The Texas Tribune has this story about the June 26 federal decision requiring Texas to let minor parties and independent candidates use electronic signatures.
The Texas Tribune has this story about the June 26 federal decision requiring Texas to let minor parties and independent candidates use electronic signatures.
How will TEC 141.064 be complied with when electronic petitions are used?
ANY TX LAW RE E- SIGS ???
Jim,
The article doesn’t go into specifics on the types of scenarios that an electronic signature could be obtained.
I think in the past a petition (I can’t remember the effort) had been submitted in both paper and digital format. Digital format to assist the SOSTX.
Wouldn’t an ipad or tablet with an electronic copy of the petition suffice in this type scenario where there is still a person doing the petition signature gathering? Is this was is being approved by the judge?
But I wonder if an electronic signature could be obtained by an e-mail blast to potential signers that links to a DocuSign type website that somehow meets the election code criteria for pointing out the statement, yet I don’t know how the person circulating the petition can “witness” the signature.
HOW MANY E-MAIL BIZ HAVE E-SIGS AS PART OF THEIR BIZ ???
— ESP FOR PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS — NOT INVOLVED DIRECTLY IN A BIZ.
@Brad,
When Kinky Friedman and Carole of the many names ran for governor, the Friedman campaign had transcribed their petitions and had checked for primary voters. They said they could have handed a CD to the SOS.
If the Strayhorn campaign had done the same, it would have been easy for the SOS to check for cross-signers. Instead the SOS had to transcribe both petitions before they could be checked.
@Brad,
After the judge made his initial ruling, the SOS proposed that signers could use an electronic stylus. In Texas, the only thing that has to written by the voter is their wet signature.
But that was rejected by the judge.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/chapter-96
USA law- e-sigs in commerce
Election law isn’t commerce.
SAM-
WHICH IS WHY I ASKED EARLIER ABOUT ANY SPECIFIC TX LAW ABOUT E-SIGS FOR ELECTION PETITIONS — OFFICES / ISSUES
IE – MORE ILLEGAL JUDICIAL LEGISLATION. ???
That’s what the court case is about?
@AZ,
Business & Commerce Code Chapter 322.
The entire obsession with ballot access goes straight to the fact that plurality voting can result in a minority outcome if there are more than two candidates on the ballot. So, the established politicos are constantly striving to craft a system of entry barriers that assure that no more than two candidates get on the ballot.
Those who believe in providing voters with a wide variety of electoral choices must logically come to the conclusion that some alternative to plurality voting should be used.
JR
Business & Commerce Code Chapter 322.
—
SOMEHOW CONNECTS TO ELECTION PETITIONS — AS A MATTER OF LAW — AND NOT JUDICIAL LEGISLATION IN A JUNK COURT ORDER ???
Walter, I’ve come instead to the conclusion that government tries to do far too many things. The only things I see it better suited to handle than other institutions or aspects of society are military defense at the national level and defense against criminal scum at the local level.
I don’t see elections as necessary at the national level if national governments were limited to military defense, unless you mean admirals and generals voting on a commander in chief. At the local level, even most of criminal behaviors and disputes could be handled less formally, and the instances of serious crimes reduced drastically by making punishment swift, sure, and severe. The remaining government to elect would be such a small part of people’s lives, there just wouldn’t be much of anything to fight over. While not quite like being selected for your jury duty, winning elections would be much closer to that than winning elections is at present.
@AZ,
The federal law applies to interstate commerce. It is not applicable to intrastate petitions.
The Texas law requires the consent of both contracting parties.
There is bit permitting a mayor to e-sign ordinances and contracts.
How do you prove identity of a signer?
JR
AGAIN — Business & Commerce Code Chapter 322.
—
HOW DOES IT prove identity of a signer?
EMAIL SIGS APPARENTLY ASS-UME THAT EMAIL PERSON HAS THE EMAIL SIG —- VIA THE PERSON’S COMPUTER BEING USED ???
@AZ,
Michigan also has enacted the UETA. You may wish to consult with a lawyer, or the SOS or AG.
The whata?
@Bob,
Uniform Electronic Transaction Act.
Oh, silly me. I should have known that.