On July 19, Lowell Nelson, vice-chair of the Utah Republican Party, testified in favor of Instant Runoff Voting. He was testifying to a legislative committee which is meeting, even though the legislature is not in session. See this story. Nelson suggested the system would be useful in both partisan primaries, and general elections, for state and federal office.
Every Thursday morning, the Americans Elect web page posts a new signature total. This total represents the number of signatures gathered across the nation so far on ballot access petitions. The July 21 figure is 1,650,449, up 76,324 in the last week. The vast majority of these signatures are from California.
Political science professor Michael S. Latner and Kyle Roach have an article in the California Journal of Politics and Policy titled, “Mapping the Consequences of Electoral Reform”, which can be seen at this link. It sets forth the likely consequences if California used proportional representation for the lower house of its legislature, using sixteen 5-member districts. Thanks to Rob Richie for the link.
On July 18, the New Hampshire Secretary of State’s office informed the New Hampshire Libertarian Party that it is free to start circulating the party petition at any time. The party petition for 2012 requires 13,698 valid signatures by August 8, 2012. This is a difficult petition drive in a low-population state, and is made more difficult by the state’s policy of only allowing one signature per petition sheet. The procedure has existed since 1996 and has only been used once, by the Libertarian Party in 2000.
However, using the party petition procedure has great advantages. The state will give a party column to any group that completes the party petition. But if unqualified parties use the easier independent procedure, all their nominees are squeezed into the “Other Candidates” column, although they do get a party label in small print next to the name of each nominee. Another big advantage is that the new party that successfully completes the party petition is then free to nominate for as many partisan offices as it wishes, without separate candidate petitions. And, if the party petition is completed fairly early in the process, the group is free to participate in any special legislative elections that may occur, without a separate petition.
Until the July 18 ruling was issued, the Secretary of State had been mulling over the idea that the party petition may not be circulated until January 1 of the election year. A law passed in 2009 does not permit independent candidate petitions to be circulated until January 1 of an election year. The Secretary of State had thought perhaps the same principle should apply to the party petition, although there is no statutory language supporting that restrictive position. Also, in 2009, a U.S. District Court in Rhode Island had ruled that it is unconstitutional to forbid groups from circulating a party petition in odd years, and in 2001 a U.S. District Court in Arkansas had made a similar ruling. Thanks to Gary Sinawski for the news.
On July 19, the Green Party of Tennessee, and the Constitution Party of Tennessee, jointly filed a new lawsuit in federal court, alleging that the new ballot access law passed this year is just as unconstitutional as the old one. As reported previously, in September 2010 the old law was held unconstitutional. In response, the 2011 session of the legislature deleted the language on the petition saying the signers are members, and moved the petition deadline from March to April. The case is Green Party of Tennessee et al v Hargett, middle district, 3:11-cv-00692. Here is the complaint.
Ballot Access News erred when it reported that the new Florida ballot access law for minor party presidential candidates requires a petition signed by 4% of the last presidential vote, unless the minor party is recognized by the Federal Election Commission. The bill was amended on the day before it passed the legislature, so that parties not recognized by the FEC as national committees need a petition of 1% of the number of registered voters. The 4% provision was deleted by that last-minute amendment. BAN regrets the error. Thanks to Dan Winslow for this news.
Although the law is not as bad as had been reported, it still seems obviously unconstitutional. The Florida Constitution says, “The requirements for … a candidate of a minor party for placement of the candidate’s name on the ballot shall be no greater than the requirements for a candidate of the party having the largest number of registered voters.” The new law requires new parties (new parties can never be recognized by the FEC) in 2012 to submit 112,174 valid signatures, whereas the Democratic Party (the Florida party with the most registered voters) need not do anything to place its presidential nominee on the ballot except certify a list of presidential elector candidates, and the names of the Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates they are pledged to, to the Secretary of State.
Furthermore, the petition is due July 15, months before the two major parties will be formally choosing their presidential tickets. The 2012 Democratic national convention is in September 2012.