On February 28, Paul Merritt, an independent candidate for U.S. Senate in California in the June 2016 primary, filed a request for reconsideration in Merritt v Padilla, U.S. District Court, central district, 8:16cv-606. California has a Voters Guide, which is postally mailed to all registered voters in advance of a federal or state election. The law permits candidates who are willing to pay to have a statement in the Guide, and does not restrict the content, except to require that candidates not discuss their opponents.

Merritt’s statement, which he paid for, said he is a registered independent. The Secretary of State deleted that information from the heading of his statement. A U.S. District Court ruled earlier this year that because it is legal in California to prevent independent candidates from having the ballot label “independent”, therefore it is also legal for the state to prevent this label from being in the heading of a candidate’s statement in the Guide.

The motion for reconsideration points out that when the 9th circuit upheld the ban on “independent” on the ballot, it said the ban doesn’t do much harm because a candidate has an “alternative way” to express his or her views in the Guide. Therefore, it is obvious the ballot and the Guide have different levels of government control. The Guide has less room for government control than the ballot.

On February 22, Iowa Representative Bobby Kaufmann withdrew HF 6. This is the bill that would have eliminated the checkoff on the state income tax form that is used by taxpayers to send a small donation to the political party of the taxpayer’s choice. The bill had passed a subcommittee but had made no further headway. It is not known why Representative Kaufmann withdrew his bill.

On February 25, the Utah Republican Party changed its mind, and decided to continue to sue over the recent law that lets candidates petition for a spot on the primary ballot, even if they haven’t shown substantial support at a party nominating convention. See this story.

The Republican Party filed the lawsuit in January 2016, and lost in U.S. District Court. Utah Republicans are very uncomfortable with the law, which was passed in 2014. Every state has procedures for candidates to get on a primary ballot even if they lack support at a party meeting, but Utah has not had such a procedure in the past, and Republicans strongly desire to limit candidates in its primary to only those with at least 35% endorsement at a party convention. The lawsuit is Utah Republican Party v Herbert, Tenth Circuit number 16-4058.