Americans Elect Has Now Collected Over 1,000,000 Signatures on California Petition

Americans Elect has collected more than 1,000,000 signatures on its petition to qualify as a party in California. The party’s national web page does not tell how many signatures it has collected in any particular state. However, as of June 16, the web page does say that the party has collected 1,262,665 signatures so far in the nation. The vast majority of these signatures are from California, where the state demands either 103,004 registrations or 1,030,040 signatures on a petition. Americans Elect is using the petition method, and will probably need at least 1,600,000 raw signatures to have enough valid signatures in California.

The public mood just now is very favorable to alternate choices, and the nation’s other minor parties would be wise to be petitioning for 2012 now. The weather is good for petitioning, and petitioning is always less expensive in odd years than in election years. Also paid petition drives go more smoothly without the stress of imminent deadlines looming.

Louisiana Bill Advances, Lets Independent Candidates Use “Independent” on Ballot

On June 15, the Louisiana Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee passed HB 533. This is the Secretary of State’s omnibus election law bill. Among other things, it lets independent candidates choose the label “independent” on the ballot. Current law puts “no party” on the ballot for independent candidates, except that current law already lets presidential independent candidates choose any label they wish, including “independent.”

The bill also removes the names of presidential elector candidates from the ballot. If the bill passes, the only states that will continue to show the names of presidential elector candidates on the ballot will be Arizona, Oklahoma, Idaho, North Dakota, and South Dakota.

Virginia Newspaper Story Says Former Congressman Virgil Goode is Considering Being Constitution Party’s Presidential Nominee

The June 13 edition of the Franklin (Virginia) News-Post has this story, in which former U.S. House member Virgil Goode says he is considering whether to seek the Constitution Party’s presidential nomination. The Constitution Party has never before had a presidential nominee who had been elected to federal or state office. Its presidential nominees have been Howard Philllips (who did have a relatively important appointed federal job under President Nixon), Michael Peroutka (an attorney), and Chuck Baldwin (a pastor).

Three Courts in Last Eight Days Have Enjoined, or Declared Unconstitutional, Certain Campaign Spending Laws

During the last eight days, three federal courts have either enjoined, or declared unconstitutional, various laws that control campaign spending:

1. On June 7, a U.S. District Court in Virginia re-affirmed its May 26 ruling in United States v Danielczyk, 1:11cr85 (e.d.). That ruling declares that the Constitution does not permit the government to ban all corporate donations to candidates for federal office. However, the newer ruling confines the holding to just that particular case, and also only to for-profit corporations, as opposed to ideological non-profit corporations. Here is the 18-page opinion of June 7. Of course, under this ruling, corporations must obey the limits on the amount of the donation.

2. On June 9, the 9th circuit agreed with a U.S. District Court, and maintained an injunction against certain San Diego city campaign finance restrictions. However, the 9th circuit also agreed with the U.S. District Court that certain other restrictions should not be enjoined. That case is Thalheimer v City of San Diego, 10-55434. The restrictions that continued to be enjoined are: (1) the ban on political parties making any contributions to candidates for city office; (2) the limit on how much may be contributed to a committee that makes independent expenditures for or against candidates for city office. The restrictions that remain in effect are: (1) no one may contribute to a candidate more than a year before the election; (2) groups (other than political parties) may not contribute directly to candidates for city office.

3. On June 15, a U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia enjoined a federal law that prohibits most political action committees from receiving unlimited donations to make independent expenditures in support or in opposition to candidates for federal office, if that same committee also makes direct contributions to any candidates for federal office. The court order does require such committees to keep separate bank accounts, one for contributions and one for independent expenditures. That case is Carey v Federal Election Commission, cv 11-259.

The extensive constitutional protection for independent expenditures for or against candidates, and the continuing restrictive rules on direct donations to candidates and political parties, has created a strange political culture in the United States. A large and growing proportion of speech about candidates comes not from the candidates themselves, and not from political parties, but from other individuals and groups, all of whom are required not to coordinate their speech with the candidate.

Louisiana Senate Committee Refuses to Pass Bill Moving Presidential Primary from February to March

On June 15, the Louisiana Senate & Governmental Affairs Committee voted to defer HB 509. Because the legislature adjourns in a week, this action severely injures the bill, although it could still be revived. HB 509 moves the presidential primary from February to March. If Louisiana does not move its primary out of February, the national Democratic Party rules, and the national Republican Party rules, if enforced, will cost the state half its delegates to the national conventions. See this story.

The major party rules do not permit any presidential primaries or caucuses earlier than March, except for Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina.