November Ballot Access News (Print Edition)

November 1, 2010 – Volume 26, Number 6

This issue was originally printed on white paper.


Table of Contents

  1. RECORD NUMBER OF STATES WITH INCLUSIVE TELEVISED DEBATES FOR GOVERNOR, U.S. SENATOR
  2. US HOUSE PASSES BILL RESTRICTING SECRETARIES OF STATE
  3. WASHINGTON TRIAL ON “TOP-TWO” STARTS NOVEMBER 15
  4. HOPE FOR CIRCULATOR RESIDENCY LAWSUITS
  5. EARLY ESTIMATES OF U.S. HOUSE REAPPORTIONMENT
  6. CALIFORNIA TOP-TWO PROPONENT CHANGES HIS MIND ON LABELS
  7. MARYLAND VICTORY
  8. MORE LAWSUIT NEWS
  9. 2010 DEBATES
  10. VOTE TESTS FOR POLITICAL PARTY STATUS IN 2010
  11. 82% OF VOTERS WILL SEE LIBERTARIAN ON BALLOT
  12. GREEN PARTY NOMINEE FOR CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR ARRESTED FOR TRYING TO SIT IN DEBATE AUDIENCE
  13. COMMISSION ON PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES ENSHRINED IN FEDERAL LAW
  14. NORTH CAROLINA INSTANT RUNOFF VOTE FOR STATEWIDE JUDGE RACE
  15. MASSACHUSETTS REPUBLICANS NOMINATE BY WRITE-IN VOTES
  16. SUBSCRIBING TO BAN WITH PAYPAL

California Bill to Increase Number of Signatures for Statutory Initiatives by 60%

On December 10, California Assemblymember Mike Gatto introduced ACA 11, to increase the number of signatures for statutory initiatives from 5% of the last gubernatorial vote, to 8%.  Existing law requires initiatives that change a statute to collect 515,117 valid signatures.  The bill, if enacted, would raise this to 824,186 signatures.

Even if the legislature passes the bill, it is a proposed constitutional amendment and thus would not go into effect unless the voters approved it.

Another Brief Filed in California Supreme Court in Lawsuit Against Certain Aspects of "Top-Two"

On December 9, the plaintiffs in Field v Bowen filed this reply brief in the California Supreme Court, S188436.  This is the case that challenges certain aspects of California’s “top-two” election system.  The issue pending in the California Supreme Court only concerns the system’s discriminatory policy on ballot labels.  The part of the case concerning write-ins is not presently before the Supreme Court.