State’s past moves to earlier primaries were largely flops
If Gov. Jerry Brown had made a signing statement when he approved California’s latest effort to move the state’s presidential primary near the front of the list, it likely would have been something like, “What the heck?”
After all, it was just six years ago that Brown signed a bill, with just three “no” votes in the entire Legislature, that moved the presidential primary election back to June after three different and largely unsuccessful attempts to jump the line and give California voters more clout when it comes to picking presidential nominees.
But this time for sure it’s going to work, the bill’s supporters promise.
The earlier primary, now scheduled for Super Tuesday on March 3, 2020, “puts California voters in the front seat in choosing our next president and will change our elections for the better,” said state Sen. Ricardo Lara, D-Bell Gardens (Los Angeles County). Lara wrote SB568, the election bill Brown signed Wednesday.
The bill “gives all Californians a more powerful voice in presidential primary elections,” Assemblyman Kevin Mullin, D-San Mateo, a coauthor of the bill, said in a statement. With one of the
largest and most diverse populations in the country, “it is only right that our primary election date makes California count.”
While legislators are eager to boost California’s political power, there are probably 49 other states that don’t want to see it happen, which could leave the state facing the same troubles it did the other times the primary date was shifted.
From 1946 to 1994, all California primaries were held in early June. In 1996, legislators moved it to the fourth Tuesday in March, in 2000 and 2004 to the first Tuesday in March, and in 2008 all the way to Feb. 5, with a separate statewide primary for congressional and legislative seats on June 3.
None of those changes worked out exactly as planned.
In the scuffle by states to avoid being at the tail end of the primary season, “it became a huge leapfrog game, with everyone jumping over everyone else to end up in almost the same order they started,” said Larry Gerston, retired professor of political science at San Jose State University.
A state analysis of Lara’s bill found that in 2008, 33 other states moved up their primary dates after California changed its to February, and 15 states shared the primary date with California.
Even with a March 3 primary date, California is going to find itself deep in a pack of semi-early starters. In 2016, for example, both the Democratic and Republican national committees ruled that Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada could hold their caucuses and primaries before any of the other states, a move that’s likely to hold in 2020.
California will share the March 3 Super Tuesday date with 10 other states, including delegate-rich ones like Texas, Georgia, Virginia and Massachusetts. Other states, such as Oregon, already are making noises about advancing their primaries, and plenty of movement is possible before 2019, when state primary dates are confirmed.
The change also comes with some likely costs. In 2016, for example, California’s 551 delegates to the Democratic National Convention included 70 bonus delegates the party awarded to the state because of its late primary date. Although party primary rules won’t be set until sometime next year, those extra delegates are likely to disappear because California’s primary was moved to March.
The new primary, which will hold for all state elections, even in non-presidential years, stretches out the campaign clock dramatically. Candidates for all offices will have to start raising money earlier and campaign through the holidays to challenge in a March election.
“To put that into perspective,” the state Senate analysis of the bill reported, “the primary election will occur before the start of the Major League Baseball season and the general election probably will not occur (until) after the last game of the World Series.”
That boosts the cost of California campaigns and probably shortens the tempers of voters already weary with what seems like nonstop politicking in the state.
The urge to be first — or close to it — also contributes to a front-loaded primary season that could change the look of national politics. With megastates like California moving into the early mix, there’s not much time for an underfunded, long-shot candidate like Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1976 to steal a couple of early victories with intense one-on-one campaigning in small states like Iowa or New Hampshire and use that momentum to build national support. Campaigning in a huge mediafriendly state like California favors candidates with plenty of money and an organization to match.
That could change the type of candidate seen in California — and in the nation, said David McCuan, a political science professor at Sonoma State University.
“Look, the early primary builds a profile for potential California candidates like Sen. Kamala Harris or Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti or someone who wants to be a counter to President Trump,” he said.
But in California, celebrity can be a substitute for money, clearing the way for a nontraditional candidate to use the state to start a high-profile national run.
“A Hollywood type or a Silicon Valley celebrity could catch lightning in a bottle, just like Jimmy Carter did,” McCuan added.
As seen in the past, California’s move to an early primary comes with no guarantees and surrenders the state’s chance to be a kingmaker in the case of a close, hard-fought contest that continues late into the primary season.
With plenty of candidates on the ballot in the early primaries, “we’re not talking about a bloc of votes going to any one candidate,” Gerston said. “Proportional voting by the Democrats and semi-proportional voting by congressional districts for Republicans” split the number of delegates awarded among a number of candidates.
But the potential rewards of an earlier California primary outweigh any political risks, supporters of the move say.
“California has been a leader time and again on the most important issues facing our country,” Alex Padilla, California’s secretary of state, said in a statement. The earlier primary “will help ensure that issues important to Californians are prioritized by presidential candidates from all political parties.”
“The early primary builds a profile for potential California candidates ... or someone who wants to be a counter to President Trump.” David McCuan, Sonoma State University political science professor