Texas HB 1193 has passed all committee hurdles in the House, and is on the consent calendar for a vote in the House on May 12. UPDATE: it did pass the Texas House on May 12. HB 1193 relaxes the deadline for qualified parties to certify the names of their presidential and vice-presidential nominees. Existing law says the certifications are due 70 days before the general election. The bill says they are due on the later of either the 70th day, or the first business day after a party national convention adjourns. The bill’s sponsor is Rep. Kelly Hancock (R-Fort Worth).
This bill exists because both the Democratic and Republican Parties missed the deadline in 2008. The Secretary of State accepted their filings anyway. The public would not have known that the major parties were late, if the Texas Libertarian Party hadn’t noticed. Bob Barr had asked the Texas Supreme Court to remove the major party presidential tickets, but the Texas Supreme Court denied the request with no opinion.
If this bill is signed into law, it will be ironic that Texas will have one of the most flexible deadlines in the nation for a qualified party to certify its presidential nominee, yet the earliest petition deadline for independent presidential candidates. The Texas independent presidential petition is due in the first half of May, but no other state has such a deadline until the second half of June. Colorado, Illinois, and Indiana are the only states with June deadlines; all other states are in July, August and September.
And is this sponsored by a Dem or Repub? The article does not specify??
The fact that this bill was filed indicates that the lawsuit filed by Libertarians last year had merit.
Thanks, Eric, you’re right. I amended the post to show that the sponsor is Rep. Kelly Hancock, a Republican from Fort Worth.
There is an omnibus election cleanup bill that contains the same change that is further along (SB 1970).
If Texas had tried to enforce the deadline in 2008, they would have lost in court. The right of a major political party to have its presidential candidate on the ballot is contingent on it holding a presidential preference primary and base a substantial share of its delegates to the national convention allocated on the basis of the results.
If the deadline were enforced, a Texas political party would not be able to associate with a national political party of its choice, even though Texas law requires such association.
The only legitimate State interest in a deadline would be to have enough time to have ballots printed, but the SoS had no problem certifying the candidates to the county election authorities by the certification deadline in State law.
Political parties must qualify to have their presidential candidate on the ballot at roughly the same time as an independent presidential candidate does. So there really isn’t a difference, except that in one case the ultimate choice of the candidate is vested in the party; and in the other case, it is vested in the candidate himself.