Representative Mike Nathie, sponsor of amendments to House Bill 1446, told the Government and Veterans Affairs Committee that the changes would allow political parties to appoint a candidate to a statewide race if the party had not produced a nominating petition candidate within one week of the secretary of state’s filing deadline.

The amendment, Nathie said, “would allow if you've met the 1%, 167 signatures, even though you don't get the 1% of the primary, you can still move on.”

The proposal drew sharp debate about its effect on primary turnout and party influence. Opponents warned the change would weaken incentives for voters to participate in party primaries and could enable cross-over voting; supporters said the change would help smaller parties put candidates on the ballot for statewide offices.

Committee members questioned the mechanics and timing of the change. Legislative counsel clarified that the amendment was placed as a new subsection to section 16.1-... (section numbers shown in committee discussion) and that it hinges on the existing deadlines for submitting nominating petitions to the secretary of state. Counsel explained that subsection 5 references 71 days before the primary, which the sponsor described as “one week prior to the deadline to submit nominating petitions.”

Members also debated a separate repeal provision offered in the same amendment package that would allow a candidate who met the signature threshold to appear on the general-election ballot even if that candidate received less than 1% of the primary vote. Nathie summarized that change as protecting candidates who “already got the 1% of signatures” from being barred by a low primary vote total.

After initial consideration, the committee voted on an amendment package related to HB1446 and, following further floor-style procedure, ultimately took a committee recommendation of do not pass. The committee’s final recorded vote on the motion to recommend do not pass was 9-4-0.

Committee discussion recorded a mix of procedural and policy concerns: members raising administrative questions about where the one-week appointment window would be placed in statute; concerns that removing the 1% vote threshold would depress primary turnout; and counter-arguments that the signature requirement already demonstrates sufficient local support for a candidate. The sponsor said he had received the amendment the morning of the hearing and sought guidance from legislative counsel before proceeding.

The bill will not be recommended for passage from the committee; it will go forward to the House according to committee rules with the committee’s recommendation.

Votes at a glance: The committee adopted a later amendment package by roll call (8-5-0) to incorporate sponsor changes, and the committee later voted to recommend do not pass on House Bill 1446 (9-4-0).