BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS
AND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
Senator Lou Correa, Chair
BILL NO: AB 80 HEARING DATE:
6/7/11
AUTHOR: FONG ANALYSIS BY:
Darren Chesin
AMENDED: 3/3/11
FISCAL: NO
SUBJECT
Presidential Primary: election date
DESCRIPTION
Existing law requires the presidential primary to be held
on the first Tuesday in February in any year that is evenly
divisible by the number four, and prohibits the
consolidation of the presidential primary with the
statewide direct primary held in that year.
This bill moves the presidential primary election from
February to June in presidential election years and
consolidates it with the statewide direct primary election.
Specifically, this bill:
Requires the presidential primary to be held on the
first Tuesday after the first Monday in June in any year
that is evenly divisible by the number four.
Eliminates the first Tuesday in February of each year
evenly divisible by the number four as an established
election date and as a date in which statewide elections
are held.
Requires the presidential primary to be consolidated
with the statewide direct primary held in that year.
BACKGROUND
A Brief History of California's Primary Elections . From
1946 to 1994, California's primary elections were held in
June of every even-numbered year. Frustrated, however,
with the perceived lack of importance and impact that
California had on the presidential nominating process, the
state passed several bills to move up the presidential
primary election. In 1996, California's presidential
primary was held on the fourth Tuesday in March. In 2000,
the presidential primary was held on the first Tuesday in
March.
Regardless of the earlier primary dates, California
struggled to gain influence on the selection of
presidential candidates as other states also moved up their
primaries. In 2000, California's March 7th Presidential
Primary came after nine other states held their primaries
or caucuses and was held on the same day as 13 other state
contests.
The legislation that permanently moved the primary to the
first Tuesday in March, SB 1999 (Costa), Chapter 913,
Statutes of 1998, did so for all future primary elections -
not just presidential primary elections. Discouraged from
the perceived lack of clout California was having in the
presidential primary process, even with the earlier primary
date, and concerned that the earlier primary for
legislative, congressional, and statewide offices was
increasing the costs of campaigning by lengthening the
campaign season, the Legislature and Governor chose to move
California's primary election, including presidential
primaries, back to June. SB 1730 (Johnson), Chapter 817,
Statutes of 2005, required California's primary election to
be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in June
in every even-numbered year.
For 2008, the Legislature and Governor again attempted to
increase California's influence in the presidential
campaign and encourage candidates to discuss and debate
issues relevant to this state. SB 113 (Calderon), Chapter
2, Statutes of 2007, moved California's presidential
primary to February 5th - the earliest vote in state
history. In addition to moving up the presidential
primary, SB 113 required a separate primary election for
legislative and congressional offices to be held in June.
By the time California voters went to the polls on Election
Day, 33 other states had also moved up their presidential
AB 80 (FONG) Page
2
primaries and 15 states held their primary on the same day
as California - giving February 5th the title of "Super
Tuesday." As a result of the primary date change,
California conducted three separate statewide elections in
2008. This bill proposes to eliminate the stand-alone
presidential primary and consolidate it with the statewide
direct primary in June.
Party Rules . When a state holds a presidential primary or
caucus, it is actually selecting delegates who are pledged
to support a specified presidential candidate to represent
the state at the political party national conventions.
Those delegates then vote at the party convention to choose
the party's presidential nominee. While a state is free to
schedule its presidential primary election or caucus
whenever it wants, it may face sanctions at the national
convention if its election or caucus is held at a time or
in a manner that violates the national party rules. The
national Democratic and Republican party rules establish a
time period during which state parties are permitted to
select delegates to the national convention. That time
period is commonly referred to as the "window."
Historically, the parties have allowed certain states,
including Iowa and New Hampshire, to schedule their
presidential contests prior to the designated window
without penalty.
In response to the 2008 "Super Tuesday" where several
states shared the same primary date, both national
political parties adopted new rules in August, 2010 to
extend the primary season and encourage states to hold
their presidential primaries or caucuses later in the year.
Though both parties begin the window on the first Tuesday
in March, they take different approaches to encourage
states to hold later primary elections. The Democratic
National Committee will be awarding states who schedule
their primaries later than March 6 a specific percentage of
bonus delegates, allotting more delegates the later the
primary or caucus. The Republican National Committee will
penalize states that choose to schedule their presidential
contests prior to the first day of April by reducing the
number of delegates awarded to an offending state by 50%.
Absent a change to current law, which sets California's
presidential primary for February, California will be out
AB 80 (FONG) Page
3
of compliance with the national party rules. Several
states have introduced legislation to comply with the new
political party rules. This bill's proposed timeframe for
the presidential primary would be consistent with national
party rules.
Primary Con$olidation . The presidential primary election in
2008 marked the first time in recent history that
California did not consolidate its presidential primary
with the statewide direct primary election, and as a result
California held three separate statewide elections that
year. According to information provided by the State
Controller's Office and the Secretary of State's (SOS)
Office, California spent approximately $96,980,195 on the
stand-alone presidential primary election in 2008. This
bill proposes to consolidate all future presidential
primary elections with statewide direct primaries.
COMMENTS
1.According to the author , current law is out of compliance
with national party rules and requires California to hold
three separate statewide elections in 2012, imposing a
huge cost on the state and local governments at a time
when our fiscal situation is in crisis. Eliminating the
state's stand-alone presidential primary election and
consolidating it with other statewide elections will save
millions of dollars, increase voter turnout, and ensure
that California's primary is held in accordance with
national party rules.
2.Previous Legislation . SB 113 (Calderon), Chapter 2,
Statutes of 2007 moved California's presidential primary
election from June to February in presidential election
years and prohibited it from being consolidated with the
statewide direct primary. AB 2949 (Umberg) of 2006 would
have required the SOS to schedule California's
presidential primary election before, or on the same day
as, the earliest presidential primary election held in
any other state. AB 2949 was held on the Assembly
Appropriations Committee's suspense file. AB 1730
(Johnson), Chapter 817, Statutes of 2004 moved
California's statewide direct primary election to the
first Tuesday after the first Monday in June and required
AB 80 (FONG) Page
4
it to be consolidated with the presidential primary
election in presidential election years.
PRIOR ACTION
Assembly Elections and Redistricting Committee: 7-0
Assembly Floor: 75-0
POSITIONS
Sponsor: Author
Support: California Association of Clerks and Election
Officials
California State Association of Counties
California Teachers Association
County of San Bernardino
County of San Mateo
Secretary of State
Oppose: None received
AB 80 (FONG) Page
5