On June 8, Ohio Governor John Kasich signed HB 153, which moves the primary for all office (in presidential years) from the first Tuesday after the first Monday in March, to the second Tuesday after the first Monday in March.

As a result, the 2016 primary moves from March 8 to March 15. That also moves the petition deadline for non-presidential independents from March 7 to March 14. Thanks to Josh Putnam for this news.

Also on June 8, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback signed HB 2104, the omnibus election law bill that eliminates the Kansas presidential primary. Kansas hasn’t actually held a presidential primary since 1992, because the budget never had enough money for it in subsequent years and the legislature would always pass a bill suspending it for the upcoming election. So, realistically, this isn’t a meaningful change. Other states that won’t hold a presidential primary for any party in 2016 are Alaska, Colorado, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, North Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. There is still a tiny chance that the special session of the Washington state legislature could restore a presidential primary.

On June 8 the Maine Senate tentatively passed LD 742, and on June 9 the Maine House also passed it. It asks the voters if they wish to amend the State Constitution, to require that initiative petitions obtain the signatures of voters in each of the two U.S. House districts. Maine initiatives need the signatures of 10% of the last gubernatorial vote. The bill would ask the voters to change this to 10% in each of the two districts.

As originally introduced, the bill would have required signatures from each county, but that was scrapped because it violates the U.S. Supreme Court precedent Moore v Ogilvie. Statewide petitions cannot have distribution requirements based on counties, because counties are unequal in population. Thanks to Thomas MacMillan for this news.

Matt Erard, the Socialist Party member-plaintiff, has asked for reconsideration in Erard v Michigan Secretary of State, 14-1873. This is the case that challenges the Michigan law that requires approximately twice as much support for a newly-qualifying party to get on the ballot than is required for an already-qualified party to stay on.