Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T20:31:37.708Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Direct Primary Legislation, 1936–19391

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Louise Overacker
Louise Overacker
Affiliation:
Wellesley College
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The passage of mandatory, state-wide, direct primary laws in Utah and New Mexico within the last four years leaves only two states which retain the convention method of making nominations for all state offices.

The Utah act of 1937 applies to all national, state, and local officers. Any party which polled two per cent of the total vote cast for representative in Congress at the last election, or which files a petition signed by at least 500 qualified electors, comes within its scope. The second Tuesday of September is fixed as the date of the primary, with a second, or “runoff,” primary in those cases in which no candidate receives a majority in the first primary. The primary is open, candidates for the nominations of all parties appearing in party columns on a “blanket” ballot with perforations between the columns. After marking his ballot, the voter detaches the used portion and deposits it in the ballot box. A separate box is provided for unused portions. Names may be placed upon the ballot by petition or declaration of candidacy, and are rotated. State committees and delegates to the national conventions are chosen at state conventions held on or before the last Saturday in June. The platform is drafted by a second convention meeting in September.

Type
American Government and Politics
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 34 , Issue 3 , June 1940 , pp. 499 - 506
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1940

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 Laws of Utah, 1937, ch. 29, sec. 5, p. 57.

3 Ibid., sec. 3, p. 56.

4 Ibid., sec. 6, p. 57.

5 Ibid., sec. 24, p. 60.

6 Ibid., secs. 13–16 and 25, pp. 58–59 and 61.

7 Ibid., sec. 39.

8 Session Laws of New Mexico, special session of 1938, ch. 2, sees. 4 and 5, p. 4.

9 Ibid., sec. 7, p. 5.

10 Ibid., secs. 9 and 10, pp. 6–8.

11 Ibid., sec. 11, pp. 8–9.

12 Session Laws of New Mexico, 1939, ch. 152, sec. 38, p. 300.

13 Ibid., special session of 1938, ch. 2, sec. 15, p. 11.

14 General Statutes of Connecticut, 1939, Special Act 544; Acts and Resolves of Rhode Island, Joint Resolutions 78 and 79.

15 Statutes of California, 1939, ch. 26; Laws of Minnesota, 1939, ch. 345; Laws of the General Assembly of Pennsylvania, 1937, No. 320.

16 Oregon Laws, 1939, ch. 360.

17 July 12, 1939.

18 See note in this Review, Vol. 30 (April, 1936), p. 279.

19 Acts of Arkansas, 1939, ch. 103, p. 214.

20 Idem.

21 For this information, the writer is indebted to Professor Robert A. Leflar, of the University of Arkansas School of Law, and Mr. Osro Cobb, chairman of the Arkansas Republican State Committee.

22 Acts of the West Virginia Legislature, 1939, ch. 58, p. 304.

23 Acts and Resolves of Massachusetts, 1939, ch. 104, p. 116.

24 Idaho Session Laws, 1937, ch. 54, p. 69; Laws of North Dakota, 1939, ch. 139, p. 215; Public and Local Acts of Michigan, 1937, No. 37, p. 46; Laws of Utah, 1937 ch. 29, p. 56.

25 Public and Local Acts of Michigan, 1939, No. 63, p. 117.

26 Acts and Joint Resolutions of South Carolina, 1938, No. 847, p. 1742.

27 Public Laws of North Carolina, 1939, ch. 159, p. 390; ch. 352, p. 758.

28 Acts and Resolves of Massachusetts, 1938, ch. 76, p. 52 (City of Medford); Laws of Minnesota, 1937, ch. 342, p. 461, and 1939, ch. 86, p. 127 (school districts); Laws of New York, 1938, ch. 435 (villages of the first class); Public Laws of North Carolina, 1937, chs. 263, 264, and 423, and 1939, chs. 78, 80, 105, 141 (certain counties); Acts and Joint Resolutions of South Carolina, 1936, Nos. 635 (Brookland) and No. 746 (city of Rock Hill).

29 Acts of Louisiana, 1938, No. 396.

30 Session Laws of Minnesota, 1939, ch. 345, Part III, sec. 1, p. 546.

31 General Laws of Alabama, 1939, No. 529 (run-off primary to be fourth Tuesday after the first primary); Public and Local Acts of Michigan, 1939, No. 172, p. 332 (city primaries to be held third Monday in February); Public Laws of North Carolina, 1939, ch. 196, p. 444 (date of state primary changed from first Saturday in June to last Saturday in May); Laws of North Dakota, 1937, ch. 130 (state primary changed from last Wednesday to last Tuesday in June); Laws of Utah, 1939, ch. 37, p. 46 (date of first primary changed from second to first Tuesday in September and date of second primary from fourth Tuesday in September to first Tuesday in October).

32 Session Laws of Colorado, 1939, ch. 103, p. 332; Acts and Resolves of Massachusetts, 1938, ch. 272, p. 242; General Laws of Florida, 1939, ch. 19663, p. 1614.

33 Laws of North Dakota, 1939, ch. 141, p. 217.

34 Session Laws of New Mexico, 1939, ch. 152, p. 287.

35 Acts and Resolves of Massachusetts, 1937, ch. 384, p. 430.

36 Ibid., 1938, ch. 473, p. 597.

37 Laws of Utah, 1939, ch. 37, p. 50.

38 Acts of Indiana, 1937, ch. 266, p. 1245. Formerly, names were rotated only where there were four or more candidates for nomination for the same office.

39 Acts and Resolves of Massachusetts, 1938, ch. 436, p. 488.

40 Acts of Arkansas, 1939, Act 372, p. 979. Constitutional amendment No. 29 was adopted by a vote of 63,414 to 56,947 at the election of November 8, 1938.

41 Idem. The proposed constitutional amendment is H. J. Resolution No. 16, p. 1104 of the Acts of Arkansas, 1939. If the voters refuse to perform as expected, another “run-off” primary act will have to be passed. The writer is indebted to Professor Robert A. Leflar, of the University of Arkansas School of Law, for assistance in untangling this chapter of legislative history. According to Professor Leflar, members of the legislature felt that the “run-off” primary feature of the 1938 amendment was in a sense “slipped over” on an unsuspecting public.

42 Acts of the General Assembly of Kentucky, 1936, ch. 52, p. 149, repealing the law of 1935; Session Laws of Oklahoma, 1937, ch. 29, Art. II, sec. 2, p. 136, repealing the law of 1929.

43 Public Laws of Maryland, 1939, No. 201.

44 Public and Private Acts of Tennessee, second extra session, 1937, ch. 2; Ibid., 1939, ch. 2, p. 16.

45 Session Laws of South Dakota, 1937, ch. 122, p. 148; Laws of Washington, 1939, ch. 1, p. 3; Oregon Laws, 1939, ch. 351, p. 655.

46 Laws of Wisconsin, 1937, ch. 336; 1939, ch. 454.

47 Statutes of California, 1937, ch. 398.

48 Oregon Laws, 1937, ch. 93, p. 125.

49 Acts and Resolves of Massachusetts, 1939, ch. 191, p. 172.

50 Ibid., ch. 371, p. 429.

51 Public and Local Acts of Michigan, 1939, No. 262, p. 482.

52 Laws of Washington, 1937, ch. 94, p. 383.

53 Laws of Wisconsin, 1937, ch. 66.

54 Statutes of California, 1937, ch. 407; Session Laws of Kansas, 1937, ch. 224; Acts and Resolves of Massachusetts, 1939, ch. 346, p. 320; Laws of New York, 1939, ch. 847, p. 2147; Oregon Laws, 1937, ch. 104, p. 138 and 1939, ch. 131, p. 285; Session Laws of South Dakota, 1937, ch. 120, p. 144; General Laws of Texas, 45th Legislature, 1937, Senate Bill 153, and 46th Legislature, 1939, Senate Bill 177; Acts and Resolves of Vermont, 1937, No. 6; Laws of Washington, 1939, ch. 48, p. 153; Session Laws of Wyoming, 1939, ch. 45, p. 51.

55 Public Laws of Rhode Island, 1938, ch. 2640.

56 Acts and Resolves of Massachusetts, 1938, ch. 397, p. 448.

57 Acts and Resolves of Vermont, 1939, No. 3, p. 4.

58 Session Laws of New Mexico, special session, 1938, ch. 2, sees. 23–25, pp. 14–15.

59 Acts and Resolutions of Georgia, 1939, No. 180, p. 309.

60 Acts and Resolves of Massachusetts, 1939, ch. 223, p. 197.

61 Oregon Laws, 1939, ch. 475, sec. 1, p. 929.

62 General and Local Acts of Alabama, extra session, 1936–37, No. 33, p. 30; Laws of Wisconsin, 1937, ch. 101; General Laws of Texas, 45th Legislature, 1937, House Bill 1021.

63 Public Laws of Maine, 1939, ch. 23.

64 Acts of Indiana, 1937, ch. 44, p. 275; Laws of New York, 1937, ch. 835.

65 Acts of Indiana, 1939, ch. 113, p. 559; Public Acts of Tennessee, 1937, ch. 159, p. 620; Public Laws of Rhode Island, 1938, ch. 2640.

66 Assembly Bill No. 506A, introduced March 17, 1939, by request of Mr. Nortman.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.