# Maximum number of primaries to legally vote in during a year **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 21, 2016, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maximum-number-of-primaries-to-legally-vote-in-during-a-year/755307 "2016-05-21T16:24:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2016, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maximum-number-of-primaries-to-legally-vote-in-during-a-year/755307/21 "2016-05-22T19:05:06Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > I don’t have any cites of hand right now but there have been a few court cases that hinged on primaries NOT being federal elections. [This article in the Constitution Daily](http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2015/09/who-controls-primary-elections-and-who-gets-to-vote/) says they are regulated by the federal government. What it all means is still unclear, haven’t had time to read it all and follow the references. > [@](#): > > An important layer in this system is the federal government, which mandates that all federal elections, primary or otherwise, be held in accordance with the Voting Rights Act. This ability is derived from its enforcement power under the 15th Amendment. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2016, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maximum-number-of-primaries-to-legally-vote-in-during-a-year/755307/22 "2016-05-22T19:21:36Z")
> [@dtilque](#): > > There may be some primaries that are considered federal. In Oregon here, the primary is not just for president, but for all positions up for election in November, including congresspersons and US senators. But not all states do it this way. I suspect most do not. Many do, but that’s not the point. The primaries are not functions of the federal government, nor transactions between states. They are purely functions of the respective parties in the particular state, conducted under the auspices of the state government. The parties and the state make the eligibility rules. ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2016, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maximum-number-of-primaries-to-legally-vote-in-during-a-year/755307/23 "2016-05-23T22:10:26Z")
Yes, Congressional and presidential primaries are federal elections. The reason this is important is that Congress had broad powers over federal elections via the two “times, places, and manner” clauses of the United States Constitution (one of which applies to Congressional elections, and one to presidential). Congress has less power over state and local elections, limited mostly to the power to prevent discrimination on the basis of race, gender, age (if over 18), or failure to pay a poll tax. This doesn’t mean that Congress controls every aspect of Congressional and presidential primaries and general elections; obviously, they don’t. But, they have the power to enact such controls as they desire. For our purposes, one important such power is the power to define and punish voter fraud. And indeed, under Title 42, Chapter 1973 of the United States Code, we find the following: > [@](#): > > (e) Voting more than once: > (1) Whoever votes more than once in an election referred to in paragraph (2) shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. > (2) The prohibition of this subsection applies with respect to any general, special, or primary election held solely or in part for the purpose of selecting or electing any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, presidential elector, Member of the United States Senate, Member of the United States House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, Guam, or the Virgin Islands, or Resident Commissioner of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. > (3) As used in this subsection, the term “votes more than once” does not include the casting of an additional ballot if all prior ballots of that voter were invalidated, nor does it include the voting in two jurisdictions under section 1973aa-1 of this title, **to the extent two ballots are not cast for an election to the same candidacy or office.** My bolding. Section 1973 aa-1 establishes limits on residency requirements. Short residency requirements and a long primary season create the possibility that a person could move and vote, otherwise legally, in two or more state primaries. The law, as I read it, makes that illegal. You can vote, for example, for Governor of Maryland in the Maryland primary, and then move and vote for Governor of California in the California primary, but you cannot vote in both presidential primaries (same office) in the same year. It strikes me as unlikely that anybody would be prosecuted for this. But, it appears to be nominally illegal. ---
**Author:** ![slash2k](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/439d5e/32.png) [@slash2k](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slash2k)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2016, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maximum-number-of-primaries-to-legally-vote-in-during-a-year/755307/24 "2016-05-23T22:22:17Z")
However, in at least some of the presidential primaries, you are not actually “selecting or electing any candidate for the office of President” as specified in 42 USC 1973. You are selecting a delegate who will go to the convention and vote for a party’s presidential candidate under a set of rules laid down by the party. For example, in the Illinois 6th Congressional District, the names on the ballot were Minch, Kois, Brady, Fakroddin, etc., not Kasich, Trump, et al. I’m not sure it is clear-cut that selection of convention delegates is the same thing as selecting or electing a candidate. ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2016, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maximum-number-of-primaries-to-legally-vote-in-during-a-year/755307/25 "2016-05-23T22:41:32Z")
> [@slash2k](#): > > However, in at least some of the presidential primaries, you are not actually “selecting or electing any candidate for the office of President” as specified in 42 USC 1973. You are selecting a delegate who will go to the convention and vote for a party’s presidential candidate under a set of rules laid down by the party. For example, in the Illinois 6th Congressional District, the names on the ballot were Minch, Kois, Brady, Fakroddin, etc., not Kasich, Trump, et al. I’m not sure it is clear-cut that selection of convention delegates is the same thing as selecting or electing a candidate. Even Illinois, however, also had a direct presidential preference vote which was used to allocate statewide delegates. If you were fastidious enough to vote only in the delegate election and not in the preference vote . . . well, I’ll let lawyers argue that one in the unlikely event that somebody some day does this and gets prosecuted for it. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2016, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maximum-number-of-primaries-to-legally-vote-in-during-a-year/755307/26 "2016-05-23T22:45:12Z")
Even if it is all under the states’ control, some states might well have rules that you can’t vote in their primary if you’ve already voted in the corresponding primary in any other state. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2016, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maximum-number-of-primaries-to-legally-vote-in-during-a-year/755307/27 "2016-05-23T22:57:33Z")
> [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](#): > > Section 1973 aa-1 establishes limits on residency requirements. Short residency requirements and a long primary season create the possibility that a person could move and vote, otherwise legally, in two or more state primaries. The law, as I read it, makes that illegal. You can vote, for example, for Governor of Maryland in the Maryland primary, and then move and vote for Governor of California in the California primary, but you cannot vote in both presidential primaries (same office) in the same year. Unless you vote in different parties each time, it would seem (different candidacies.) 😛 As you say, it’s unlikely anyone would ever notice or care, regardless. Thanks for the research! The meaningful reveal to me is, > [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](#): > > This doesn’t mean that Congress controls every aspect of Congressional and presidential primaries and general elections; obviously, they don’t. But, they have the power to enact such controls as they desire. So all this mess with the different state rules could be cleaned up. Despite what I’ve heard from several commentators this season, Congress _could_ lay down procedural rules for all the ~168 state-level parties and governments. Interesting. ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2016, 7:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maximum-number-of-primaries-to-legally-vote-in-during-a-year/755307/28 "2016-05-24T07:02:41Z")
> [@Peremensoe](#): > > So all this mess with the different state rules could be cleaned up. Despite what I’ve heard from several commentators this season, Congress _could_ lay down procedural rules for all the ~168 state-level parties and governments. Interesting. Maybe, kind of, sort of, but . . . I wouldn’t go to the wall over that one. I simplified above by speaking of two “times, places, and manners” clauses. Strictly speaking there is one “times, places, and manner” clause and one “time” clause: > [@](#): > > The Times, Places, and Manner of holding Elections for Senator and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators. > [@](#): > > The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which day shall be the same throughout the United States. In practice this “time” clause has been interpreted almost as broadly as the “times, places and manner” clause. This [Yale Law Review summary](http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1320&context=ylpr) (PDF) is 20 years old, but gives a good summary of the issue: > [@](#): > > In interpreting the Presidential and Congressional Elections Clauses, the Supreme Court has recognized broad congressional power to regulate federal elections and primaries. For example, in the 1934 case of Burroughs and Cannon v. United States, the Court upheld the Federal Corrupt Practices Act, by which Congress imposed various bookkeeping requirements on political committees seeking to influence presidential elections.’ The petitioners, who had failed to comply with these provisions and were indicted under the Act, contended that Congress lacked authority to regulate presidential elections. This argument was rejected by the Court . . . Justice Sutherland’s opinion dismissed the petitioners’ contention that Congress’s power under the Presidential Election Clause is limited merely to regulating the timing of presidential elections. “So narrow a view of the powers of Congress in respect of the matter is without warrant.” > > Just as Congress’s power under the Congressional Election Clause includes the power to regulate congressional primaries, so, too, does the power granted under the Presidential Election Clause include the power to regulate presidential primaries. The Court made this clear in 1970 in Oregon v. Mitchell, which upheld a federal statute lowering the voting age in presidential elections to eighteen. As the Court explained: “It cannot be seriously contended that Congress has less power over the conduct of presidential elections than it has over congressional elections.” Five years later, in Buckley v. Valeo, the Court stated plainly that “Congress has power to regulate Presidential elections and primaries.” But, if Congress were to attempt anything so drastic as specifying a uniform presidential primary date and uniform presidential nominating rules, I feel sure that SCOTUS would take a fresh look at this issue, and I will not hazard a guess as to the outcome. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2016, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maximum-number-of-primaries-to-legally-vote-in-during-a-year/755307/29 "2016-05-24T19:27:40Z")
Just a small correction, Oregon doesn’t allow non-humans to vote in her elections … so the maximum number of primates to legally vote in during a year is zero. ---
**Author:** ![boffking](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/858c86/32.png) [@boffking](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boffking)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2016, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maximum-number-of-primaries-to-legally-vote-in-during-a-year/755307/30 "2016-05-24T20:06:47Z")
> [@watchwolf49](#): > > Just a small correction, Oregon doesn’t allow non-humans to vote in her elections … so the maximum number of primates to legally vote in during a year is zero. But humans _are_ primates. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2016, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maximum-number-of-primaries-to-legally-vote-in-during-a-year/755307/31 "2016-05-24T20:10:51Z")
The vast majority of primates in Oregon are humans. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2016, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maximum-number-of-primaries-to-legally-vote-in-during-a-year/755307/32 "2016-05-24T21:44:59Z")
Sorry … y’all look alike. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2016, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maximum-number-of-primaries-to-legally-vote-in-during-a-year/755307/33 "2016-05-25T02:08:09Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > The vast majority of primates in Oregon are humans. The Bigfoot vote is crucial in Salem. ---
**Author:** ![watchwolf49](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e9c0ed/32.png) [@watchwolf49](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/watchwolf49)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2016, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maximum-number-of-primaries-to-legally-vote-in-during-a-year/755307/34 "2016-05-25T02:12:58Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > The Bigfoot vote is crucial in Salem. Gotta have them Green Party votes !!! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/maximum-number-of-primaries-to-legally-vote-in-during-a-year/755307.md?page=1)