The San Jose Mercury-News has this op-ed by Political Science Professor Larry N. Gerston. It says the California top-two system is failing voters and that it hasn’t caused more moderate politicians to be elected.
6
At the New York congressional primaries on June 26, the Reform Party had arranged for all write-ins to be counted in its primary for the 15th U.S. House district. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez won that nomination, with 9 write-ins. No names were printed on the ballot. There were also 13 write-ins for other individuals, none of whom got as many as Ocasio-Cortez. Therefore, she was considered nominated.
However, she declined the nomination, because she is also running as the Democratic nominee in the 14th district, and New York state law doesn’t let individuals run for two offices simultaneously. See this story. Thanks to Frank Morano for the link.
Law Professor Stephen Carter here advocates that U.S. Supreme Court justices be chosen by popular vote. Thanks to How Appealing for the link.
Vice-president Michael Pence’s PAC recently sent a $5,000 campaign contribution to Carol Miller of New Mexico, a former Green Party congressional candidate. According to this story, Pence’s PAC sent the money to the wrong Carol Miller. The PAC intended the money to go to a West Virginia Republican congressional nominee who is also named Carol Miller.
On July 9, a California environmental group, the Planning and Conservation League, asked the California Supreme Court to remove Proposition 9 from the ballot. This is the initiative to split California into three states. The court is free to either hear the case or decide not to hear it. The lawsuit argues that a mere statutory initiative can’t split the state; that at a minimum, the initiative should at least have been a proposed constitutional amendment, not just a statute. Proposed initiatives to amend the California Constitution require signatures of 8% of the last gubernatorial vote, whereas statutory initiatives need 5% of the last gubernatorial vote.
The case is Planning & Conservation League v Padilla, S249859. On July 12, the California Supreme Court asked the proponent of the initiative to respond to the lawsuit.