On July 3, the California legislature passed SB 1272, which says the following ballot measure will be on the November 2014 ballot: “Shall the Congress of the United States propose, and the California Legislature ratify, an amendment or amendments to the United States Constitution to overturn Citizens United v Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), and other applicable judicial precedents, to allow the full regulation or limitation of campaign contributions and spending, to ensure that all citizens, regardless of wealth, may express their views to one another, and to make clear that the rights protected by the United States Constitution are the rights of natural persons only?”

On July 16, Governor Jerry Brown said he would not veto the measure, so it takes effect. However, he refused to sign it, saying it is not a good idea to put ballot measures on the ballot that have no binding effect, and are merely advisory. He said he will veto future measures for advisory questions.

On July 22, a lawsuit was filed with the State Appeals Court, 3rd district, to remove the measure from the ballot. Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association v Bowen, C076928. The lawsuit points out that in 1984, the California Supreme Court removed an initiative from the ballot that asked the voters if they wish to instruct Congress and the legislature to pass a U.S. Constitutional amendment for a balanced federal budget. The only difference between that case, and the new case, is that the 1984 measure was put on the ballot by the voters, whereas the current measure was put on the ballot by the legislature. Generally the California Constitution treats the voters (acting through the initiative process) as the equivalent of the legislature. Here is the text of the bill that put the current measure on the ballot.

Paul Hogarth has this detailed analysis of how California’s top-two system has worked in both 2012 and 2014. It appears at Daily Kos, and the impetus for the analysis was the New York Times op-ed by U.S. Senator Charles Schumer that ran on Tuesday, July 22.

Hogarth does not mention these factual errors in Senator Schumer’s piece: (1) Schumer refers to the November election as a “runoff”, but federal law since 1872 has required that the election itself (for Congress) be in November, and if states want congressional runoffs, they must be later than that; (2) Schumer says most states don’t let independent voters vote in Democratic and Republican primaries, but only 15 states don’t let independents vote in Democratic congressional primaries, and only 19 states don’t let them vote in Republican congressional primaries. Schumer also deplores the 2014 Republican primary in Virginia than unseated Congressman Eric Cantor, but Schumer doesn’t seem to know that Virginia has open primaries.

The Los Angeles Times has this story about the California write-in candidates who placed second in the June 2014 primary. In all cases, a write-in candidate only placed second when only one candidate had filed to be on the June ballot for that office. The only three minor party candidates who will be on the California general election ballot this year were write-ins who ran in such races. They include one Peace & Freedom candidate for U.S. House, one Libertarian for Assembly, and one American Independent Party member for Assembly.