Census Bureau Issues Survey Concerning Voting Behavior in 2012

Posted on by May 10, 2013
11

On May 8, the U.S. Census Bureau released its study of voting from the November 2012 election. The Bureau issues a report after each presidential and congressional election. Here is a link to the various tables.

Table 4a shows the voter turnout. One column calculates the turnout, as a percentage of the eligible adult citizen population. That column, headed “percent voted (citizen)” shows that Oklahoma had the third lowest turnout of any state. Oklahoma, in 2012 and in each of the two previous presidential elections as well, has not permitted anyone to vote for President other than the Democratic and Republican nominees. The only two states with lower turnout were West Virginia and Hawaii.

Table 10 has “Reasons for not voting”, but this table merely presents data for the entire United States, and does not break it down by state. The four leading reasons individuals gave for not voting are: (1) “Too busy, conflicting schedules”; (2) “Not interested”; (3) “Illness or Disability”; (4) “Did not like candidates.” It would be interesting to this data broken down by state.

Table 12 shows method of registration. National Journal has an interesting story, highlighting that data. Thanks to Rick Hasen for that link.

COFOE Annual Meeting Set for July 14 in New York City

Posted on by May 9, 2013
Reply

The Coalition for Free & Open Elections (COFOE) will hold its annual board meeting on July 14, Sunday, in New York, at 339 Lafayette Street, third floor, at 1 p.m. COFOE was formed in 1985 and is a loose coalition of most of the nation’s nationally-organized minor parties, plus other groups that support fair treatment for minor parties and independent candidates.

COFOE recently made a contribution to the legal costs for the ongoing Alabama ballot access lawsuit. Previously COFOE helped fund the appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court in the lawsuit over whether election officials must tally votes for declared write-in presidential candidates. Unfortunately the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear that case.

All of COFOE’s income comes from contributions from people like you. COFOE members receive a free subscription to the printed Ballot Access News.

Initiative Proponents Sue to Overturn California Law on Petition Validity

Posted on by May 9, 2013
Reply

On May 7, proponents of an initiative in Long Beach, California, filed a federal lawsuit against a restrictive California election law concerning validity of signatures on petitions. Section 105 of the California election code says a signature on any type of petition is invalid, if the address of the voter on the petition differs from the voter’s address in voter registration records.

This law, interpreted literally, means that a voter who signs a petition and who then moves and promptly re-registers at the new address, will have his or her signature invalidated. This happens because there is obviously a time lag between the day the voter signs the petition, and the day the petition was checked. While it may seem that this does not happen very often, it did happen often enough to affect one particular initiative this year.

A Long Beach city initiative to legalize medical marijuana was circulated this year. Proponents needed 33,543 valid signatures and submitted 43,159. The city did a random sample of the petition. The results are so close, the random sample will determine that the petition had enough valid signatures only if the California law is construed to validate the signature of eleven particular voters (whose signature were chosen for the random sample) who listed their correct address at the time on the petition, but who then moved and re-registered. If these signatures are not counted, then the petition failed the random sample process. The case is Coltharp v Herrera, central district, 2:13-cv-3263.