DENVER – A bipartisan coalition of Colorado lawmakers announced plans Thursday to switch to a presidential primary following a chaotic caucus that left many irate.
The plans would not do away with the state’s caucus system, in which neighbors gather to voice their support or opposition to a candidate as part of a grass-roots nominating process. Those caucuses would take place for other offices, such as legislative races.
But an outcry after the March 1 caucus in Colorado pushed lawmakers to propose a presidential primary that would include more participants. Caucuses had long lines and confusion over how to participate.
The state last had a presidential primary in 2002.
“People want it back, and the first thing this bill does is address this issue,” said Rep. Tim Dore, R-Elizabeth, a co-sponsor of the expected legislation. “It’s a common-sense, straightforward approach to bringing back the presidential primary so that those concerned citizens, those citizens that want to be part of this process, have an opportunity to be part of it and have their voice heard.”
Rep. J. Paul Brown, R-Ignacio, will be a co-sponsor.
“The beauty of this is we would not only have a presidential primary where we can involve many more people, but we’ll also be able to keep the caucus system so that communities can come together,” Brown said.
Leaders from both parties attended the news conference, as well as Secretary of State Wayne Williams, whose office supports the effort and would assist in administering the primary.
Voters affiliated with a party would simply receive a mail ballot for their party’s presidential candidates. The process would be similar to general election voting, in which voters could mail the ballot, drop it off or vote at a voting center.
Unaffiliated voters would be informed 60 days before the election that they must choose a party preference to receive that party’s ballot. The preference is temporary. Thirty days after the election, the preference would default back to unaffiliated. There would, however, be a public record of what preference that voter chose for the election.
Under a 2013 law backed by Democrats, same-day registration would apply, meaning an unaffiliated voter could show up on the day of the primary, choose a party preference and vote.
Jean Walter, chairwoman of La Plata County Democrats, said even with passions flaring over the presidential race, caucus night saw only 20 percent participation.
“If the primaries are boring, people just don’t turn out,” Walter said. “It’s so exclusionary. Nobody wants to exclude people who can’t get there.”
Travis Oliger, chairman of the La Plata County Republican Party, added: “We’ll get a wider range of a voice, and it makes it easier for people to vote. The caucus system is difficult to maneuver. ... It would be a good thing to give everybody more of an opportunity to be involved.”
Switching to a presidential primary could raise Colorado’s profile.
With Republicans opting this year to eliminate a preference poll at caucus, presidential candidates largely ignored the state. Democrats held a preference poll on March 1, but because of the state’s confusing process, it did not receive much national attention.
The national parties would choose the date for Colorado’s presidential primary.
Observers say Colorado could become one of the early states to hold a presidential primary, which would add to its national significance.
Meanwhile, a ballot effort – led largely by the Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce – remains on the table to switch to a primary. Proponents say the legislative effort does not go far enough.
“Why should someone who views themselves as an independent be forced to join – even temporarily – a political party in order to participate in elections paid for by all taxpayers?” asked Curtis Hubbard, campaign manager for the ballot drive, Let Colorado Vote. “Why should anyone support a measure that doesn’t treat Colorado voters equally, and instead creates two classes of voters?”
An open question also remains over funding, with estimates as high as $7 million.
“It gives us three years to find the money,” said Rep. Dominick Moreno, D-Commerce City, a co-sponsor of the coming legislation. “We’ll find a way to pay for it.”
