On April 21, the California Senate Elections Committee passed SB 163, which provides that in statewide elections, all voters will automatically receive a ballot in the postal mail. The bill would not affect non-statewide elections that are not held simultaneously with statewide elections. Polling places would continue to be open.
States that now send a ballot to all registered voters by postal mail are Oregon, Washington, and Colorado.
On the afternoon of April 22, the Oklahoma Senate passed HB 2181. As amended earlier in the Senate Rules Committee, it lowers the petition for a newly-qualifying party from 5% of the last vote cast, to 3% of the last gubernatorial vote.
The bill already passed the House at 1%. Now it goes back to the House, which is expected to approve the Senate version of the bill. Assuming the bill is signed into law, the number of signatures in 2016 for a newly-qualifying party will fall from 41,242 valid signatures to 24,745. The number of signatures in 2018 would also be 24,745. In 2014 the requirement had been 66,744.
The vote on the Senate floor was 37-4. Thanks to Wes Benedict for this news. The four Senators who voted “No” are: Mark Allen (R-Spiro), Larry Boggs (R-Wilburton), Ron Sharp (R-Shawnee), and Wayne Shaw (R-Grove).
The Alabama Constitution says that persons convicted of crimes of “moral turpitude” lose the right to vote, but the Constitution does not define “moral turpitude”. Each county has imposed its own definition in the past. On April 21 the Alabama House passed HB 344, which lists 38 types of felonies that disqualify a person from voting. Here is a copy of the bill.
On April 22, the North Carolina House Elections Committee passed HB 457, which moves the presidential primary from February to March. The bill has no impact on the primary for other office, which would continue to be in May. Later the same day, the bill passed the House on a voice vote.
On March 31, the Seventh Circuit held oral argument in Common Cause of Indiana v Individual Members of the Election Commission, 14-3300. The issue is the Indiana law that says for Indianapolis (Marion County), but no other county, the partisan election for trial court judges shall use limiting voting. No political party may run for more than half the seats that are up.
Although in theory independent candidates and the nominees of minor parties can run for these judicial seats, almost always, the only candidates on the general election ballot are Democrats and Republicans. Since neither of those parties can run for more than half the seats, the voters have no real choice. Typically, 16 judges are to be elected, but there are only eight Democrats and eight Republicans on the ballot, so the outcome of the election is a foregone conclusion.
Limited voting exists in Pennsylvania, Connecticut, and the District of Columbia, but in those places, it exists for government bodies with multiple members, such as city councils or school boards. The Indiana limited voting is different because trial court judges don’t sit together as a multiple-member body. Each judge handles his or her case load as an individual. The voters who challenged the Indiana system argue that voting must be meaningful, and when the typical election has a foregone conclusion, the election is not meaningful. The U.S. District Court in this case had invalidated the system. Here is a link to the oral argument, which lasts 30 minutes. The judges were Michael S. Kanne, a Reagan appointee; Ilana D. Rovner, a Bush Sr. appointee; and U.S. District Court Judge Theresa Springmann, a Bush Jr. appointee from Indiana. Judge Rover dominated the discussion and seems inclined to strike down the system, and to uphold the U.S. District Court decision.
Indianapolis has used limited voting since 2006.
