California SB 696 will be heard in the Assembly Appropriations Committee on Wednesday, August 14, at 9 a.m. Here is a link to the Appropriations Committee’s analysis of the bill. Choose the August 12, 2019 version. SB 696 says no party can have the words “independent” or “independence” in their names. If signed into law, it will force the American Independent Party to choose a new name later this year.
The Appropriations Committee analysis does not contain any warnings that the bill may violate the First Amendment. By contrast, when the bill was in the Assembly Elections Committee, the analysis for that committee did mention that problem. The same link enables anyone to also read the Assembly Election Committee analysis, which is dated July 1, 2019.
The link also has some April 2019 analyses, but they are irrelevant because back then, the bill had an entirely different subject matter.
What is the style of the Santa Cruz litigation? Did the legislative analyst know, or is he just repeating hearsay by a senator from Orange County 100s of miles away?
Was the voter confused by Alex Padilla’s registration form, or the term No Party Preference? Or did they use the federal registration form that continues to use the archaic form “Decline to State”? Why hasn’t Padilla updated the federal form?
Are voters confused when they see the words “No Party Preference” on the ballot? What if the candidate happens to prefer the Socialist Party USA? What if they heard there was a real socialist, but could not remember his name. Or might they be confused in believing that he was hiding his party affiliation?
Is California in effect administering a literacy test in the form of a voter registration form?
DIRECT attack by the RED communist CA legislature on the 1st Amdt — if not ALL of the USA Const.
See also ANTI-Trump ballot access law machination.
Will Prez Trump declare that such CA RED communist regime is in a state of rebellion against the USA Const ???
see April 1861.
Alleged harm of alleged confusion, some voters might be denied opportunity to vote in presidential primary of party that permits “independents” to vote in their exclusionary presidential primary.
Simple solution 1:
Permit a party to open its primary to voters affiliated with select parties as is done in Alaska and Idaho. The Alaska Supreme Court ruled that the Alaska Constitution confers greater political association rights than the federal constitution. The California Supreme Court has made a similar determination. Rather than waiting for a party to sue, the legislature could simply let any party designate who might vote in their primary.
Simple solution 2:
Use 2000 blanket primary format. Let each party decide how to interpret votes. Also let recognized independent candidates appear on ballot as required by California Constitution. Any independent who gets 1% of the vote qualifies for general election. This will also settle IVN and De La Fuente litigation.
Simple solution 3:
Let any voter change affiliation when they vote.
Simple solution 4:
Inform voters in December of their current affiliation, and inform them that there will be a presidential election in 2020, and the primary will be in March. Inform them how to change their affiliation on Internet and provide alternative methods.
Simple solution 5:
Eliminate all partisan affiliations on voter registration. Permit political parties to maintain lists of affiliated voters for purposes of affiliation history, or permit anonymous affiliation as in Michigan or non-persistant affiliation at polls as in Texas.
Simple Solution 6:
Include check-box for Independent, Nonpartisan, None, Decline To State, or No Party Preference.
Include “Party” as part of part name on forms.
Moderate solution 1:
Eliminate affiliation on initial registration. Send booklet to new registrants with advertisement by parties, and form for affiliation. Voters who don’t respond will be registered as independent. Voters who are updating a registration (address, name, etc.) won’t be able to change affiliation, but confirmation form will include booklet and option.
Annually send booklet and affiliation form to all voters along with confirmation of their registration status.
More complex solution 1:
Permit voters to specify Independent, Nonpartisan, Undecided, Decline To State, No Party Preference, None, Blank, or Unenrolled on their voter registration as check box. If such a voter runs in a Top 2 primary, let them choose their designation on the ballot from the above list. Let other candidates use the affiliation they specified as Other. Once these options are available, any problem will disappear. Voters who were confused, but don’t vote in presidential primaries aren’t harmed. True independents are unlikely to skip the list to select American Independent.
If a voter has written in one of the above on their registration, contact the voter with a new affiliation form.
More complex solution 2 (avoids changing constitution)
Eliminate write-in party affiliation. Let new party qualify with small number of registrants (50 or 100). When party qualifies, change registrations. Require annual party registration: $50 fee, bylaws, officers, minimum number of registrants (50 or 100), republican form of governance by registrants, biennial state convention.
Party registrants could run for voter-nominated offices with party affiliation on ballot. Party could make endorsements in voters pamphlet (state party not county party as at present).
By-mail party elections in odd years. Parties would produce ballot formats. State would mail out ballots and collect returned ballots, and deliver them to parties for counting. A party may alternatively provide an invitation to a party convention.
Presidential candidates qualify by petition. May include party affilation with consent of party and if elector candidates affiliated with party.
Fusion permitted. Requires consent of presidential candidate, all parties and elector candidates distributed among all parties, based on party agreement.
See simple option 2 for presidential ballot.
Transition:
Collect lists of “other” parties, including “independent”, etc. Require registrars to use original affidavits. Permit SOS to recognize reasonable variants. If there are more than the minimum number of registrants (e.g. Natural Law, Reform, Constitution, etc. qualify the party in a dormant status, and inform registrants of that status. Dormant party registrants may specify the party if they run for a Top 2 office. A dormant party may not make endorsements or have a presidential nominee or have party officer elections.
Voters who wrote-in the name of an “independent” group will be sent an affiliation form. If no response change affiliation to unknown. Voters who wrote in a name of a party with fewer than the minimum number of registrations, treat them the same. If the mame is that of a political group attempting to qualify, freeze the affiliation to permit the party to attempt to qualify (6 or 12 months only).
A dormant party may be activitated by sufficient number of registrants (50 or 100) and a reorganization convention with all registrants informed. New bylaws must be approved by majority of all registrants for reactivation to occur. If an active party does not maintain its annual registration, it becomes dormant (appropriate due process and notification). If registration drops below minimum, probation for 6 months at which time registrants are sent new affiliation form before being swiched to unknown.
NO primaries
NO party registrations
ONE election day
Equal Nom pets / filing fees
PR and AppV – pending Condorcet