Matt Meyer Calls For Primaries To Determine Successors To Sarah McBride And Kyle Evans Gay
I kinda like the idea, although the process for the special elections is pretty far along already. Here’s the press release:
Governor-elect Matt Meyer Calls for Open Primaries in Upcoming Special Elections to Empower Delaware Voters and Increase Transparency
Wilmington, DE – As first reported by Cris Barrish with WHYY, Governor-elect Matt Meyer is urging Delaware’s Democratic Party to adopt an open primary process for the upcoming special elections in the First and Fifth Senate Districts. Meyer argues that allowing voters to decide the nominees aligns with the party’s principles and strengthens democracy.
“Our party’s nominees should be chosen by the people of the First and Fifth Districts in an open and transparent process, not by political insiders. It’s as simple as that.” Meyer stated.
Meyer outlined his vision in a letter to party leadership, emphasizing, “To encourage inclusiveness and afford every Democrat a seat at the table, we should hold Democratic Primary Elections to nominate our candidates for these Senate seats.” He added, “This open and inclusive process would require our candidates to organize, persuade, and get out the vote in order to earn the Democratic nomination, providing them with a strong mandate from Democratic voters and setting us up to succeed in the special elections.”
“Our administration is committed to fighting for transparency everywhere it’s needed, including within our own party’s rules,” Meyer stated, underscoring his dedication to democratic ideals.
Truth-in-advertising: I definitely have preferred candidates in both and I don’t think an open primary would hurt them. Especially since, in one case, my preferred candidate was the victim of a skewed nomination process dominated by insiders. I doubt that primaries will take place this time. But, as an RD committee member, I’d vote to support them. Doesn’t hold true for our current Democratic Chair, though:
Meyer outlined his position in a letter he sent to Democratic Party chair Betsy Maron on Friday, three days after being elected.
Maron did not return a request from WHYY News to discuss Meyer’s proposition. But Monday she rejected the proposal in a letter to the governor-elect that also said changes could be considered at the party’s annual convention in June.
“We welcome a dialogue to evaluate the current official replacement process under the Delaware Code, the Delaware Democratic Party rules, and the laws of other subdivisions and municipalities,’’ Maron wrote. “At this time, however, we cannot support your proposal.”
At which point Betsy went back to her real job of extending birthday wishes to party hacks. She must be replaced ASAP.
You said Betsy’s name three times. That means LG is going to appear soon, as the legend foretold.
She’s a nepo baby. Set expectations accordingly
Absolutely should be primaries for these seats. Matt Meyer is correct.
They should not be picked behind closed doors by the Bud Freels of the world and a group of unelected volunteers who serve on these political committees, who may or not represent the will of voters.
In fact, I would consider these seats “Open” in 2026, unless there are primaries where the voters choose the replacements.
Thank you Matt Meyer for bringing this up.
Well, the seats will both be up in 2026 as neither Sarah nor Kyle would have been up this year.
The time to make this proposal was BEFORE there were 2 specials in the works.
Change the code, change the rules, do both in the appropriate deliberative bodies (The legislature and the party rules committees). It’s inappropriate to put you finger on the scale at this point in the process. It could all be done by the end of the legislative session in June.
Word on the street is that Meyer’s proposal is designed to get an ally of his elected to one of the seats. This ally has won elections, but has no pull among RD committee members. And it would not be someone in El Somnambulo’s top 5.
Man, NOW you got me going.
Does the Code need to be changed, or does the Code leave it in the hands of the political parties? I don’t know the answer to that.
So, a couple things… Here’s part of the code:
§ 7103. Candidates.
(a) The county committee for each political party eligible to place candidates on the general election ballot for the most recent past general election may nominate a candidate for the special election by submitting a nomination to the Department office conducting the special election no later than 25 days before the date of the special election.
It doesn’t explicitly state that the parties CAN’T hold a primary, but there are two major factors working against it: 1) There is nothing in the special elections sections of the code providing for how a special election primary would be run or funded; and 2) The window is insanely tight and would not work.
Envision the scenario where a lawmaker dies in office (pray that it never happens). There’s no runway to identify a successor ahead of time. The clock starts immediately. The Speaker or Pro Tem has 10 days to issue a writ scheduling the primary for 30-35 days out. Each party’s candidate has to submit the paperwork to DOE no later than 25 days out from the general (special) election.
That leaves a max of 20 days for the party to nominate a candidate. There is quite literally no way to adequately solicit candidates and hold a primary in less than three weeks… at least not in a way that wouldn’t favor some deep-pocketed individual who can throw stuff together in a matter of days.
But even if the Dems decided to do this and rush a primary, they’d have to insist that DOE hold a primary (which requires certain notifications/deadlines and mailing of permament absentee and overseas ballots) in less than three weeks. Again, those are insanely tight windows.
Defintely worth consideration, but also looks like it would require a change in code to reasonably work.
It’s happened several times that I can recall. Herman Holloway Sr., Thurman Adams, Jim Vaughn, and former Speaker of the House Brad Barnes.
The Vaughn and Thurman ones were crazy because the results of those Senate specials touched off another special in the House.
When Herman Holloway Sr. died, we ended up with the candidacy of Herman Jr.–which ended up electing Marageret Rose Henry in a district that had something like an 80-20 D registration edge.
Ah, yes, the classic trick of putting your thumb on the scale by *checks notes* having a democratic election.
I can’t breathe because of all of the smoke in this room.
Good to see your back to party hack status. Your momentary praise of the Gov elect you bent over backwards to slam was saccharin sweet. Nice to see ya back on the dark side.
Like button. In addition to the impossibility of imminent change, annoyed at certain prospective candidates and Matt people not smart enough to realize we had time to change already. Kyle’s seat maybe not, but we could see Sarah’s special coming for a while and could have easily run a bill to update the Code on it. Something Matt will learn soon: elections cost money. No gov has thought the change was worth the price yet. But man some of these people being talked about would probably change your mind. Anyway, I hope Matt turns back around and gives props to how the process is being planned, because it’s way more inclusive than the law actually requires.
I agree. There has been a concerted effort to encourage committees to expand their membership.
In our 7th RD, I’ve been blown away by the degree of community involvement our newest members have brought to the table.
The way I read the code is that it is in the hands of the political parties. Says they nominate the candidate. It does not say how they choose the candidate. I guess the law might have be changed to allow the state to pay for the primary election. Just my none lawyer thoughts.
As much as I like the idea, it’s probably too late to change now. The process had been under way for a couple of months in anticipation of special elections. I know that our committee had been kept up to speed on it.
There’s also the logistical challenge of having a primary AND a general election in time to ensure that the districts don’t remain unrepresented for too long.
Betsy’s a mess but Matt has some reading to do about the law. We sure can support his request – but that doesn’t mean the Party can actually complete his request with no money and oh yeah, the need to follow the law. Also it’s not even in her control they should be asking the subdivisions their thoughts. That old GOP hag is probably waiting with baited breath to sue on something like this. Who will replace Betsy this spring?
I was upset when Stephanie Hansen was selected to run as Democrat for Bethany Hall-Long’s senate seat in 2017. I wasn’t against Stephanie, just the process. This year I see that it is important to quickly get a good candidate that is ready to run in the special election. Also, this time I will be one of the ‘selectors’ in that smoke filled room. —- I hope this has crushed any chance of me being on the progressive MVP list.
Not at all. I’ll be one of those selectors as well.
Plus, I don’t smoke. Are you in SD 1 or SD 5?
5
Ooooh–let’s have coffee.
BTW, I’m sorry, you’re on the MVP List whether you like it or not.
Maybe this will change your mind. I have asked Sarah McBride to get me tickets to Trump’s inauguration.
Heh. Heh-heh.
I’d prefer primaries too, but switching at this point seems not feasible. And would the Dems having a primary but the R’s selecting their candidate thru the current process but D candidates at a disadvantage from a timing standpoint this year?
I don’t think any reasonable person disagrees with the intent of the Gov-Elect here. Sounds like a bill clarifying and funding this new process would get a lot of support. However, “putting your finger on the scale” at this point in the process, and sending an open letter to the Party, knowing that time and operational support is not on your side, just smacks of sleazy political showmanship. Maybe I give it a pass because his policy position is accurate, but the showmanship gives me a little bit of the ick (as the kids would say)
I tend to agree. Especially with how he sprung it on the NCC Democratic Committee.
One hopes it’s just ‘misreading the room’.
The more I think about it, the less I like Matt’s idea, unless a lot more thought goes into it.
There are multiple candidates signed up to run in each Senate District. Unless you have ranked-choice voting, you could well end up with a repeat of Monique Johns’ victory–she clearly wasn’t the choice of the vast majority who voted, but she prevailed in a five-way primary. I think she would have finished third or 4th had there been ranked-choice voting.
Who wants that in a special election for the State Senate? Not me.
Plus, it’s a sprint in a special, so even if you doubled the runway for a primary, that’s less than seven weeks to campaign for the party nomination. That leaves little time for a good, but unknown, candidate to get their name out. It would heavily favor someone with name recognition and/or quick access to money.
I’m a huge fan of ranked choice voting. That’s an interesting solution and should be part of any discussion.
Ranked choice voting can be gamed, just as any system can be gamed. Most people don’t realize it because they’re not sneaky by nature. Political people are.
True, but as you pointed out, most people, which I take to include most voters, are not sneaky by nature.
I’m pretty sure I don’t have to tell you the nature of the bloc of “most voters.” Let’s put it this way: Running a candidate with the same name is already a tactic, as is flooding the ballot with candidates. Because they work.