028 presidential primary calendar maneuvering on the Republican side:

"South Carolina Republicans likely will keep the coveted role of first-in-the-South on the 2028 presidential primary calendar after a Republican National Convention committee moved to secure that early slot last week.

"South Carolina has been the first Southern state to vote in the presidential primary since 1980, championing the significance of the position. For years, the state has consistently backed the person who would become the Republican presidential nominee. Only one candidate, Newt Gingrich in 2012, did not become the nominee after South Carolina voted for him.

"Tyson Grinstead, the South Carolina GOP committeeman, said the Jan. 22 committee meeting in Santa Barbara, Calif., was significant for the state. Members, including Grinstead, voted on a plan to keep the same calendar as before."

--

Noteworthy: While it almost always seemed like the Presidential Nominating Process Committee, empowered by the RNC to reexamine the delegate selection rules, would vote to carry over the same early calendar lineup the national party has employed in recent cycles, it was perhaps not a mere formality. As Wilder highlighted:

"Those familiar with the decision said the spot has been competitive in the past and was again this year, as Florida had been eyeing the leadoff Southern spot. In 2012, Florida attempted to take it, but South Carolina moved its date up.

"Ultimately, the chair of the Florida Republican Party, Evan Power, made the motion for South Carolina to keep the spot at the Jan. 22 meeting, despite Florida’s effort to grab it."

Again, all signs consistently pointed toward Republicans once again carving out space before Super Tuesday on the 2028 presidential primary calendar for Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina (the latter two in some yet-to-be-determined order), but it appears that there was at least some room for other states to make a case. And just as Michigan had a history of trying to break through into the early window of the Democratic nomination process (before finding success), Florida has a history on the Republican side. 

Only, Republicans in the Sunshine state were not successful this time around. 

--

The seeming absence of Georgia in these discussions is noteworthy as well. The Peach state secured a waiver (ultimately rescinded) from the DNC to conduct an early primary in 2024, but were unable to bring any move of the primary into the early window to fruition. In that process in 2023, there was some acknowledgment from the Republican secretary of state in Georgia of the value of an early presidential primary. But he punted any action on that idea to 2028. 

Thus far, the notion of placing general election battlegrounds into the early window of the presidential primary calendar is one more firmly held on the Democratic side than among Republicans. ...for this cycle anyway.

--

The report from the Presidential Nominating Process Committee now moves on to a vote by the RNC Rules Committee. A majority vote there would send it to the full RNC for consideration, where a three-quarters vote is required for final passage. 

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Republican rule changes for the 2028 cycle 

The RNC's work on delegate rules isn't done, but the baseline is different on several fronts from the regulations that guided the 2024 process

"House committee kills plan to reinstate Missouri presidential primary"

Rudi Keller at the Missouri Independent with the latest from Jefferson City on the efforts to resurrect the state-run presidential primary in the Show-Me state:

"The push to reinstate Missouri’s presidential primary suffered a defeat Tuesday when the House Elections Committee voted to remove it from a wide-ranging elections bill.

"On a voice vote, the committee removed the provision from the bill. The measure also extends the period for 'no-excuse absentee' voting from two to four weeks.

"The committee then voted 13-1, with two abstentions, to send the bill to the full House for debate.

"The primary is unpopular with well-organized groups who prefer the caucus system traditionally used to select Missouri’s delegates to presidential nominating conventions, said the bill’s sponsor, state Rep. Peggy McGaugh, a Republican from Carrollton."

--

Noteworthy: Mark one presidential primary bill off the list in Missouri. Four remain active in the 2026 legislative session, two in the House and two others in the state Senate. The dispute has been a consistent one, post-2022, when the presidential primary was nixed in an omnibus elections bill that passed in the waning hours of the legislature's term that year. It boils down to something that Keller later picked up on in his synopsis of the committee's actions during its executive session on the bill on January 27:

"A caucus is easier to control than the primary, she said. Even though Missouri’s primary is just a popularity contest — no delegates are pledged based on the result — opponents don’t want evidence they are not the majority of their party’s voters, she [bill sponsor, McGaugh] said."

But here's the thing: The premise that no delegates are bound, that, in turn, the primary is a beauty contest and, as a result, that the state should not fund the election is built on the thinnest reasoning. Yet, it keeps coming up session after session in Jefferson City when these primary bills face scrutiny in committee (or on the floor). In fact, the sponsor of the controversial 2022 elections bill that eliminated the presidential primary, Rep. John Simmons (R-109th, Washington), raised it in the committee hearing for McGaugh's HB 1871 two weeks ago:

"Why are we having a presidential primary when we aren't binding the electors [delegates] and the parties are still running a caucus and  technically deciding electors there and we the taxpayers are paying $10m for a show election that doesn't actually have legal meaning to it." 

Never mind that the delegates were bound based on the results of the primary when it was still codified in state law (and the caucuses in 2024 when it was not). But that was a function of the parties' rules -- at both the state and national levels -- defining the nature of the binding and not the state, based on state law. 

Missouri Republicans, those in the legislature most firmly opposed to the return of the state-funded primary anyway, seem to have trust issues with the state party. The party rules have consistently bound delegates. However, those same rules -- rules that are very much consistent with those in other states in the national Republican process -- 1) allow for the release of delegates bound to candidates who have dropped out of the race for the nomination and 2) allow delegates aligned with one candidate to be selected and bound to another candidate (again, based on the primary or caucus results). Those Show-Me state Republicans in opposition to the primary want a legal remedy to those outs that Republican delegates have, to lock them into the binding at the convention no matter what.

That is what keeps killing these bills in Missouri. And HB 1871 is yet another casualty. 

--

And just as a postscript, it should be noted that when McGaugh is talking about "control" she is noting control of the presidential primary (or caucus) electorate. This came up in hearing as well, but there are a number of legislative Republicans in the Show-Me state who are not keen on the open primary there. Caucuses allow the Republican Party in Missouri to restrict the electorate to Republicans only, shielding the election from the potential participation of Democrats. 

--

See also: 

12/10/25: Missouri Senate bills prefiled to reinstate presidential primary

12/18/25: Missouri House again tees up host of bills to resurrect the defunct Show-Me state presidential primary

2/3/26: Another one bites the dust: Missouri Senate bill stripped of provision to reestablish a presidential primary

3/5/26: Missouri House Elections Committee reports amended Super Tuesday primary bill "do pass"

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

The 2028 Annotated Presidential Primary Calendar

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

"New Mexico Democrats seek to move up 2028 presidential primary, citing state's diverse electorate"

Dan Boyd at the Albuquerque Journal describes the efforts of New Mexico Democrats to nab an early calendar spot for 2028:

"New Mexico’s Democratic Party has launched a long shot bid to become one of the early primary states for the 2028 presidential election cycle.

"In their recent application to the Democratic National Committee, state party leaders touted New Mexico’s diverse electorate and relatively inexpensive media market as factors that set the state apart.

"'We submitted a bid to hold an early presidential primary because the Democratic Party is facing real national challenges — and New Mexico shows the path forward,' state party chairwoman Sara Attleson said in a statement.

"The state Democratic Party chairwoman, who was elected to the post last year, also cited the national Democratic Party's struggles to win support from rural, working-class voters."

--

Noteworthy: "Long shot" is likely an apt way to describe the New Mexico Democratic Party's push to be included among the early states on the 2028 presidential primary calendar. That is not a statement about the merits of the bid from Democrats in the Land of Enchantment. Rather, it is an acknowledgment of the institutional barriers that make successful inclusion in the early window difficult for the state party there. Under the rules of the process the Democratic National Committee (DNC) has instituted for the 2028 cycle, at least one state from each of four regions across the country will be represented in the pre-Super Tuesday portion of the primary calendar. New Mexico is one of two states from the west region opposite an early state stalwart, Nevada. And Democrats in the Silver state already have an early primary -- first Tuesday in February -- codified in state law. At best, then, New Mexico Democrats are likely fighting for any fifth spot that may be at stake. And there may be better options among the pool of applicants than New Mexico for that position.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Now we know which states they are looking at 

Some thoughts on the 2028 Democratic primary calendar process now that the deadline for state parties to apply with the DNC has come and gone

"These Are the 12 States Vying to Kick Off Democrats’ 2028 Contest"

Reid Epstein, Lisa Lerer and Shane Goldmacher at The New York Times shed light on the 12 states that are vying for four or five early slots on the 2028 Democratic presidential primary calendar:

"Democrats in 12 states have applied to kick off the party’s 2028 presidential primary contest, pushing arguments about race, geography, size, diversity, the rural-urban divide and their relative status as battlegrounds, according to copies of hundreds of pages of application materials reviewed by The New York Times.

"The Democratic National Committee, which will decide the order, has said that one state from each of four regions will hold nominating contests in the so-called early window, the month before Super Tuesday. A bonus fifth state could also be selected. State parties in these places applied:

"West: Nevada and New Mexico

"South: Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia

"Midwest: Illinois, Iowa and Michigan

"East: New Hampshire and Delaware."

--

Noteworthy: Fewer state parties submitted applications in 2026 as compared to 2022. Then, there were 20 state and territorial parties that threw their hats in the ring to be considered for early spots on the 2024 Democratic presidential primary calendar. Of those 20 from 2022, eight (8) state parties submitted applications again for the 2028 process (in alphabetical order): Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

Four states submitted applications for early window consideration for the first time this time around: New Mexico, North Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia. 

But why were there fewer applicants in 2026 relative to the process in 2022?

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Now we know which states they are looking at 

Some thoughts on the 2028 Democratic primary calendar process now that the deadline for state parties to apply with the DNC has come and gone

"What's in Iowa Democrats' bid to regain first-in-the-nation status?"

Brianne Pfannenstiel at the Des Moines Register weighs in on Iowa Democrats push to return to the early window for 2028:

"In its bid to regain a toehold in early days of the presidential nominating calendar, Iowa Democrats are arguing that the national party cannot build sustainable national majorities without reconnecting to rural America.

"To help the party accomplish that, Iowa Democrats are touting the flexibility they can provide with their caucuses. Faced with several years of upheaval and experimentation, state Democratic Party leaders say they can create a system that is more inclusive and transparent and eliminates many of the pitfalls that bedeviled it in 2020.

“'No other state has the knowledge, infrastructure and history of giving long-shot presidential candidates a fair chance,' party leaders wrote in an application to a panel of the Democratic National Committee that sets the presidential nominating calendar. 'When Iowa is included among the early states, we complement and represent an intentionally well-designed balance of our party’s values and priorities.'"

--

Noteworthy: Iowa Democrats are treading a very fine line. The party obviously wants the caucuses back in the early window (if not to be first again) and are clearly bending over backwards to appear flexible in their application to the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC). However, that flexibility in method -- in-person caucusing, voting electronically, voting via telephone, vote-by-mail, etc. -- runs the risk of coming across as less flexible than a muddled a la carte menu of options from which the state party cannot choose (or appears unable to choose).

Why does that distinction matter? It matters because the members of the RBC were adamant in their discussions of what they were after in these applications at their October 2025 meeting. They wanted not only clarity of method, but a demonstration of what worked in the past, what did not and how a state party would mitigate any lingering issues from the past implementation in 2028. 

All is not lost for Iowa Democrats. FHQ finds it hard to imagine the state party not being invited to make a presentation to the RBC for inclusion of its caucuses in the 2028 early window. [More on why soon at FHQ Plus.] So they will have a chance clean up any perception that this is a muddled mess by focusing on what the party could do to enhance what went right with the vote-by-mail party-run primary from 2024.

--

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

"As the DNC chooses the 2028 primary order, NH makes its case for first"

Margie Cullen, New England political reporter for USA Today, has the story on New Hampshire Democrats' push to return to a sanctioned early position on the 2028 presidential primary calendar:

"New Hampshire is planning on holding the first-in-the-nation presidential primary once again in 2028 — whether the rest of the country likes it or not.

"The Democratic National Committee will likely decide the order of its 2028 presidential calendar by the end of the year, and states that wish to hold a presidential primary or caucus before Super Tuesday must submit their plans to the Rules and Bylaws Committee by Jan. 16, 2026.

"New Hampshire has held the first primary since 1920 — even in 2024, when the DNC wanted South Carolina to go first instead. The state is applying to go first again in 2028, but officials have said it doesn’t really matter what the DNC decides: New Hampshire will be going first no matter what, as mandated by a state law passed in 1975.

"'Whether or not it is sanctioned or not, is really the conversation,' New Hampshire Democratic Party Chairman Ray Buckley said."

--

Noteworthy: Chair Buckley pretty much hits the nail on the head with his statement above. New Hampshire will have the first contest. The only catch is if the DNC sanctions that scheduling. 

The only caveat that FHQ would add is that that notion is true under current conditions, where New Hampshire is under unified Republican control (or even divided in some configuration of state government in 2027). But if Democrats sweep back control of state government in the 2026 midterms and install a Democratic secretary of state, then it is worth questioning just how much pressure the DNC might exert on Democrats in elected office in the Granite state to alter the oft-discussed presidential primary law. That is likely the only way in which the above scenario does not play out in some way, shape or form.

--

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

"[Illinois] State Democrats looking to push forward 2028 primary"

Benjamin Cox with WLDS in Jacksonville, IL discusses the Democratic Party of Illinois' efforts to win an early slot on the 2028 presidential primary calendar:

"The Democratic Party of Illinois has formally submitted a proposal to the Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee seeking to move Illinois into the party’s early, or “pre-window,” presidential primary calendar.

"Democratic Party of Illinois Chair Lisa Hernandez said Illinois offers a uniquely representative testing ground for Democratic presidential candidates, citing its mix of urban, suburban, and rural communities, as well as its racial, economic, and geographic diversity.

"Hernandez also framed the proposal in national political terms, arguing that Illinois voters have been directly affected by policies of the Trump administration and would scrutinize candidates on issues including healthcare costs, reproductive rights, civil rights, and protections for marginalized communities."

--

Noteworthy: The Illinois bid for an early calendar position in 2028 is not unlike the effort in Virginia. It is a blue state -- even bluer than the Old Dominion -- with unified Democratic control of state government. Thus, a calendar change can easily be facilitated. That is one big factor in the state party's favor. But the question is, does Illinois have the profile of a state that the DNC wants in the early window? 

Blue state applicants, like those state parties in Delaware, Illinois, New Mexico and Virginia, can be thought of as contrasting the virtues of their own attempts with their regional neighbors in the pool that have some history in the early window -- New Hampshire, Michigan, Nevada and South Carolina, respectively. And by extension, those efforts may best be viewed as moves for any fifth spot in the DNC's early window on the 2028 presidential primary calendar (should the party opt to squeeze in another early contest).

--

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