E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS“The Republican Party should consider pulling its 2012 convention from Florida if that state continues to insist on holding its primary so early in the schedule, state party leaders in Iowa and South Carolina said yesterday,” The Boston Globe reports. “The dispute is part of an ongoing disagreement over the presidential nominating calendar, which could prove crucial for which candidate wins. National GOP leaders had been seeking an orderly and extended primary season, in part by punishing states that scheduled their elections before March 1, 2012. They carved out an exemption for four states: Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada. Florida has taken the most aggressive position, with a primary that is currently scheduled on Jan. 31, 2012 — before any other state.”
“The chairman of the Florida Republican Party is open to moving the date of his state’s presidential primary to fifth in the nation, he said in a statement Thursday evening,” Roll Call reports. “The party had scheduled its nominating contest for Jan. 31, touching off a battle with South Carolina and Iowa, which are authorized by Republican National Committee bylaws to go first in the process, along with New Hampshire and Nevada.”
COLORADO: “Republicans on the House Administration Committee want to shore up voter registration rules in the wake of a Colorado study that found as many as 5,000 non-citizens in the state took part in last year’s election,” The Hill reports.
FLORIDA: The standoff between the GOP and rogue states trying to move up their primary dates continues, now with Republican Party leaders from traditionally early states getting involved, the Tampa Tribune writes. “South Carolina and Iowa Republican Party leaders are calling for the party's 2012 national convention to be moved out of Florida if the state doesn't change its schedule-busting presidential primary date, a threat some Florida Republicans say should be taken seriously.”
IOWA: Two pairs of congressmen -- Republicans Tom Latham and Steve Kind and Democrats Dave Loebsack and Bruce Braley -- might have to go head-to-head in the primaries, as a new redistricting plan would consolidate their four existing districts into two, the Des Moines Register writes.
MISSOURI: “Democrats are attacking Missouri GOP Senate hopeful Sarah Steelman after news surfaced Thursday that four years’ worth of key records from her tenure as state treasurer are missing,” Roll Call writes. “Most of the documents — sent emails, schedules and travel information, among other content — are required by state law to be preserved in the state archive.”
NEVADA: The two-day Conservative Leadership Conference in Las Vegas will host a Republican presidential debate on July 10, the Las Vegas Review-Journal reports.
Leave a Comment:
If they don't already, the states should make the political parties pay for their primaries. If they are piggybacking on another state balloting event, they should still have to pay for the expenses they add. That should save a couple million for every state that doesn't already do that.
The only problem with this theory is that it is not the party holding an election. It is the state holding an election and telling the party that it has to live with the results of the state election. It would be one thing to require a party to pay for a primary in the handful of states (e.g. Virginia) in which the state gives the party the option of choosing its candidates by primary or convention. It is another thing requiring the party to pay for a primary which the state mandates by law that be held, especially in a state in which the party wants to choose delegates by caucus (e.g. Washington).
Acually there should be federally mandated calandar that can't be abidged by states. This is a federal not state election. The fedeal govenemnt should pay the state to admisnister it so that states are not stuck with the whole tab. Nation parties should be required tobe bound by this calendar as well orlose tax deducatiblty of contributions.
State caucus proedures should be tightened. Since some caucuses by parties are on differet dates it is possible forpeople to cross party lines, because there is no mechanism to prevent voting twice-once in the demecrats and another in the Republican.
There are no penalites for caucus vote frouds.
AP: "Republicans who have thus far been campaigning far to the right will have to branch out "beyond talking about things like the Declaration of Independence and conservative Republican talking points."
This is what passes for "hard news" ? Snarky digs at Republicans?
The AP is not a news organization , it is a joke; deep in the tank for Obama...
Even makes MSNBC seems slightly objective by comparsion...
Wow, when are we going to atually do something different. Our country is going down the toilet and we have a chance to turn this around. Perry? come on! more of the same! Ron Paul is the only one who speaks from the heart and actually means what he says.