Committee gives favorable report to bill moving off‑year May primary to second Tuesday

The Constitution, Campaigns and Elections Committee gave House Bill 258 a favorable report after members debated moving the off‑presidential‑year May primary from the fourth Tuesday to the second Tuesday in May.

Sponsor Representative Carnes described the bill as “one of the simplest bills I’ve ever handled,” saying it “changes one word in an existing statute” and that in 2026 the current fourth‑Tuesday date would fall the day after Memorial Day. He warned that would “probably double or triple the cost of every county doing elections” and could depress turnout, and said he had run the proposal by the Secretary of State’s Office and the County Commission Association, which he said support the change.

Committee members asked how the change would affect runoff and qualifying dates. Representative Pincher asked whether the runoff date would move; Carnes said runoffs would remain four weeks after the primary. Committee members and staff clarified qualifying timing: qualifying ends at 5 p.m. on a Friday 116 days before the primary. In an example cited during the meeting, if the primary were the second Tuesday in May (May 13 in the scenario discussed), qualifying would close at 5 p.m. on Friday, Jan. 17, and the qualifying period would likely open in mid‑November. By contrast, a fourth‑Tuesday primary would shift qualifying later into the winter months, committee members said.

Mike Jones of the Secretary of State’s Office told the committee that the agency “can actually run the administrative calendars” to model any date changes and that staff can test the proposed schedule for unintended consequences. Members asked Jones to double‑check the calendar impacts after the vote.

The committee took a voice vote on a motion to give the bill a favorable report. Vice Chairman Harlan Mooney moved to report the bill favorably; the motion was seconded and approved by voice vote. A staff follow‑up was requested to confirm there are no unintended administrative consequences from the date change.

The sponsor and several members said an additional reason for the change was to avoid conflicts that previously fell on high‑school graduation dates when the primary landed in the latter part of May. No formal amendment to the bill was recorded in committee discussion.