On June 8, the California Senate Elections Committee passed AB 80 unanimously. It moves the presidential primary from February to June. It saves money by combining the presidential primary with the primary for other office. The bill has no effect on the petition deadline for independent candidates (which is in August) nor on the deadline for a new party to become qualified by obtaining 103,004 registrations (which continues to be in January).
Wasn’t there an earlier deadline for a party becoming qualified to participate in a February presidential primary? Being qualified for the primary for voter-nominated offices is relatively meaningless, especially once the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the State and Federal courts read what SB 6 actually says.
It all depends on one’s definition of “deadline.” I use that word in the sense of a mandatory directive. It’s true that while California had two primaries in presidential election years (an early presidential primary and a later primary for all other partisan office) there were two deadlines, and if a party wanted to have its own presidential primary, it had to obey the earlier. But in the years when California had two primaries, there is not a single instance when a new party cared enough about its own presidential primary to bother with the earlier date.
Being a ballot-qualified party in California is of huge importance, because a ballot-qualified party can put its presidential nominee on the November ballot automatically (whether it participated in the presidential primary or not).
It really doesn’t save any money unless Top Two is invalidated, since they still have print separate primary ballots for President and tally them the same way, so voters will still have two ballots, one for the jungle primary and another for the partisan presidential primary, the tally costs will be similar, and so will the printing costs. Mailing costs for absentee ballots will be the only savings, and that is insignificant overall.
The real reason they’re doing this is they want to increase Democrat turnout at the regular primaries because they are scared about more competition in the redistricting coming up. They need to circle their wagons, and most voters will yawn at two separate votes three months apart and skip the second one out of confusion or apathy, and with Top Two they can’t afford that or they’ll lose. They’re willing to sacrifice Super Tuesday for that objective.
Richard Winger,
It is not clear how the numbers of electors have gone up
from 103,004 to 103,040. That is 36 more party membership than before. Why the extra 36 electors?
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party
#2 My interpretation of Article II.5(d) is that for a party to have its nominee on the general election ballot for partisan office (as opposed to a voter-nominated office) they would have to participate in the primary for that office. The only remaining partisan office is for President.
California only had split primary dates in 1940 and earlier, and in 2008. The constitutional provisions date from 2004 and 2010. Who knows what the qualification rules were in 1940?
The America Elects party clearly cares only about the presidential primary. That is why the Secretary of State, had advised them of the potential change in the deadline for their petition.
#4 The petition requirement is 1,030,040; while the registration requirement is 103,004, and these are given in successive paragraphs of the canvass of the 2010 election. It could be a simple case of transposition.
#4, thanks for pointing out the 103,004 instead of 103,040. I just fixed it.
#5, there are dozens of precedents from California history in which minor parties did not use their presidential primary, but still placed their presidential nominee on the general election ballot. The Prohibition Party never participated in the California presidential primary in all the years in which it was on the ballot and California had presidential primaries. That is also true for the Socialist Party, the Communist Party, the Progressive Party of 1934-1940, the Townsend Party in 1940, the American Independent Party in 1968, the Independent Progressive Party in 1948 and 1952, and the Liberty Party of 1932. Furthermore, the true candidates in presidential primaries in California are the candidates for delegate to the national convention. It’s none of the state’s business if a party wants to choose its delegates some method other than a government presidential primary.
IN THE GOOD OLD DAYS THE PRIMARY WAS IN JUNE. RICHARD WHAT DOES YOUR CRYSTAL BALL SAY?
#7 Those historical precedents were more than a half century prior to the change in the California Constitution which tied placement on the general election ballot, to participation in the primary.
Article II.5(c) states: “… including [a] presidential primary whereby the candidates on the ballot are those found by the Secretary of State to be recognized candidates throughout the nation or throughout California for the office of President of the United States …”
It is the State’s business if its recognition of a party is based on the party’s voters participating in the selection of the party’s candidates.