Top-Two Supporters Submit Initiative Petition in South Dakota

On November 6, supporters of a top-two system submitted approximately 37,200 signatures to the Secretary of State’s office. Initiatives to change the state constitution this year need 27,741 valid signatures. If the petition is approved, the measure will appear on the November 2018 ballot.

The proposal does not cover statewide state offices other than Governor. If it were approved, parties would still have nominees for Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Treasurer, Attorney General, Auditor, School Commissioner, and Public Utilities Commissioner. But there would be no party nominees for Governor, Congress, state legislature, or county office.

Because the measure only amends the state constitution, it is not very detailed. It would be up to the legislature to pass laws on whether party labels would be allowed for voters who are registered members of unqualified parties. Also the legislature would decide how the ballot would explain to the voters that party labels for some office do mean the candidate is a party nominee, but for other offices, party labels don’t mean that the candidate is a party nominee. Here is the wording of the proposed change.

Money for the paid circulators came from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation of Houston, Texas, channeled through the New York city organization called Open Primaries.

There will probably be at least eight other initiatives on the November 2018 South Dakota ballot, although the number won’t be known until early next year, after the signatures are checked. Another initiative that submitted signatures would require a non-partisan commission to draw legislative district boundaries.

Washington State Trial Court Uphold’s Seattle’s Public Financing System

On November 2, the King County Superior Court upheld Seattle’s system of public financing for candidates for city office. Unlike most public financing systems for candidates, voters who support a particular candidate aren’t required to give a small donation to a candidate to help that candidate receive public funding. Instead every voter is given vouchers, and the voter then decides whether to use that voucher to help a particular candidate. Candidates with enough vouchers then receive the public funding.

Here is the eight-page decision in Elster v City of Seattle, 17-2-16501-8. Seattle has non-partisan city elections, and the voucher program treats all candidates equally. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.

U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Delay Trial in Pennsylvania Gerrymandering Case

On November 3, Justice Samuel Alito refused a request by Pennsylvania state officials to delay a trial in League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania v Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. That case, filed in Commonwealth Court, seeks a ruling that Pennsylvania’s U.S. House district boundaries are an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander. The state government wanted to suspend the trial that is set for December. The state government said in case the U.S. Supreme Court later rules in the Wisconsin case that partisan gerrymandering is constitutional, the trial would be a waste of time.

See this story. Because Justice Alito refused to stop the Pennsylvania trial, it will proceed next month.

Alaska Government Will Ask State Supreme Court to Reverse Democratic Party’s Victory on Who Can Run in its Primary

On November 3, Alaska state officials said they will ask the State Supreme Court to reverse the October 17 decision of a trial court in Alaska Democratic Party v State. The Superior Court had ruled that both the U.S. Constitution and the Alaska Constitution protect the ability of the Democratic Party to let independent voters seek its nomination, even though state law says no one may seek a party nomination unless that person is a member of the party. See this story.