roundup of big state primary calendar news

[Mr. Morden]

Only the DNC/Howard Dean has created (IMHO stupid) rules barring a few states from holding primaries before February 5.

The RNC has done no such thing.  Winning the Florida primary awards the full number of delegates.

That's not exactly true.  The RNC does penalize pre-Feb. 5th states by awarding those states fewer delegates than they would get if they voted on Feb. 5th or later.  I don't remember the exact number, but I think pre-Feb. 5th states might be sacrificing up to 50% of their delegates.  (The RNC also has no exceptions for IA or NH, so those states are giving up much of their delegation as well.)

However, even with that penalty, FL still has a lot of delegates to offer, so it's sure to get a lot of attention from the GOP candidates.  Whereas, on the Dem. side, even if all the candidates campaign there, I can't see them going all out for what will essentially be a beauty contest, that has no binding result.  Not with half the country voting a week later, in elections that *will* result in the awarding of delegates, which count towards determining the nomination.

[Mr. Morden]

Updates from both Florida and Michigan.

First, Florida:

It looks like the cutoff date for campaigning in Florida will be August 25th.  Unless Florida moves its primary to some other date in the interim, every Democratic candidate who campaigns in Florida after Aug. 25th will be ineligible to win any of the state's delegates:

http://www.sptimes.com/2007/06/13/State/Florida_primary_will_.shtml

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Meanwhile, in Michigan, Democrats are pushing to move up their primary to Jan. 29th as well, if not earlier, and there's a good chance the state GOP will join them:

link

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

An update on the effort to move up the Pennsylvania primary, which doesn't sound too optimistic about the chances of it moving up from its current spot in April:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07166/794357-103.stm

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Also, here's an updated map of the state-by-state primary dates just published in the Wall Street Journal:



It appears to include states like CT and IL as being on Feb. 5th, though I think in those cases, the bill to move the primary up to Feb. 5th has been passed by the legislature but not yet signed by the governor.  However, it's probably going to happen in those states, so they might as well be included.

I still don't understand why so many news sources are suggesting that NC will vote on Feb. 5th.  AFAIK, a bill was introduced to move up NC's primary to Feb. 5th, but it went nowhere.

[Mr. Morden]

The primary calendar seems to be largely set at this point, at least among the largest states.  Here's the situation in the 11 largest states:

Jan. 29 FL (though the Democratic vote probably won't count)
Feb. 5 CA, GA, IL, NJ, NY
March or later NC, OH, PA, TX
MI

Michigan is the wildcard now.  And things may not be settled there for some time, as the two parties currently can set their primary dates on their own, and may move up in response to whatever NH does (and NH may not decide for some time).  However, the two parties' ability to hold separate primaries in MI may be eliminated if either of these bills pass the MI legislature:

http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/06/27/michigan-bill-for-january-presidential-primary/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

Hmm. That´s really a problem. Isn´t there a deadline sometimes in September or October when every state has to have it´s primary/caucus date fixed ? What if this is the case lets say in early September that every state has signed their respective date into law and lets say 2 days before the deadline the DNC approves a softening of their rules, so that the votes finally count in the Jan. 29 primary ? No state would have enough time to pass an earlier date before the deadline. Florida has it´s "legitimate rule-softened-primary" and negative publicity about voter disenfranchisement is avoided. Probably this won´t happen though.

Well, they're meeting on Aug. 25th to decide this very issue of whether FL's move should be allowed.  Why would they rule that it shouldn't be allowed, and then just a few days later reverse themselves?  Anyway, the DNC has pretty much committed itself, and I can't see them backing down now.  Why would any state follow their rules in the future if they back down now?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If Clinton and Obama are the main two contenders on Jan. 29th, then I think he would have a pretty good chance of getting 15% even without campaigning there.  FL is so big, I don't know if anyone other than Clinton and Obama would have the $ to go all out there, and even Clinton campaigns there, would she bother with anything more than a token effort designed to avoid alienating Floridians for the GE?  What's the point of campaigning hard if all the delegates could end up going to Obama anyway?  The "win" probably wouldn't provide much momentum anyway if her principal rival isn't competing there, just as Bush didn't really get any boost against McCain when he won Iowa in 2000 (which McCain skipped).

[Mr. Morden]

Update from Pennsylvania:

As mentioned in another thread, the state House passed a bill that would move the state's primary to Feb. 12th, however it appears the state Senate is unlikely to act on it:

http://www.pennlive.com/news/patriotnews/index.ssf?/base/news/1184118915107150.xml&coll=1

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As mentioned way upthread, it's the GOP legislators in PA that have seemed more skeptical of an early primary from the begining.  To quote from an article I posted a bit upthread:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

Ohio becomes the last of the big states to at least consider an early primary.....in this case, Jan. 29:

http://www.whiotv.com/news/13679915/detail.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

Also note this story on the matter:

http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/07/14/ohio-bill-for-january-presidential-primary/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

I had previously mentioned that there were two nearly identical bills that had been proposed in the MI Senate....one would set the primary for both parties at Jan. 29th, the other Feb. 5th (but also giving both parties the option of moving to a different date if they both agree).  It appears that *both* bills have passed the relevant committee, and I'm assuming that they'll now move to the full Senate:

http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/07/18/michigan-presidential-primary-bill-advances/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

More on Michigan: The move to hold a joint primary for the two parties has stalled, and one option being floated for the GOP's backup plan is to select the delegates at a nominating convention to be held Jan. 25-26.  The Giuliani people do not like the idea of MI (where Romney has more organizational strength) voting before Feb. 5th, and they're also not keen on a nominating convention, which would likely be dominated by conservative activists who would be less likely to vote for Giuliani than an average GOP primary voter.  From last week:

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/07/rep_candace_miller_a_supporter.php

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And an update:

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/07/updating_the_michigan_primary.php

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

Following the news about IA, NH, and SC possibly all moving up their contests, the MI Dems have reiterated their desire to match the primary date of any state that violates the DNC rules:

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070809/POLITICS01/708090325/1022/POLITICS

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In other news, the Florida GOP is joining the Dems in fighting national party rules that punish them for holding an early primary, and the Florida Dems are floating a compromise idea:

http://www.tbo.com/news/politics/MGBAR0W335F.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

Looks like Michigan may now be holding a primary for both primaries on January 15th:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/08/17/321548.aspx

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My guess as to what happens next, assuming MI goes through with this: NH will move to Jan. 8th, and IA will move to Saturday, Jan. 5th, just to avoid voting in December.  I don't know if this will make much difference on the Dem. side, since MI's primary won't count towards awarding delegates if it's outside the DNC window, so I'm not sure if the candidates will bother pouring too many resources into such a big state if they don't get any delegates out of it.

But on the GOP side, this will probably lessen the importance of SC, as you'd now have Iowa-New Hampshire-Michigan being the first three contests, followed by SC & NV on the same day.  Romney would probably benefit the most, as he's struggled in SC, and he's ahead of all the candidates in terms of organizing in MI.  In fact, there've been rumors for over a year now that Romney's people in MI were trying to push for an early primary there, because they thought it would help him.

[Mr. Morden]

The MI state Senate has now voted to move the state's primary to Jan. 15th:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6959588.stm

Now it just has to pass the House and get signed by the governor.

[Mr. Morden]

After looking into this some more, it appears that this is not such a sure thing to pass the MI House, as there's quite a bit of opposition to it among Democratic legislators.  Most of the Democrats voted against it in the Senate.  So it's unclear whether it'll pass the House when it comes up for a vote next week.  But GOP legislators are solidly behind the Jan. 15th primary, as is Granholm.

One thing that might influence those Dem. legislators is what the DNC decides to do about Florida's primary.  The DNC will be meeting tomorrow to discuss sanctions against states that violate their rules for holding primaries early....and it's getting ugly:

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/08/a_fullscale_war_has_erupted.php

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

The DNC has stripped FL of all of its delegates, because its Jan. 29th falls outside the DNC-sanctioned window for primaries:

http://apnews.myway.com//article/20070825/D8R868K00.html

This makes it less likely that the MI legislature will go ahead with moving up their primary to Jan. 15th, but I guess we'll see how that plays out.

[Mr. Morden]

The Michigan state House has passed the bill that moves the primary to Jan. 15th:

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/08/jan_15_primary_passes_michigan.php

Looks like there'll still have to be a House-Senate conference bill passed, but it now looks like a lock for passage, and Granholm has promised to sign the bill.

[Mr. Morden]

Some fairly big news on the Democratic side.  First, there had been some talk of the MI Dems ignoring their own state's primary, and going ahead with a Feb. 9th caucus.  But that idea is now dead:

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/08/news_michigan_dems_are_unanimo.php

But the really big news is that all the Democratic candidates have pledged not to campaign in FL or MI or any other pre-Feb. 5th states other than IA, NV, NH, and SC.  Those four states had circulated this letter yesterday:

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/08/the_pledge_four_states_urge_de.php

which includes the following pledge for the Dem. presidential candidates to sign:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Each of the Democratic candidates has now agreed to these terms:

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/09/the_jockeying_behind_the_four.php

So there will be no campaigning by the Dem. candidates in FL or MI (I'm assuming the Jan. 15th primary in MI will pass.  It looks like it's certain to.), or any other states that break the rules.

But wait.  NH itself has already announced that they're going to break the rules by moving their primary to at least a week before the Jan. 19th SC GOP primary and NV caucus.  (And IA will presumably move earlier as well....in fact, the people in MI who were pushing the Jan. 15th primary said the reason they were doing so was because IA and NH had already announced they were going to ignore the DNC rules anyway, so why shouldn't MI ignore them too?)  Isn't it the height of hypocrisy for them to be circulating this letter, which says that candidates should avoid other states that break the rules?  I'd say yes.  Anyway, yeah, I expect that IA and NH will be voting earlier than the DNC mandated dates for those states, which means that their delegates won't count either.  Does that mean that the presidential candidates won't campaign there either?  I doubt it....but that would seem to be the logical consequence of this argument.

[Mr. Morden]

Granholm has signed the bill moving the MI primary to Jan. 15th:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/09/04/michigan_makes_primary_move_of.html

So it's official now.  And I think the primary calendar is now pretty much set among the largest states:

Jan. 15 MI
Jan. 29 FL
Feb. 5 CA, GA, IL, NJ, NY
March or later NC, OH, PA, TX

Though on the Democratic side, the FL and MI primaries will not count towards awarding any delegates, and all the Dem. candidates (except Gravel and Kucinich) have pledged not to campaign there, in order to respect the DNC calendar.  Speaking of which, MI Dems have sent a letter to the DNC, blasting them for selective enforcement, for apparently turning a blind eye to NH's flouting of the party rules:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/09/04/344061.aspx

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

Now there's talk that the boycott of states that violate the DNC rules might go so far as to include candidates witholding their names from the ballot:

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070905/COL04/709050325/1001

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

The Florida Democrats are backing down on the Jan. 29th primary.  That is, there will still be a Jan. 29th primary, but it looks like the FL Dems will propose an alternative method for awarding Florida's delegates to the Dem. convention, thus putting an end to the candidates' boycott of the state.  So far, there's no indication that the MI Dems will do the same.  The deadline for proposing a new method for awarding delegates is Sept. 29th:

http://www.miamiherald.com/458/story/238351.html

http://www.tallahassee.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070920/NEWS01/709200368/1010

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

Never mind.  The Florida Dems have done another 180, and will not go ahead with any alternative method for delegate selection.  They're going to go ahead with the Jan. 29th primary, and hope that the delegates somehow get counted:

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sfl-flffladems0923nbsep23,0,190842.story

[Mr. Morden]

Believe it or not, there's still an outside chance that there could be a further shakeup to the primary calendar, though I think the chances of that happening are probably remote.

What's happening is that the effort by some Michigan Democrats to abandon the state's Jan. 15th primary, and instead hold a caucus on some other date, probably Jan. 8th, isn't quite dead.  This is happening on two different tracks.  First, since most of the Democratic presidential candidates have removed their names from the primary ballot anyway (and none of them are campaigning there), a bill has been proposed in the legislature that would scrap the state's primary, though it looks like it hasn't made any progress so far:

http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/10/29/hearing-set-in-michigan-lawsuit-on-voter-list/

http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/11/03/michigan-bill-to-abolish-presidential-primary-makes-no-headway-so-far/

If this were to pass, then the MI Democrats would hold a caucus instead, and the MI GOP would hold a nominating convention.  But I doubt the Republicans in the state legislature are eager to pass this.  Why would they give up on the primary, if it's giving the state some attention from the GOP candidates?  And it looks like Gov. Granholm is also not too keen on giving up on the primary.  She wants them to hold the primary, send a slate of delegates to the convention, and hope that they're seated.  (That's a strange approach though, as restoring the delegates wouldn't happen until after the nomination is already decided anyway, and it's a sure thing that the primary will receive little attention if Obama and Edwards aren't on the ballot.)

The other track is that, even if this bill doesn't pass, and the primary goes forward on Jan. 15th, under current MI law, either party has until Nov. 14th to decide whether they want to back out of the primary.  The MI Democratic party could just decide on their own not to play in the primary, and instead hold a caucus.  They're meeting on Nov. 7th to discuss this option:

http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/politics/index.ssf?/base/politics-1/1194047055108750.xml&storylist=2006elections

However, because Granholm supports the primary, and as governor, she's kind of de facto leader of the party in the state, chances are they won't do this.  They'll just stick with the primary (that currently lacks most of the Dem. candidates on the ballot and doesn't count under DNC rules).

Who are the MI Dems who are trying to opt out of the primary and instead do a caucus?  Looks like there are two different factions here.  One is John Edwards supporters:

link

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The other faction is MI Dems (most notably Carl Levin) who are sick of Iowa and NH's priveleged position on the primary calendar, and want to screw over NH by scheduling a caucus on Jan. 8th.  This would presumably push NH into December, which would both 1) really force the issue of reforming the primary calendar in 2012, and 2) possibly cause NH to lose influence, with its primary getting lost in the craziness of the holiday season.

NH SoS Bill Gardner says he won't announce the date of the NH primary until the MI Dems make a final decision on whether or not they'll hold a caucus, and when that caucus might be.

[Mr. Morden]

Huge news out of Michigan:

A judge has ruled that law that moved the primary to Jan. 15th unconstitutional.  Which means that as of now, there will be no Jan. 15th primary in the state, for either party:

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071107/NEWS06/71107020/0/SPORTS07

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Other stories on this seem to indicate that this decision will be immediately appealed, but I don't know what the prospects for it being overturned are.  So right now, it's unclear whether Michigan will actually hold its primary on Jan. 15th.  And it's unclear what the two parties will do if the Jan. 15th primary doesn't happen.

[Mr. Morden]

From following this for a while, my sense of it is that if the MI Dems can't hold a primary on Jan. 15th, then they just won't participate in a primary at all, and will go with a caucus instead (which may or may not be held before Feb. 5th).  Not sure how the caucus would be run, but if it's like the Iowa caucus, then I don't think there would even be a ballot at all.  Caucus-goers express a presidential preference in their caucus meetings, and that gets reported in the statewide results.  At least, I think that's how it works.

Firstread now reports:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/11/07/453895.aspx

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

The MI Dems had a meeting tonight, and the original plan was to make some kind of final decision on whether to participate in the state's Jan. 15th primary, in light of the DNC sanctions against the state.  However, in light of today's court decision to strike down the primary, that item was taken off the agenda, as they attempt to figure out if the legislature can / will do anything to fix the primary:

http://www.ballot-access.org/2007/11/07/michigan-democrats-postpone-decision-on-whether-to-hold-caucus/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

As I understand it, the Dems have a Nov. 14th deadline to tell the state whether they'll participate in the primary or not.  Except....that's the very primary that was just struck down.  So maybe there is no deadline.  It looks like the whole thing is up in the air.  And NH SoS Bill Gardner has said that he will not set a date for the NH primary until MI finalizes its plans.  If there is no MI primary on January 15th, I suppose the NH primary might well be held later than the previously assumed Jan. 8th.

Things are as murky as ever regarding when MI and NH are going to vote.