Several Iowa state legislators have introduced SSB 1072, which would establish public funding for candidates for partisan state office. To qualify, candidates for Governor would need to receive contributions of at least $5 from each of 2,000 individuals, with 500 from each of the four U.S. House districts. The donors would also need to sign a petition.

Candidates for State Senate would need contributions from 200 voters in that district; representatives would need 100.

The bill does not discriminate for or against any type of candidate, except that during the primary season, candidates who were not running in a primary would only receive one-fourth as much public funding as candidates who are running in a primary. Here is a copy of the bill.

Illinois Governor Pat Quinn has asked the legislature to change the Illinois primary system from the type of open primary in which the voter (on primary day) must publicly ask for one particular party’s primary ballot, to the type of open primary in which the voter would decide which party’s primary ballot to use in the secrecy of the voting booth. See this story.

Arizona and other states with the initiative process provide that initiatives must only deal with a single subject. Last November, Proposition 121 appeared on the Arizona ballot. It would have established a top-two open primary if it had passed. The Arizona Supreme Court had ruled before the election that Proposition 121 did not violate the “single subject” rule, but only on January 7, 2013, did it issue its opinion explaining why it didn’t violate the rule.

Opponents of the initiative had won in the lower court. The lower court had said that an initiative that puts a top-two open primary in place, and also abolishes elections for political party precinct committeemember, cannot appear on the ballot because those two parts consist of two different subjects. But the Arizona Supreme Court said both parts are a single subject, and the single subject is that both parts downgrade the role that political parties would play in Arizona elections, if the measure had passed. The decision is Save Our Vote v Bennett, cv2012-010717. Footnote three points out that the initiative didn’t pass, so the decision has no practical significance except as a precedent for future controversies over the single-subject rule.