On December 10, an Oregon state court refused injunctive relief to a group of voters whose mail-in ballots weren’t counted because election officials thought their signatures on the outer envelope of the ballot didn’t match their signatures on voter registration forms. There is a procedure for such voters to contest such a ruling, but it depended on notifying those voters and in many cases the notifications did not reach the voters. This outcome is bad news for the proponents of Measure 92, the initiative that was just barely defeated, on the subject of labels for genetically altered foods. See this story.
On December 9, the text of the congressional bill that would fund the federal government was released. It contains a surprise provision that would make it possible for individuals to give substantially more money to national committees of political parties than the current law allows. Currently individuals cannot give more than $32,400 per year to the national committee of a political party.
The budget rider would allow much larger contributions, but only if the money were donated for one of three purposes: (1) to defray expenses of national conventions; (2) to defray expenses incurred with respect to the construction, purchase, renovation, operation, and furnishing of one or more headquarters buildings of the party or to repay loans the proceeds of which were used to defray such expenses, or otherwise to restore funds used to defray such expenses (including expenses for obligations incurred during the 2-year period which ends on the date of the enactment of this paragraph); (3) to defray expenses incurred with respect to the preparation for and the conduct of election recounts and contests and other legal proceedings.
Although many news stories about this bill imply that the bill only applies to the Democratic and Republican National Committees, the bill actually applies to all political parties recognized by the Federal Election Commission as “national committees.” They include the Libertarian, Green, Constitution, Socialist, Natural Law, and Reform Parties.
The bill is expected to pass Congress this week. Thanks to Dan Tokaji for the link.
Eric Ostermeier has posted this interesting article on Smart Politics, which calculates the percentage of gubernatorial elections in which the winner polled less than a majority of the vote cast. In the 2010’s decade, so far, 26.7% of all gubernatorial elections have produced winners who didn’t receive a majority.
2014 matched 2010; in both years, 10 of the 36 gubernatorial elections were won with just a plurality. As Ostermeier says, the 2010’s decade has a higher percentage of plurality winners than any decade since the 1910’s, and this shows that the current decade is notable for the rise of strong independent and minor party candidates. The reason the 1910’s had so many plurality winners was that in the 1910’s, the nation had three very strong minor parties. The Progressive Party elected the Governor of California in 1914 and the Prohibition Party elected the Governor of Florida in 1916. The Socialist Party didn’t elect any Governors, but sometimes polled over 10% of the vote. Its best showing in gubernatorial races were in 1914, when it got 15.7% in Nevada and 20.8% in Oklahoma.
Hobbs, New Mexico, held an election on December 9, for the sole purpose of letting voters decide whether to require voters at the polls to show government photo-ID. It passed 78%-22%. See this story. The measure says the city will pay the costs of obtaining such ID for residents who don’t have it. The measure only impacts elections for city office.
The measure’s path to the Hobbs ballot was long and complicated. The city allows initiatives to change city ordinances, and proponents of photo-ID were told how many signatures they needed. They obtained those signatures, but then it was discovered that the measure could not be a legitimate ordinance, because it changed the city charter. Therefore, the petition was invalid. The city council then voted to put the measure on the ballot.
Hobbs is the county seat and largest town in Lea County, in southeast New Mexico.
Oregon Measure 92, for labeling genetically altered foods, lost by 812 votes last month, and a recount is underway. On December 8 the initiative’s supporters filed a lawsuit in state court, arguing that 4,600 ballots weren’t counted because election officials felt the signature on the outer envelope of the mail-in ballot doesn’t match the signature on the voter registration form. Some of the plaintiffs are voters whose ballots weren’t counted. They point out that the appearance of their signatures has changed over the years. See this story.
When a voter’s ballot is rejected because the signature appears not to match, that voter is supposed to be notified, and is given until November 18 to come into the office. But many voters say they were not informed their ballot had been rejected.