The U.S. House Oversight and Reform Committee is investigating Georgia’s vote-counting machines’ performance in the November 2018 election. According to this story by Salon’s Executive Editor, Andrew O’Hehir, new evidence shows especially suspicious evidence about how the machines performed in the Lieutenant Governor’s race.
On August 26, the California State Appeals Court issued a 20-page opinion in Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association v Newsom, C086334. It says that a 2016 law passed by the legislature, authorizing public funding of campaigns by the state or any local government, is invalid. This is because in 1988 the voters passed Proposition 73, which bans public funding of campaigns. Proposition 73 did not put the ban into the state constitution. It was merely a statute. But California generally does not allow the legislature to repeal or amend laws enacted by initiative, unless that original initiative said the legislature could amend it. So, the 2016 law is void.
The issue is complicated because of the numerous changes to the California campaign finance laws. It is likely the state will ask the State Supreme Court to review this decision.
Maine Governor Janet Mills says she still hasn’t decided whether to sign LD 1083, the bill to provide for ranked choice voting for president in both primaries and the general election. See this story.
On August 30, the California Assembly Appropriations Committee passed SB 696, the bill to force the American Independent Party to change its name to something that doesn’t have either “independent” or “independence.” All Democrats voted for it; all Republicans voted against it.
The sponsor, Senator Tom Umberg, is amending the bill, but he refused to let American Independent Party leaders (who were present) know what the amendment will be.
On August 30, a federal lawsuit was filed against certain North Carolina ballot access laws that affect independent candidates. The plaintiffs are Kyle Kopitke, an independent running for president; and Greg Buscemi, an independent candidate for U.S. House. Kopitke v Bell, e.d., 7:19cv-164-D.
The lawsuit challenges the February petition deadlines for independent candidates, which has existed since early 2017. It also challenges the number of signatures, both for statewide independent candidates and candidates for U.S. House. Statewide independents need 70,000 signatures, and U.S. House independents need approximately 15,000.
A U.S. District Court in North Carolina already ruled in 2004 that the state cannot require more signatures for statewide independents than for newly-qualifying parties. After the 2004 decision, DeLaney v Bartlett, the state equalized the statewide independent and new party petitions. But then in late 2017 they sharply reduced the number of signatures for new parties, so that the two requirements were again different. New parties need 11,778 signatures.
The lawsuit also challenges the requirement that write-in candidates must file a petition in order to have their write-ins counted.
