The Tennessee Republican State Executive Committee will meet on February 7 to vote on whether the party should work for a closed primary for itself. See this story. Tennessee has always had open primaries and has never had voter registration forms that asked applicants to choose a party affiliation or to choose independent status. The Tennessee legislature has a Republican majority in both houses, and the Governor is a Republican, so if the party decides in favor of closed primaries, it would probably work with the legislature, rather than going to court.
Ballot Access News
January 1, 2015 – Volume 30, Number 8
| This issue was printed on blue paper. |
Table of Contents
- INFLUENTIAL VOICES ASK FEC TO REVISE RULES ON PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES
- CONGRESS INCREASES DONATION LIMIT FOR POLITICAL PARTIES
- MICHIGAN REPEALS REQUIREMENTS FOR PETITIONERS
- ELEVENTH CIRCUIT WON’T STRIKE DOWN ALABAMA MARCH PETITION DEADLINE
- ILLINOIS ALMOST MAKES BALLOT ACCESS WORSE, BUT THEN CHANGES ITS MIND
- BOOST FOR OKLAHOMA BALLOT ACCESS
- “OTHER” VOTE IN 2014 WAS 4.6%
- BALLOT ACCESS BILLS EXPECTED IN MANY STATES
- HOSTILE TEXAS BALLOT ACCESS BILL
- ERRATA
- 2014 VOTE FOR U.S. SENATE
- 2014 VOTE FOR U.S. HOUSE
- LOUISIANA MINOR PARTY PARTISAN WINS IN DECEMBER
- ARIZONA GREENS ARE BACK ON BALLOT
- N.Y. CONSERVATIVE PARTY HAS ITS BEST VOTE SHOWINGS SINCE 1990
- LIBERTARIANS DISPLACE DEMOCRATS ON ALASKA CAMPAIGN COMMISSION
- MINOR PARTY NON-PARTISAN WINS
- LIBERTARIANS POLL 1,471,101 VOTES FOR TOP OF TICKET OFFICES
- SUBSCRIBING TO BAN WITH PAYPAL
Iowa Representative Bruce Hunter (D-Des Moines) has introduced HF 27, to provide for public funding of campaigns for state office. It would also provide for a voters pamphlet to be sent to all voters, with candidate statements. See this story, which describes the bill. The story also mentions the other election law bills introduced in Iowa so far. Thanks to Nathan Hetzel for the link.
Courthouse News Service has this article about the January 29 decision of the California Court of Appeals, upholding the top-two system. The case is Rubin v Padilla.
According to this Washington Post story, on January 30, three Virginia Democratic voters filed a federal lawsuit that says the Democratic Party broke the law when it held a nominating convention for the special election for Delegate, district 74. The story says that the party charged $1,500 for any candidate who wanted to be nominated. The story also says the convention improperly excluded voters from part of the district.
The case does not seem to be registered on Pacer yet, so it is difficult to understand the story completely. Check back in a few days. I hope to have seen the Complaint by then and will be able to more fully describe it. UPDATE: the case is Lambert v Democratic Party of Virginia, e.d., 3:15cv-61. See Jim Riley’s comment below for more about this interesting case.