By Wendy Underhill

While eyes are glued to the unusual doings of the presidential nominating races, there’s another story to be told. That is:  primaries aren’t just for presidents. Indeed, they aren’t even mainly for presidents.

In fact, in 17 states, the presidential preference primary is merely an add-on to the state’s regularly scheduled state primary—the primary in which each party’s nominees are selected for everything from the governor on down. By combining the presidential primary with the state primary, 18 states save on the cost of running an election and possibly avoid voting fatigue. This year, 5,917 out of 7,383 state legislative seats are up, and that means a lot of ballot real estate will be devoted to legislators!

Eighteen states do use a separate presidential preference primary (like New Hampshire’s), and run the state primary later in the year. South Carolina is an outlier in this camp, in that its parties hold their primaries on separate days.

But wait—that’s not all. Twelve states use caucuses for both parties to indicate their presidential party preference, instead of a primary. These are party-run events, not associated with state elections at all (and not paid for with state dollars). Here’s the line-up:

• Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota and Utah all use caucuses. (Utah Republicans are using an Internet-based caucus today, something that has the election security world aflutter with concern).
• Alaska, Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, North Dakota, Washington and Wyoming also use caucuses for both parties, but the parties have chosen to do their events on different days.

Finally,  there are six states that use a hybrid system, mix and matching primaries and caucuses. In Idaho and Nebraska the Republicans are using a primary this year, while the Democrats are using a caucus.  And in Kentucky, it’s the other way around—the Republicans caucused and the Democrats will hold a primary.

The one common thread: as always, state law rules. Legislators can establish a primary and its date, decide not to offer a primary thus moving parties to run their own caucuses, or give parties the option to use the primary or run their own caucuses.

And because state law governs the processes, it can be changed. This year Maine, Minnesota and Colorado all are considering shift from caucuses to primaries, and Arizona has a bill to go the opposite direction. The upshot: when it comes to presidential nominating processes, money and politics both are factors. But aren’t they always? 

Wendy Underhill is the program director for elections and redistricting at NCSL.

Email Wendy.