Rhode Island Voter Registration Forms Will No Longer List Any Political Parties

According to this story in the Providence Journal, the Rhode Island State Board of Elections has redesigned the voter registration form, so that the form no longer lists the qualified parties. Instead the voter will be asked to write-in his or her party on a blank line on the petition form.

Rhode Island has three qualified parties, Democratic, Republican, and Moderate. The Moderate Party has criticized the new forms, because not listing the qualified parties has a disproportionate effect on the Moderate Party. Many, if not most, voters don’t know that the Moderate Party is a ballot-qualified party. The Board says the new forms will save money, because under the old policy, every time a new party qualified, the forms had to be reprinted. Thanks to Ken Block for the link.

U.S. District Court Strikes Down Part of Maine’s Public Funding Law

On July 20, a U.S. District Court struck down part of Maine’s law on public funding of candidates for state office. Specifically, the decision eliminates extra public funding for publicly-funded candidates who have privately-funded opponents with a great deal of resources. The decision was no surprise, because the U.S. Supreme Court had issued a similar decision in an Arizona case last month. The Maine case is Cushing v McKee, 1:10-cv-330. See this story.

Utah Republican Party Vice-Chair Testifies in Favor of Instant Runoff Voting

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.

Scholarly Journal Publishes Article on How California Would be Changed if it Used Proportional Representation

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.

New Hampshire Secretary of State Agrees that Party Petition May be Circulated in Odd Years

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.