Oklahoma Bill To Require a Party to Pay for its Presidential Primary if the Winner of the Oklahoma Primary is Different than the Convention Nominee

Posted on by February 13, 2025

Representative Molly Jenkins (R-Coyle) has introduced HB 1010. Originally it said if a party’s national convention nominates someone for President who lost the Oklahoma presidential primary, then that party must pay whatever the state spent on that party’s presidential primary. If the party did not pay, it could not have a presidential primary in the next election.

On February 11, the House Elections & Ethics Committee passed the bill, after amending it to say the payment is not required if the person who won the Oklahoma presidential primary placed second or lower in the national delegate count and that candidate had released his or her delegates.

If enacted, the bill would be unconstitutional. The U.S. Supreme Court three times during the 1970-1982 period said state laws cannot intrude on the activities of national presidential conventions.

Comments

Oklahoma Bill To Require a Party to Pay for its Presidential Primary if the Winner of the Oklahoma Primary is Different than the Convention Nominee — 18 Comments

  9. You are misreading the bill. Think of it as a faithless delegate bill – akin to a faithless elector law.

    By publishing the names of the President/Vice President candidates on the November general election ballot, Oklahoma is representing that the electors associated with those candidates will vote for them at the December meeting of electors.

    By publishing the names of presidential candidates on the March primary ballot, Oklahoma is representing that the delegates associated with those candidates will vote for the July/August meeting of delegates.

    Current Oklahoma law purports to require delegates to faithfully vote for the presidential candidate they are associated with (see §26-20-104.G). This has been law since 1987 – and is quoted in the Green Papers.

    HB 1010 would (or attempts to) make an enforcement mechanism.

    My guess is that a constituent brought the idea to their representative. Or maybe someone was upset that Oklahoma Democratic delegates did not vote for Joe Biden at the convention.

  10. A better solution is to have a direct primary to determine the general election candidates.

    National Popular Vote schemers could coordinate primaries in multiple states such that the candidates supported by a majority of the voters would appear on the general election ballot.

  14. Jim, it is definitely a bill introduced to facilitate criticizing Democrats for having a candidate other than one delegates chose, although the amendment to allow releasing delegates would mean that it would be very unusual for it to have any affect.

  15. That’s what the communists get for replacing a dementia patient they voted for with a DEI drunk no one chose.

  17. any body with ONE brain cell >>> tyrant zero Brain Trump

    does trump have a *brain* most like a spider / a snake / a shark ???

    ie kill whatever

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.