Monthly Archives: March 2019

Delegate Selection Rules — Hawaii

By tmess2 | Published March 30, 2019

This week we continue our review of the draft delegate selection plans from the 2016 caucus states with Hawaii.  The focus of this on-going review has been how these states are implementing the new provisions for state parties that do not have the option of or choose not to use a state-run primary.  Under Rule 2.K of the DNC’s Delegate Selection Rules, such state parties must make efforts to increase participation in these party-run processes and (just like states that use a state-run primary) the state must use the vote at the “first-determining step” to allocate its pledged delegates to candidates.  Of course, the simple way to comply with these rules is to follow the suggestion to use a state-run primary which is what this week’s draft plan from Nebraska does (like prior draft plans from Colorado and Idaho and one of the two draft plans from Washington). 

For states that do not have a state-run primary in the Spring of 2020 that they can use, however, the only option is to use a party-run process.  In 2016, Hawaii used a traditional precinct caucus.  The individuals present at those caucuses cast a presidential-preference vote.  The results of that preference vote from the individual precincts were totaled and used to determine the allocation of district-level and state-level (party leader and at-large) delegates.

Since the allocation of delegates in Hawaii already complies with Rule 2.K, the issue for Hawaii was what steps to take to make it easier for Democrats to participate in the caucus process.  For 2020, Hawaii has opted to use a party-run primary (sometimes called a firehouse primary) instead of a traditional caucus.  Under this system, there will be two ways that voters can participate in this primary.  First, a person can vote absentee by mail.  Apparently, all individuals registered as Democrats by February 18 will receive a mail-in ballot by March 3.  If the voter would rather vote absentee, they can mail in that ballot at any time before March 28.  Second, a person can vote in person on April 4 during the eight-hour voting period.  Individuals choosing to use the in-person option apparently will be able to vote at any location even if it is not their “home precinct.”  (For the most part, there should not be much of an issue in making sure that a ballot is counted in the right congressional district.  The only island that is in the First Congressional District is Oahu.  Only a small number of voters from the First Congressional District will be on another island on April 4 and likewise only a small number of voters from the other islands will be on Oahu on April 4.  The issue is most likely to be voters from Oahu casting votes in the part of Oahu that is in the “other” district.) Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 Convention, Delegates, Democratic Party | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Delegate Selection Rules — Hawaii

Delegate Selection Rules — Nevada

By tmess2 | Published March 24, 2019

The tour of the draft plans from 2020 caucus states continues this week with Nevada’s draft plan.  For 2020, as it has been for the last several cycles, Nevada — along with Iowa — is one of the two caucus states in the “carve-out period” prior to Super Tuesday.  Most of the caucus states — other than potentially Washington — are small states which means that, after Super Tuesday, their influence is at the margin with most of the attention going to the large primary states.  However, the four carve-out states each have about a week of national attention giving them a significant role in narrowing the field. 

In looking at the draft plans for the caucus states, there have been two major issues that the states have had to address in light of changes to Rule 2.K of the DNC Delegate Selection Rules.  First, what procedures does the state intend to take to increase participation in the caucuses?  Second, how are the votes at the caucuses translated into the allocation of delegates? 

As to the first issue, the 2016 plan in Nevada — recognizing that casino and hotel employees in Las Vegas form a significant bloc of potential caucus participants and that the 24-7 nature of that business would mean that some would-be participants would be working during the time set for the precinct caucuses — also scheduled at-large caucuses at a different time from the regular caucuses to allow shift workers to attend a caucus at a time that did not conflict with their job along with tele-caucuses for those in the military.  The plan assigned each of the at-large caucuses a number of delegates based on expected participation at that location and two delegates to the tele-caucus.  Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 Convention, Delegates, Primary Elections | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Delegate Selection Rules — Nevada

Convention updates

By Matt | Published March 18, 2019

Some recent news on the 2020 Milwaukee Democratic National Convention:

Posted in 2020 Convention, Milwaukee | Comments Off on Convention updates

Delegate Selection Rules — North Dakota

By tmess2 | Published March 17, 2019

In 2016, fourteen states and four territories used a caucus-based system to allocate pledged delegates to the candidates for president.  This post is the third in a series on how the states that are choosing to retain a caucus-based system are proposing to respond to the DNC’s 2020 Delegate Selection Rules, particularly Rule 2.K, which have added emphasis to prior language encouraging state parties to take steps to make it easier for people who are unable to attend their local caucus meeting to participate and requiring that delegate allocation be based on the preferences in the initial round of caucuses (unlike the old rules which allowed the allocation to be made based on the preferences at the meeting that actually selected the delegates).  The new rules also include a preference for a state-run primary.  Of the fourteen states that had caucuses in 2016, four (Colorado, Minnesota, Nebraska, and Idaho) have already opted to switch to a state-run primary for 2020.   In addition, at least two other states have primary bills either awaiting the Governor’s signature (Utah) or moving in the legislature (Maine — which has some weird features that may warrant a post if it passes and the Maine Democratic Party opts in).   The first two posts covered Iowa which is sticking with a caucus system and Washington which put forward two plans (one primary-based and one caucus-based) with a final decision to come next month.  That leaves six (or eight if you include Utah and Maine) states (and the four territories) to propose plans (all of which are supposed to be posted for public comment more than thirty days before approval by the state party with the state party supposed to submit the state party-approved plan to the Rules and By-laws Committee of the Democratic National Committee by May 3).

This week’s post covers the recent draft plan issued by North Dakota’s Democratic-NPL Party.  In 2016, North Dakota had a caucus meeting at the legislative district-level and the allocation of state convention delegates from those meetings was used to allocate the national convention delegates.  Additionally, there was no provision for “absentee” votes by those who could not attend the legislative district meeting.

Reflecting the DNC’s desire to improve participation in the caucus state, North Dakota is switching from caucus meetings to what is sometimes called a “firehouse” or party-run primary as its first step.  In a traditional caucus system, voters must be present at the time scheduled for the start of the caucus with the vote taking place during the caucus.  In a firehouse primary/caucus, the party opens polling places and voters can show up at any time during the voting period.  In North Dakota, the proposal is to have local voting places which will be open for eight hours (from 11 a. m. to 7 p.m. on March 10).  In addition, North Dakota will allow mail-in absentee voting.  Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 Convention, Delegates, DNC, Primary Elections | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Delegate Selection Rules — North Dakota

O’Rourke running

By Matt | Published March 14, 2019

Beto-mania has arrived:

Beto O’Rourke, the 46-year-old former Texas congressman whose near-miss Senate run last year propelled him to Democratic stardom, announced on Thursday that he was running for president, betting that a broad message of national unity and generational change will lift him above a slate of committed progressives offering big-ticket policy ideas.

We now have 14 announced candidates, and only 8 still to hear from. Continue Reading...

Posted in Democrats | Comments Off on O’Rourke running

Dem Chair Perez on Milwaukee choice

By Matt | Published March 11, 2019

Posted in 2020 Convention, Milwaukee | Comments Off on Dem Chair Perez on Milwaukee choice

Milwaukee in 2020!

By Matt | Published March 11, 2019

Milwaukee’s political moment has arrived.

The city will host the 2020 Democratic National Convention, edging out two large and deep-pocketed rivals over a months-long campaign waged behind the scenes through phone calls, contract negotiations and quiet lobbying by some of the most powerful political figures in the country.

The announcement will be made in Milwaukee at a 3 p.m. press conference, according to DNC spokesman Brandon Gassaway. – Milwaukee Journal Sentinal

Posted in 2020 Convention, Milwaukee | Comments Off on Milwaukee in 2020!

Delegate Selection Rules for Washington — Primary or Caucus

By tmess2 | Published March 10, 2019

Under the current national rules, the state Democratic parties are encouraged to use a state-run election when available as the “first binding step” in the delegate selection process.  Since 2016, the legislatures in several of the states that had a caucus in 2016 had authorized a primary for 2020.  In Colorado and Idaho, the draft delegate selection rules reflect that the party will use the primary instead of the caucus to select delegates.  The other caucus states and territories fit into one of several categories:  1) primary authorized but state party has yet to release its delegate selection plan (Minnesota and Nebraska); 2) no primary authorized and delegate selection plan released (Iowa); 3) no primary authorized and no legislation pending but no delegate selection plan released (Nevada); 4) legislation related to primary but no delegate selection plan released; and 5) legislation pending but tentative delegate selection plan released.   

Washington fits into this last category.   In 2016, Washington had a primary authorized but it was set for May.  Wanting earlier input, Washington opted for a March caucus.  However, the Washington legislature has passed a bill moving the primary to the second Tuesday in March but allowing the Washington Secretary of State to reschedule the primary to another date in March to be part of a regional cluster.  As California is on the list of potential partners, Washington could hold its primary on Super Tuesday.  This bill is waiting for the governor’s signature.  Given that the current governor is currently running for President, it is highly likely that this bill will become law.  Given the requirements of the national rules, the Washington Democratic Party has released two alternative plans.  One plan would use the primary to allocate the delegates.   Like many states, while delegates are allocated based on the results of the primary, Washington would retain its caucus system for the purpose of selecting the actual delegates.  (This plan would get rid of the precinct caucuses and start the process at the legislative district level.)

The other plan would keep the primary as non-binding and use the caucus system to allocate the delegates.  Under this plan, Washington would keep the precinct caucuses which would be scheduled for March 21.  In keeping with the language in the national rules requiring states to take steps to increase participation in the caucuses, the plan pledges to set up a system to allow absentee voting by those who are unable to attend.  However, the current draft does not include any details of this system.  Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 Convention, Delegates, Democratic Party, Primary Elections | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Delegate Selection Rules for Washington — Primary or Caucus

The Supreme Court and Redistricting — Again.

By tmess2 | Published March 9, 2019

Next Monday, the Supreme Court begins its March argument session.  Over the following two weeks, the Supreme Court will hear three case on redistricting.  These cases represent the fifth consecutive year in which the Supreme Court is looking at the rules for redistricting.  While memory is always a tricky thing, I can’t remember a redistricting cycle in which there were these many cases this late in the cycle.  At this point, these cases are more about setting the ground rules for 2021 than getting valid lines for the 2020 election (as, regardless of the decisions in these cases, the lower courts will not have much time to redraw the lines or have those new lines reviewed before 2020).

The session starts on March 18 with another look at the lines for the Virginia House of Delegates.  Two years ago, the Supreme Court found that the trial court applied the wrong standard in considering whether the Republicans in the legislature had improperly considered race in drawing those lines.  On the reconsideration ordered by the Supreme Court, the trial court changed its earlier decision and found that race improperly predominated in the line drawing decisions.  As with earlier cases this cycle, this latest racial gerrymander case involves the fine balancing of the interests of the Voting Rights Act (requiring the State to create majority-minority districts) and the Equal Protection Clause.  The question in these cases ultimately are two questions.  First, whether in the name of creating winnable districts for minorities, the legislature is actually engaged in packing more minorities into the district than is really necessary to meet the requirements of the Voting Rights Act.  Second, whether the districts created are such a departure from the normal districting principles that the lines are clearly the result of a racial gerrymander. 

In previous cases, the Supreme Court has rejected the concept of a one-size-fits-all approach to how many minorities an individual district must have to give minorities the ability to elect the candidate of their choice.  The last time that these districts were in front of the Supreme Court, the majority found that the record showed that the legislature had used such a mechanical rule, drawing the lines so that each of the twelve minority districts had a voting-age population which was at least 55% African-American.  The question on remand (and the issue on appeal) is whether that percentage was appropriate given the history of voting in these area and, assuming that it was not, whether the lines drawn were still appropriate give the other concerns (compactness, contiguity, incumbent protection, existing community lines, etc.) that traditionally govern the redistricting process. Continue Reading...

Posted in Civil Rights, Elections, Judicial | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on The Supreme Court and Redistricting — Again.

Brown Out

By Matt | Published March 7, 2019

Wow, the biggest name yet to not run:

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) announced Thursday that he will not run for president in 2020, just after completing a tour of early caucus and primary states.

We still have 13 announced candidates, but now in single digits – only 9 still to hear from. Continue Reading...

Posted in Delegates | 1 Comment