Bill would let party committees decide whether endorsed candidates bypass primaries; witnesses split

Senator Chuck Wallin (District 4) introduced Senate Bill 22-52, which would allow a state party or district party committee to decide, in odd-numbered years, whether an endorsed candidate should appear directly on the general election ballot rather than first appearing on an open primary.

Sponsor Wallin said the proposal is optional for each party and argues it would “get more people involved at the local level” by giving party members a stronger stake in selecting candidates. "If we want more party involvement, we need our districts and state meetings and conventions to be more than just a get together and a feel-good meeting," Wallin told the committee.

The bill drew sustained testimony and partisan disagreement. Supporters, including county and district Republican chairs, told the committee they had seen higher engagement in districts that emphasize party organizing and said the proposal would let active members choose whether to endorse and advance a candidate directly to the general ballot.

Greg Demme, district 3 chair, said the option increases voters' power inside the party: "When we encourage people not just to be involved, but their voice and their vote actually has power," he said, describing growth in attendance at recent reorganizing meetings in his district.

Opponents and several senators warned the measure could exclude many voters. Senator Lee argued the change risks concentrating candidate selection among relatively small groups who can attend reorganizational meetings and that the open primary allows the broader electorate to have a say. Several senators and witnesses noted travel distances, scheduling conflicts, or caregiving responsibilities that keep otherwise engaged voters from attending in-person party events.

Testimony illustrated the practical trade-offs. Gerald Goric, a district chair, said his district’s reorganization meetings grew from a dozen to several hundred participants as local organizers expanded outreach; others said many districts remain small and that a small in‑meeting majority could effectively select candidates for thousands of party voters. District chairs also argued it protects parties from outside voters who use open primaries to influence nominations.

Committee members pressed on operational details including notice requirements to the Secretary of State and whether the rule would default to a primary if a party failed to make a determination by the statutory deadline. Wallin said the party would notify the Secretary of State before the deadline and that, if no decision were made, the candidate would default to the primary ballot.

The committee did not take immediate final action. The bill drew broad public testimony and showed partisan division about whether the change would boost party engagement or narrow the pool of voters who decide party nominees.