California Bill Making Minor Improvements in Ballot Access for New Parties Has Hearing April 29

The California Assembly Elections Committee will hear AB 446 on Thursday, April 29, in a meeting that starts at 10:30 a.m. The bill makes slight improvements to the process of qualifying a new party. It cuts the number of signatures for the party petition from 10% of the last gubernatorial vote to 3%.

The petition method for qualifying a new party in California is almost entirely unused. It is not mandatory, because a new party can also qualify by persuading .33% of the number of registered voters to join the party, and that is the method almost always used. So the party petition is just a back-up method. Even if the bill is signed into law, the 3% party petition would still be tied for the most difficult such petition in the nation, except that Minnesota and Rhode Island have a party petition of 5% of the last vote cast. Like the California party petition, the Minnesota and Rhode Island party petitions are also not mandatory; there are easier methods to create a new party in Minnesota and Rhode Island.

California AB 446 also gives a new party the freedom to use the name of an old, no longer existing party. The existing law says a party that expects to qualify by registration must file a statement of intent. The Secretary of State’s office has been interpreting that law to mean that if a group files the statement of intent (and many groups do), no future party can ever use the same name. The bill relaxes that rule, and says a name can be re-used after two years have gone by and the old name has not been used successfully. For example, if the bill is signed into law, a new party called the Reform Party could come into existence in California.

Census Reveals Reapportionment Figures for U.S. House

On April 26, the U.S. Census Bureau announced the number of U.S. House seats that each state will have in the coming five elections.

Texas gained two seats.

These states each gained one: Colorado, Florida, Montana, North Carolina, Oregon

These states each lost one: California, Illinois, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia.

It is somewhat surprising that Rhode Island kept both its seats. Some had predicted that it would lose one of them.

Michigan Legislative Committee Hears Testimony on Bill to Let Each U.S. House District Elect its Own Presidential Elector

On April 20, the Michigan House Elections & Ethics Committee heard testimony on HB 4319 and HB 4320, which would provide that each U.S. House district elect its own presidential elector. The authors are Representatives Beau Matthew LaFave (R-Iron Mountain) and Jeff Yaroch (R-Richmond). See this story. The Committee hasn’t voted yet on the bills.

North Dakota Legislature Passes Bill to Study How to Stop the National Popular Vote Plan

On April 20, the North Dakota legislature passed SB 2271, on the subject of the National Popular Vote Plan. Originally the bill provided that North Dakota election officials would not release the state’s presidential vote totals until after the electoral college had voted in mid-December. But the bill was amended before it passed. Now it says that the legislature opposes the National Popular Vote Plan, and during the next year it will study how to prevent the plan from being enacted. It also calls on Congress not to approve the plan, should enough states pass it so that it goes into effect. Here is the text.