On April 5, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, in a speech, criticized various election law bills pending in state legislatures. Included in his criticism are bills and proposed bills to end the winner-take-all system for electing presidential electors. Such a bill is pending in Pennsylvania and may eventually be introduced in Michigan. See this story.
On April 4, the Alabama Senate Constitution, Campaign Finance, Ethics & Elections Committee passed SB 265 by a vote of 5-0. This is the bill by Senator Cam Ward that reduces the number of signtures for newly-qualifying parties and non-presidential independent candidates. It also provides for a later petition deadline for newly-qualifying parties. Thanks to Joshua Cassity for this news.
On April 4, the Oklahoma House passed SB 309, so it is now on its way to the Governor. This is the bill to provide that if a presidential elector casts a vote in the Electoral College different from what was expected, he or she is deemed to have resigned. The vote in the House was 62-24. A majority of the Democrats who voted on this bill voted against it. This is the first time a bill on this subject has failed to get majority support in any legislative chamber from either of the two major parties. Generally these bills pass almost unanimously.
California Assemblymember Tim Donnelly has introduced AB 1117, which would provide that any statewide initiative in circulation would be posted on the Secretary of State’s web page. Any registered voter could then find the petition, print a blank petition sheet, and sign the petition both as the signer and the circulator. The bill has a hearing in the Assembly Elections Committee on Tuesday, April 9, at 1:30 p.m.
California Assemblymember Richard Pan (D-Sacramento) has introduced AB 1038. It says, “A person shall not offer to pay or pay money or other valuable consideration to another person, either directly or indirectly, to assist another person to register to vote under a certain political party by receiving the completed affidavit of registration. Any person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor.”
Assemblymember Pan had a similar bill in 2012, AB 2058, but Governor Jerry Brown vetoed it.
The bill is discriminatory, because while it would make it illegal for a qualified party to pay someone for each registration into that party, it would not be illegal for an unqualified party to do the same thing. California election law defines “party” to mean a qualified party. The bill has a hearing in the Assembly Elections Committee on Tuesday, April 9, at 1:30 p.m.
