Category Archives: Delegates

2020 Delegate Selection Plans

While it has taken some time to get plans from all of the states and territories, it appears that all of the delegate selection plans for 2020 have now been sent to the Rules and By-laws Committee (you may remember them from 2008) for review.  One of the key issues for this current set of plans has been how many caucus states there will be for 2020.

Caucuses have been a catch 22 for both sides of the establishment vs. activist debate.  On the one hand, the caucus system rewards organization which — at least in the past — gave an edge to the establishment.  On the other hand, in recent cycles, caucuses reward the candidates with the most enthusiastic supporters — which has tended to be the candidates supported by grass roots progressive activists.  On the third hand, the advantage for the activists come from a system that puts obstacles in the place of broad participation — so, while that system, benefits progressive activists, the basic structure is contrary to some basic principles that progressives hold.   As a result, the rules changes after the 2016 cycle were definitely designed to promote movement away from caucuses and to encourage those that remained to take steps to increase participation, and those changes have had an effect.

In 2016, thirty-seven states and two territories (D.C. and Puerto Rico) had government-run primaries.  Democrats Abroad had a party-run primary.  Finally, thirteen states and four territories held a variation on a caucus — some more open than others. Continue Reading...

Also posted in 2020 Convention, 2020DNC | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on 2020 Delegate Selection Plans

Delegate Selection Plans — Wyoming and Update

As more delegate selection plans are posted on-line, we have two states that have confirmed that they are switching from a caucus to a state-run primary.  The first is Minnesota.  Previously, the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party had informed the Minnesota Secretary of State that it would be participating in the state-run primary, but we now have the draft plan which bases delegate allocation on the results of the primary.  The other state is Washington.  When we looked at the draft plan for Washington last month, the Washington Democrats had submitted two plans — one based on the caucus and one based on the primary.    Since then, the state of Washington finalized the scheduling of the primary for March (moving it up from May) and, at last weekend’s state committee meeting, the Washington Democrats opted for the primary-based plan.

With these two changes, we were down to a handful of states.  Yesterday, Wyoming released their draft plan for 2020.  Wyoming is keeping with a caucus system using, as in the past, a county caucus as the first step.  While there is not a specific set date in the plan, it does indicate an intent to hold the county caucuses on a weekend in March which would be earlier than the mid-April date from 2016.  To meet the goals of making access to the caucuses easier for voters, Wyoming is tentatively calling for allowing those who are unable to attend the county caucuses to participate by submitting a “surrogate affidavit.”  The exact details of how this will work is still being discussed and is not clear from the current draft.  (The name suggests a proxy vote, but my hunch is that — either at the final plan approved by the state or the final plan as amended in response to the national Rules and By-laws committee requests — it will be more like a typical absentee ballot.) 

The Wyoming plan uses the preference vote at the county caucuses to elect state convention delegates.  It uses a separate preference vote at the state convention to allocate the national convention delegates.  This part of the plan is clearly contrary to the national party rules.  In relevant part, Rule 2.K.5 requires that the delegate allocation be locked in based on the final preference vote at the first determining step.  In Wyoming’s plan, the first determining step is the county caucuses.   As such, assuming that Wyoming does not correct this part of the plan in the final draft, it is likely that the Rules and By-laws Committee will require a change prior to approving Wyoming’s plan.  Given what the other states are doing, Wyoming will probably be given the option of using either the raw vote totals (which they have used in the past) or the state convention delegates won.  As noted in previous posts, using state convention delegates won eliminate the effect of high turnout in some parts of the state but can also penalize candidates who are get just over 15% of the raw vote state-wide (as those candidates are likely to miss the threshold in some of the counties converting 13% of the vote in those counties into 0% of the delegates potentially causing the candidate to slip beneath 15% if the delegates won state-wide).  Continue Reading...

Also posted in 2020 Convention | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Delegate Selection Plans — Wyoming and Update

Swalwell joins the fray

Rep. Eric Swalwell today became the 16th candidate for the Democratic nomination for President. Only 6 still to hear from.

Definitely running:

  1. Rep. John Delaney
  2. Sec. Julian Castro
  3. Gov. Jay Inslee
  4. Sen. Elizabeth Warren
  5. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard
  6. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand
  7. Mayor Pete Buttigieg
  8. Sen. Kamala Harris
  9. Sen. Cory Booker
  10. Sen. Any Klobuchar
  11. Andrew Yang
  12. Sen. Bernie Sanders
  13. Gov. John Hickenlooper
  14. Rep. Beto O’Rourke
  15. Rep. Tim Ryan
  16. Rep. Eric Swalwell

Potential candidates who have shown some interest: Continue Reading...

Comments Off on Swalwell joins the fray

Delegate Selection Rules — Alaska, Maine, and Utah

At this time last week, eight of the eighteen states that had used caucuses or party-run primaries in 2016 had released their delegate selection plans for 2020.  This week three of the remaining ten released their plans and they are a very mixed bag.

This week, we start out west in Alaska.  In 2016, Alaska used a traditional caucus process with the caucuses occurring at the legislative district level.  When it came to allocating delegates to the national convention, Alaska used the raw vote totals from the legislative district caucuses to allocate the “district-level” delegates, but used the votes of the state convention delegates to allocate the pledged party leader and at-large delegates.

For 2020, Alaska is switching to a party-run primary that will allow early voting (either electronic or by mail-in absentee ballot).  Additionally, the party will run voting centers in key locations that will be open for at least four hours on the primary/caucus date (although there is conflicting language in the draft concerning the times that these centers will be open).  All of the delegates to the national convention will be allocated based on the results of the party-run primary.  (Like many “primary” states, Alaska will continue to use the local caucuses to choose delegates to the state convention which will elect the actual national convention delegates.) Continue Reading...

Also posted in 2020 Convention | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Delegate Selection Rules — Alaska, Maine, and Utah

Delegate Selection Rules — Hawaii

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...

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

Delegate Selection Rules — Nevada

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...

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

Delegate Selection Rules — North Dakota

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...

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

Delegate Selection Rules for Washington — Primary or Caucus

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...

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

Brown Out

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...

1 Comment

Iowa Caucus 2020 Rules — First Look

Part of the changes in the DNC Call for the 2020 Convention and National Delegate Selection Rules were provisions governing the caucus states.  In past cycles, the results in states which used caucuses as their delegate selection process but also used a later non-binding primary showed two things.  First, significantly more people participated in the non-binding primary.  Second, the voters in the non-binding primary had different preferences than those who attended the caucuses.  Additionally, the rules in some of the caucus states created an opportunity for “mischief” at the later levels of the delegate selection process permitting a well-organized campaign to win additional delegates at those later levels and costing a poorly-organized campaigns delegates that they had apparently won on caucus nights.  The new rules attempted to address these “problems”  In particular, Rule 2.K of the Delegate Selection Rules includes requirements that caucus state have a procedure for early or absentee votes in the caucus, have a mechanism to allow participation by those who are unable to attend their local caucus at the time and location set for the local caucus, a means for reporting the “statewide and district level results for each candidate based on the first expression of preference by the participants” in the first level of caucuses; and require that “the allocation of all national delegates, be locked in at the final expression of preference” in the first level of caucuses.  However, Rule 14.B and Rule 14.E seem to suggest that caucus states might still be able a later level as the determining step.  (In primary states, these same rules require using the primary vote.)

In 2016, the Iowa Caucus (held under the old rules) did have a process by which voters could vote absentee via satellite and tele-caucuses but the satellite caucuses only elected three state convention delegates and the tele-caucuses only selected two state convention delegates.  Voters participating in either of these alternative caucuses had no role in the selecting delegates at the district level.  For those who could attend the precinct caucuses, at the precinct caucus, attendees would divide into an initial preference and determine which groups were viable (with a general 15% threshold unless the precinct was electing three or fewer delegates to the county convention).  After the initial count, attendees would have the opportunity (based on which preferences were viable or close to viable) to change their preference.  The precinct chair would report the results of this second count to the state party in terms of “state delegate equivalents” and would not result raw votes.  The delegates selected at the precinct caucuses would attend the county conventions where a similar process would occur to select the delegates who would be attending the congressional district convention and the state convention.  A similar process would again occur at the congressional district conventions and the state convention to determine the allocation of the national convention delegates selected at those conventions.  For multiple reasons (the possibility of delegates elected at precinct caucuses and county conventions not attending later conventions, the possibility of changes in preference of such delegates, delegates pledged to withdrawn candidates choosing between the remaining candidates, and the fact that each delegate chosen at a precinct meeting was a fraction of a state delegate and those fractions would be converted to whole numbers at the county convention), the report of the state delegate equivalent only provided a rough estimate of the national delegates that each candidate was likely to receive from Iowa.

We now have a draft of the 2020 Delegate Selection Rules for Iowa.  (Of course, these rules still have to go through a public comment period, be finally approved by the Iowa Democratic Party, and by approved by the Rules and By-laws Committee of the Democratic National Committee before becoming final.)  This draft gives us a first look at how the caucus states might change their state rules to comply with the new national rules.  Continue Reading...

Also posted in 2020 Convention, Democratic Party, Elections | Tagged , | Comments Off on Iowa Caucus 2020 Rules — First Look