PROVIDENCE — Governor Carcieri has vetoed legislation — passed during last week’s special legislative session — that would have moved Rhode Island’s presidential primary up from March 4 to Feb. 5, 2008.

With other states scrambling to move their primaries and caucuses to earlier in the year, the drive to make sure Rhode Island didn’t get “left out in the cold” began last February with the introduction of a bill to move the Rhode Island date up by a month. As it stands, 36 other states will have voted before Rhode Islanders get their chance to have a say in the presidential sweepstakes.

But after clearing the state Senate in May, the bill stalled in the House.

Had it cleared the General Assembly during the regular session that ended in June, Carcieri — a supporter of Republican presidential aspirant Mitt Romney, a former Massachusetts governor — said he would have allowed it to become law without his signature.

But with no opportunity for public testimony, voter and candidate-action deadlines bearing down this week, and “unexpected and difficult burdens on local boards of canvassers,” Carcieri’s veto message said: “I have no choice but to object.”

“Although some may believe that a February presidential preference primary might allow Rhode Island primary voters to feel more relevant to the nomination process, changing the date [at] this late hour would create an excessive burden on the local boards of canvassers,” said Carcieri, making public 21 letters of concern he received since last Tuesday’s special session from town officials.

Summing up the sentiments contained in each of the letters, Dorothy M. O’Gara, chairwoman of the East Providence Canvassing Authority wrote: “Although we have no problem with a future February primary, we do have a problem with the time of this legislation. It would certainly create an unnecessary burden on all the local boards of canvassers because of this late action.”

Rep. Leonidas Raptakis, the disappointed sponsor of the primary bill, said: “If the General Assembly doesn’t come back this week, it’s a lost cause,” he said. But with disaffiliation deadlines yesterday and tomorrow, he acknowledged, time has probably already run out.

“This bill should have passed back in June,” Raptakis, D-Coventry, said. “If those powers that be were very concerned about passing a bill, they should have come back in September to override the governor’s vetoes. Don’t wait until October 30 to come back.”

Asked who he blames, he said: “I should be mad at the whole process. I should be mad at the General Assembly. This bill should have passed back in June.”

Now, he said, Rhode Island faces the prospect of holding a March primary at taxpayer expense — with almost no voter interest, and “very, very low turnout” — after clear winners have already emerged. “Nobody is going to go out to vote on March 4 knowing the nominees have already been chosen,” he said.

Relevance has been the watchword for people on both sides of the primary bill.

Within minutes of last Tuesday’s special session vote for the bill, 10 members of the tiny House Republican bloc had signed their names to a letter urging Republican Carcieri to veto the bill on grounds the legislation “guarantees Rhode Island’s irrelevance in the selection process.”

Elaborating during the House floor debate, House Minority Leader Robert A. Watson, R-East Greenwich, said Rhode Island “will never be relevant” on the new Feb. 5 “Super Duper Tuesday” when 21 other states — including such delegate-rich states as New York and California — are voting. The state’s only chance at having a meaningful role would be waiting until the early rush of primaries in the event no clear winners have emerged on either side by then.

“What happens if no candidate locks it up by Feb. 5?” said Watson, a declared support of Republican U.S. Sen. John McCain of Arizona. “Guess what? Every other state that waited, every other state that wasn’t so impetuous as to think they had to race to the front of the line … is in play and would it be wonderful if, after Feb. 5, it’s still an unsettled issue and for the first time in the history of Rhode Island, we really have a role to play at the presidential level.”

So, “if you support John Edwards, don’t vote for this bill. If you support Barack Obama, don’t vote for this bill,” shouted Watson. “I suppose there’s only one person in America who cares about whether or not we do this today and that’s Hillary Rodham Clinton. She’s the individual that’s desperate to end the primary cycle as soon as possible.”

In the end, the Senate voted 29-to-7 for the newest version of the primary bill, but the House vote of 38-to-25 just barely cleared the three-fifths threshold that would be necessary to override a gubernatorial veto.

House leaders had no response yesterday to questions about why they did not take the bill up earlier, or call the override session early enough to avoid the timing and deadline issues Carcieri cited in his veto message. But House Speaker William J. Murphy took the opportunity to tweak the governor.

In a statement issued by his State House office, Murphy said: “The Governor stated that he supported the bill and then he turned around and vetoed it. His veto is nothing more than political payback to Bob Watson and the members of the Republican caucus for carrying his water on veto override night. The Governor’s actions are politically motivated.”

But neither House nor Senate leaders voiced any interest in returning for another veto override session. Speaking for Senate President Joseph Montalbano, spokesman Greg Pare said: “Nobody’s even asked him.”

Asked why the governor vetoed the bill on Sunday, but did not make the decision public until yesterday, his spokesman Jeff Neal said: “It was decided to take action on Sunday to make doubly sure they were in the allotted time line” for vetoes, but “there was no press staff working” to announce the move.

kgregg@projo.com