On April 11, California Secretary of State Alex Padilla endorsed SB 568, which moves the primary in presidential years, for all office, from June to the third Tuesday in March. The author of SB 568 is Senator Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens). The bill says the Governor would have the power to move the primary to an even earlier date.

The bill is similar to AB 84, by Assembly Speaker Pro Tempore Kevin Mullin (D-South San Francisco). AB 84 sets the primary in the first week of March, for all office, in presidential years.

SB 568 has a hearing in the Senate Elections & Constitutional Amendments Committee on April 18, Tuesday, at 1:30 p.m. AB 84 has a hearing in the Assembly Elections Committee on April 26, Wednesday, at 9 a.m.

If either of these bills pass, there would be no means for a candidate for Congress, or partisan state office, to get on any ballot, in the year of the election itself. The filing deadline for candidates who want to be on a ballot would be in December of the year before the election. Because California has a top-two system, there is no method for candidates to get on the November ballot (except for president) other than through the primary process. No other state has ever had an election system with the characteristic that all routes to the ballot are closed off in the election year itself. It is likely that such a system would violate the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court has on three occasions said that there must be some means onto the general election ballot that is later than early spring of the election year. The cases were Anderson v Celebrezze (1983), Lendall v Jernigan (1977), and Salera v Tucker (1976). The latter two were summary affirmances and related to congressional and state legislative elections.

On April 10, the Iowa House again passed HF 516, which repeals the straight-ticket device and makes other unrelated changes as well. The bill had passed both houses of the legislature in March, but the versions of the bill were different in each house, so the House had to pass it again. It still isn’t through the legislature, though, until it passes the Senate one more time.

The Governor is expected to sign the bill. Then, the only states that will still have the device are Alabama, Indiana, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah. Also in Michigan it was repealed but it still exists because a U.S. District Court Judge blocked the repeal. It is somewhat likely that the Texas legislature will repeal the device this month or next month.

At 4 p.m., the Alaska House Judiciary Committee held a short hearing on HB 200, which imposes a top-two system. The hearing was supposed to start at 1 p.m., but it couldn’t start then because the House was unexpectedly in session in the afternoon.

Because there was so little time for a hearing, no one from the public was allowed to testify.

The sponsor, Representative Gabrielle Ledoux, said that four states have top-two and that it came about by the initiative process in all four states. This is not accurate. The California top-two idea was put on the ballot by the legislature. Louisiana does not have top-two; instead it has abolished primaries and only has general elections in November and sometimes a run-off after November; in any event Louisiana does not have the initiative process. Finally, Nebraska does not have a top-two system either. It has semi-closed primaries for congress, and state executive offices, and county partisan offices, and a completely non-partisan elections (with no party labels) for legislature.

Another hearing will be held on Wednesday, April 12, probably at 1 p.m.

When public testimony is allowed, individuals in several population centers may testify by video, even if they aren’t there in person in Juneau.