AB 126 to replace the major party caucuses with a presidential preference primary was introduced on Feb 15, 2021. The bill is sponsored by Assemblyman Jason Frierson, Assemblywoman Teresa Benitez-Thompson, and Assemblywoman Brittney Miller.
The primary will be used to “…determine the preferences of the registered voters of a major political party regarding the party’s nominee for President of the United States.” (Sec.1)
Delegates selected by the party to their national convention “…must reasonably reflect the results of the presidential preference primary election if one has been held for the party.” (Sec. 5)
The bill requires the primary to be the first nominating event in the among the 13 western states. (Sec. 43) It will actually be the first in the nation.
Clearly, the intent is for Nevada to have a major impact on the nomination process of both major political party presidential candidates.
Section 1 of the bill clearly states the winner should reflect the preference of the registered voters of each party. I’m sure the desire and priority of the party is for the party’s nominee to have the broadest support, to unite the party behind the candidate, and to avoid intra-party conflict during the nominating process.
Section 5 clearly directs the party to select delegates to their national convention who represent that preference.
However, given the timing of the primary and the potential for numerous candidates at that particular time in the process, Section 46 of the bill creates a high likelihood that the winner of the primary; the winner of the state’s national convention delegates, will actually be a candidate with a small plurality of primary votes not meeting the desired outcome of Section 1; “Such a registered voter may vote for only one qualified candidate on the ballot as the voter’s preference for the nominee for President of the United States for the party.”
The Nevada Democratic Party was highly successful in overcoming this potential outcome during the early voting process of the nominating caucus last February. Party members were allowed to rank their candidate preferences in order, ensuring, should their preferred candidate not be viable, their voice would still be heard. Party members who participated in caucus early voting overwhelmingly liked this system and found it easy. Using a similar process in a crowded primary field would ensure the goal or section 1 would be achieved.
Please contact Speaker Frierson; via email Jason.frierson@asm.state.nv.us or phone
775-684-8537 and urge him, in the name of party unity and cohesion, to allow party members to rank candidates in order of preference so the winner of the primary (and the state’s delegates) truly reflect the desire of a majority of party voters.
Ranked Choice Voting is an important tool to ensure every vote counts. This would open up the possibility of a viable 3rd party that will represent the majority of Americans, not the extreme sides of the current political parties.