The Texas Tribune, a well-read on-line Texas news source, has this opinion piece by Representative Rob Simmons. It urges that Texas voters contact their state legislators and ask them to support his HB 1288. The bill would eliminate the straight-ticket device.
There are at least five states in which U.S. District Courts could at any time issue an opinion on the constitutionality of a ballot access law.
In Alabama, U.S. District Court Judge Myron Thompson will decide Hall v Bennett. The issue is whether the state’s severe 3% petition requirement for independent candidates must be eased when special elections are called, given that the time frame to collect signatures in a special election is so much shorter than in a regular election.
In Illinois, U.S. District Court Judge Andrea Wood will decide Libertarian Party of Illinois v Illinois State Board of Elections. The issue is the state’s law that requires newly-qualifying parties to submit a full slate of candidates. No other state has ever had such a law, and even Illinois doesn’t force already-established parties to run a full slate. The law has existed since 1935.
In Missouri, U.S. District Court Judge Ronnie White will decide if St. Louis County can constitutionally limit special elections for County Council to only the two parties that polled the biggest vote for Governor in the last election. The case is Constitution Party of Missouri v St. Louis County.
In New Mexico, U.S. District Court Judge Martha Vazquez will decide Parker v Duran. The issue is whether New Mexico can require independent candidates to submit a petition of 3% of the last gubernatorial vote, when the petition for minor parties to get on the ballot for themselves is only one-half of 1%, and the minor party nominee petition is 1%.
In Ohio, U.S. District Court Judge Michael Watson will decide Libertarian Party of Ohio v Husted. The issue is whether the state’s new procedures for minor parties, passed in late 2013, are consistent with the Ohio Constitution. The Ohio Constitution appears to require that all parties nominate by primary, and yet the new law says newly-qualifying parties should nominate by convention. There are other issues in the case also. The Secretary of State has taken the position that the Libertarian Party is not ballot-qualified for the local partisan elections of 2015. Here is a news story about that.
There are constitutional ballot access cases pending in other states as well, but the cases listed above seem to be the only ones that are fully briefed. Cases not ready for a decision (either from a trial court or a higher court) are pending in Arizona, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee.
Three Connecticut Republican State Senators have introduced SB 222, which eases the definition of a major political party. Current law says a major party is entitled to a primary, and is defined as a group that either polled 20% for Governor, or which has registration membership equal to 20% of the number of voters enrolled in all political parties.
The bill lowers both the vote test and the registration test from 20% to 15%. It is not known why this bill was introduced. The sponsors are Senators Leonard Fasano (the leader of Republicans in the State Senate), Kevin Witkos, and Michael McLachlin. The Republican Party polled 46.15% for Governor in 2014, so it is not in danger of going off the ballot. Its registration is about 20% of the state total, but about 36% of the total of voters registered into a party.
The bill had a hearing in the Government Administration & Elections Committee on February 13, but the legislature’s web page hasn’t posted the minutes for that meeting yet.
The Daily Journal has this story about the Vermont bill to set that state’s presidential primary on the same day as the New Hampshire presidential primary.
The Staten Island Advance has this detailed and interesting account of the February 13 oral argument in Rossito-Canty v Cuomo, e.d., 1:15cv-568. This is the case over whether there is any constitutional requirement that a Governor call a special U.S. House election soon after the vacancy occurs.
