In February 2019 the New York legislature passed a bill to reduce the number of signatures for primary petitions in 2019 only, but that temporary liberalization did not apply to New York city. That bill was S2862/A2570, signed February 20.

In March, the legislature passed another bill on this subject. The formula for the number of signatures in primaries in New York has always been somewhat complex. The requirement is a percentage of the number of registered voters in a particular party, but also there is a maximum number of signatures, and the actual requirement is the lower of the two. The new bill lowered the percentage, whereas the first bill had not. Whether this makes any concrete difference in 2019 depends on whether the party has a very large number of registrants, or whether it is a minor party with a small registration. The new law, S4350/A5979, was signed on March 25.

But the new bill also added Erie and Nassau Counties to the list of places in which the new laws don’t apply, whereas the older bill only exempted New York city. The new bill is very confusing, and it is unclear whether the new bill actually makes the number of signatures in Erie and Nassau Counties higher for major party members than under the older bill.

Some Erie County major party candidates are suing in state court over the number of signatures in their county. Reese v Cuomo, Supreme Court, Niagara County, 167989-2019. The case will be settled very soon because the petitioning period is almost over. Attorneys for the state government have filed a brief insisting the number of signatures in Erie County did not actually rise, and they are also arguing that the lawsuit has procedural flaws, and that Niagara County isn’t a proper venue. There is one office, Judge of the Supreme Court, that includes both Erie and Niagara Counties, and the drafters of the new law don’t seem to have thought about that. See this story.

Here is the text of the new bill. One wonders, if the new bill didn’t actually increase the number of signatures in Erie and Nassau Counties, why did the bill even mention them? Thanks to Joe Burns for this news.

The Los Angeles Times has this editorial, opposing two California bills to restrict ballot access for presidential primaries. Most of the editorial is concerned with SB 27, to force presidential primary candidates to release their tax returns. The editorial also opposes SB 505, and notes that Peace & Freedom Party representative C. T. Weber testified that it might eliminate all choices on the Peace & Freedom primary ballot.

HR 51, to admit the District of Columbia as a state, has 201 co-sponsors. But HR 1965, to admit Puerto Rico as a state, only has one co-sponsor.