Welcome to the Tuesday, Aug. 4, 2026, Brew.
By: Lara Bonatesta
Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:
- Democratic National Committee announces proposed early states for 2028 Democratic presidential calendar
- Connecticut treasurer race centers on ESG investing
- Maine secretary of state says Troy Jackson's candidacy does not violate state law
Democratic National Committee announces proposed early states for 2028 Democratic presidential calendar
The Democratic National Committee (DNC) announced on July 24 that its Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) had voted to select the first six states for the 2028 Democratic presidential nominating calendar. Those states and their proposed primary dates are as follows:
- South Carolina : Jan. 22, 2028
- Nevada : Feb. 1, 2028
- New Hampshire : Feb. 8, 2028
- New Mexico : Feb. 15, 2028
- Michigan : Feb. 22, 2028
- Virginia : Feb. 29, 2028
Six states applied for early positions but were not selected: Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Tennessee, and North Carolina.
The DNC’s proposed 2028 schedule places South Carolina’s primary on Jan. 22, a day earlier than the first 2024 primary was held. While the DNC also scheduled South Carolina to hold the first nominating contest in 2024 — on Feb. 3 — New Hampshire held its state-run primary on Jan. 23, 2024. The DNC chose not to allocate delegates based on the state-run primary, and the New Hampshire Democratic Party instead held a second, party-run primary, which was used for delegate allocation.
In the decades leading up to 2024, Iowa and New Hampshire held the first presidential nominating contests. Since 1968, New Hampshire law has required the state’s presidential primary to be held at least seven days before any other state “hold[s] a similar election.”
Iowa's presidential caucus was the first event in the Democratic nominating calendar from 1972 to 2020. In 2024, the Iowa Democratic Party held a mail-in primary with voting taking place between Jan. 12, 2024, and March 5, 2024. The Iowa Democratic Party released primary results on March 5, which was also Super Tuesday.
The full DNC will vote on the proposed 2028 calendar at its summer meeting in mid-August.
The RBC adopted criteria for choosing the early window states in October 2025 and evaluated potential early window states on rigorousness, fairness, and efficiency. The RBC defined each of these criteria as follows:
- “Rigourousness: the lineup of early states must be a comprehensive test of candidates with diverse groups of voters that are key to winning the general election;
- “Fairness: the lineup of early states must be affordable, practical for candidates, and not exhaust their resources unreasonably, precluding them from effectively participating in future contests;
- “Efficiency: the practical ability to run a fair, transparent, and inclusive primary or caucus.”
Based on these criteria and the states’ applications, the DNC announced that RBC chose to amend its rules to select six early window states for 2028, rather than four or five previously allowed under the rules. The DNC's July 24 press release says, "The early window provides a comprehensive test with diverse groups of voters that are key to winning a general election. In fact, it is the most diverse open field early window in Democratic Party history, massively increasing diverse representation from 2020 early window states."
The release also listed media market prices in South Carolina and Nevada, as well as the compact geography of both South Carolina and New Hampshire, as affordability considerations that influenced the decision.
The RBC voted in June 2026 to increase penalties for states that hold unsanctioned primaries during the early window. Penalties for not following the DNC calendar in 2028 include the state losing delegates, participating candidates being prohibited from DNC debates, and the state party receiving a $270,000 fine.
Following the release of the RBC proposal, Iowa Democratic Party Chair Rita Hart said, "[W]hen we get to November, and we have some newly elected Democratic officials, they’re gonna have some things to say about that, along with the rest of our Democrats."
New Hampshire Democratic Party chair Ray Buckley said of the RBC proposal, "Today's vote shows that many party insiders have learned nothing from 2024. ... This committee's vote does not change the realities governing New Hampshire’s primary, which are beyond the control of both this committee and our state party."
Click here to learn more about the 2028 Democratic presidential primary calendar.
Connecticut treasurer race centers on ESG investing
Environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) investing has emerged as a central issue in the Nov. 3 race for Connecticut treasurer. The Connecticut treasurer is responsible for overseeing the financial investment of state monies, including through the state's public pension funds. Connecticut law allows the state treasurer to consider the social, economic, and environmental implications of investments, provided that the treasurer acts consistently with fiduciary duties to pension beneficiaries.
Incumbent treasurer Erick Russell (D) – who was first elected in 2022 when he defeated Harry Arora (R) 52.4% to 44.9% – defends using ESG to manage the state's approximately $69 billion in public pension assets. Republican candidate Fred Wilms, who represented District 142 in the Connecticut House of Representatives from 2015 to 2019, opposes the practice. Both parties' primaries were canceled after only Russell and Wilms ran.
Russell said using an ESG approach is "part and parcel with driving strong returns on long-term investments" and said reducing greenhouse gas emissions and improving board diversity in the state's investment portfolio were examples.
Wilms’ campaign website said, "The Treasurer's role isn’t to push a personal agenda—it’s to protect and grow Connecticut’s financial assets for taxpayers and retirees…. That means resisting ESG, holding managers to their benchmarks, and eliminating underperforming investments… .”
Wilms called for transferring fiduciary duties for the state's pension funds from the treasurer to an investment board. The board would assume authority over ESG-related decisions as well as other investment decisions now entrusted primarily to the treasurer. Russell and Gov. Ned Lamont (D) opposed similar legislation in 2025, arguing that the existing Investment Advisory Council already provides sufficient oversight.
Russell said three years of double-digit returns are evidence that considering ESG factors alongside financial metrics improves performance. He said that the Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds — which invests assets for the state’s six public pension systems — ranked in the top 17% of public pension funds in 2025, reflecting a turnaround after a decade of underperformance. Russell attributed these gains to structural changes and his investment team's work, though he acknowledged a strong stock market played a role.
Five states encourage public pension officials to consider ESG, while 21 states currently restrict or discourage it, based on a 2024 Pew analysis and a 2026 Simpson Thacher report. All five states encouraging ESG consideration have Democratic trifectas. Of the 21 restricting states, 18 have Republican trifectas and three — Kansas, Kentucky, and North Carolina — have divided governments.
Ballotpedia tracks support for and opposition to the ESG investing movement. To learn more about arguments for, against, and about ESG, click here. For more information on reform proposals related to ESG policy, click here.
To read more about the 2026 election for Connecticut Treasurer, click here.
Maine secretary of state says Troy Jackson's candidacy does not violate state law
On July 31, Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows (D) announced that Troy Jackson, the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate who ran unsuccessfully for governor earlier this year, was allowed to run under state law. Bellows made the announcement in response to a July 24 letter from state Rep. James White (R) questioning Jackson’s eligibility under Maine Revised Statutes Title 21-A §351.
Section 351(1) says a candidate may not file "whether by primary election or nomination petition, as a candidate for more than one federal, state or county office at any election."
In June, Jackson ran unsuccessfully in the Democratic primary for governor. On July 25, he won the Democratic nominating convention to replace Graham Platner (D) as the party's nominee to face U.S. Sen. Susan Collins (R) in the general election. This is the first time since 1918 that a U.S. Senate nominee has been replaced in Maine.
In his letter to Bellows, White said Jackson’s failed gubernatorial bid should disqualify him as the Senate nominee: "Courts have likewise recognized that so-called 'sore loser' laws exist to preserve the integrity of the electoral process by preventing candidates who lose one race from obtaining access to the general-election ballot through another path. Allowing a candidate to seek one statewide office, lose before the voters, and then become the nominee for a different statewide office through a party committee appears inconsistent with both text and purpose of Maine's election laws."
In a statement, Bellows said, “For multiple reasons, the laws prohibiting running for multiple offices in certain circumstances do not apply to the process of selecting a replacement nominee after the winner of a primary election withdraws their candidacy.”
On July 29, University of Maine School of Law professor Dmitry Bam told News Center Maine, "The statute here is not really a sore loser statute. It's kind of a dual filer hedger statute. ... I think somebody could bring the challenge in court and say this person is not eligible. ... I think it's highly unlikely that the court would reverse the decision anyway."
While the question of whether §351(1) is rightly called a sore loser law is debated, Maine has three separate statutes — §351(2), §353, and §354(8-A) — that effectively prohibit candidates from running in the general election for an office after losing the primary for the same office (a different situation than the Maine Senate election).
Laws that either explicitly or effectively prohibit candidates who sought and failed to secure a party's nomination from running as independents or as nominees of another party in the general election for that same office are commonly called sore loser laws.
Maine is one of 48 states that have either effective or explicit sore loser laws. Currently, 18 states have laws that explicitly prohibit a candidate who appeared on the primary ballot and was defeated from being placed on the general election ballot.
Other states have laws that effectively ban defeated candidates from running in the general election.
Twenty-three states have laws that effectively ban such candidacies by prohibiting a candidate from running as a member of one party in the primary election and as a member of a different party or as an independent candidate in the general election. These laws are types of cross-filing bans.
Five states have deadlines that preclude a defeated primary candidate from appearing on the general election ballot.
Maine has both a cross-filing ban and deadlines that preclude a defeated primary candidate from appearing on the general election ballot, while Vermont has both explicit and effective sore loser laws. New York and Connecticut do not have sore loser laws.
Whether these laws apply to presidential elections varies by state and has been the subject of litigation.
Click here for more information about sore loser laws.
