If Hawaii Congresswoman Colleen Hanabusa is Appointed to U.S. Senate, Hawaii Faces a Special Election for Her Seat

According to this article, it is likely that Hawaii Congresswoman Colleen Hanabusa will be appointed to Hawaii’s vacant U.S. Senate seat. If that happens, Hawaii will then soon hold a special election to fill Hanabusa’s seat. Hawaii special U.S. House elections are one-round elections in which parties do not have nominees. When Hawaii held a special U.S. House election in 2010, two popular Democrats ran, splitting the normal Democratic vote, so that Republican Charles Djou was elected. The vote in that special May 2010 special election for the top three candidates were: Republican Djou 67,610; Democrat Colleen Hanabusa 52,802, Democrat Ed Case 47,391. But in November 2010, in a normal partisan election, Djou lost to Hanabusa.

North Dakota Libertarian Party Finds a State Senator who will Introduce a Ballot Access Bill

The North Dakota Libertarian Party has found one State Senator who says he will introduce a bill to improve North Dakota ballot access, when the legislature convenes in January. North Dakota and Oklahoma are the only states that have not had any minor party legislative nominees on the ballot (with the party label) during the last four years. The problem in North Dakota is a law that requires between 10% and 15% of all voters who vote in the primary election to choose a minor party primary ballot, in order for that minor party to nominate any legislative candidates.

Rhode Island State Board of Elections Releases Presidential Write-in Tally

Rhode Island does not have a law requiring write-in candidates to file a declaration of candidacy if they wish their write-ins counted. Instead, Rhode Island tallies the votes for any candidate who receives at least five write-ins. For President last month, Rhode Island says the names that received as many as 5 write-ins are: Ron Paul 617, Hillary Clinton 64, Mickey Mouse 14.

Oregon Constitution Party May Have Lost its Qualified Status

Oregon requires qualified political parties that have registration smaller than one-half of 1% to poll at least 1% of the vote for any statewide office, every two years, in order to remain on the ballot.

At the 2012 election, the Constitution Party nominated candidates for three statewide offices: President (the Oregon Constitution Party nominated Will Christensen for President instead of Virgil Goode); Treasurer; and Attorney General. The party’s nominees for President and Treasurer did not poll as much as 1%, and the party’s registration is only about one-seventh of 1%. However, the Constitution Party’s nominee for Attorney General, James Leuenberger, did meet the vote test; he polled 2.79%, placing third. But his vote appears not to count toward keeping the party on the ballot, because section 248.008(7) says a candidate who is nominated by more than one party cannot use his vote to “save” the ballot status of any party.

Leuenberger appeared on the November 2012 ballot as “Constitution, Libertarian” because he was also the nominee of the Libertarian Party. He won the Libertarian nomination in the Libertarian Party’s all-mail private primary election, in which all registered Libertarians were able to vote. No one else sought the Libertarian nomination for Attorney General. Oregon permits fusion. It now appears that Leuenberger injured his own party, the Constitution Party, by also winning the Libertarian nomination. This post has been re-written to reflect the existence of the law that says a fusion nominee’s vote total cannot help a party retain ballot status. Thanks to Dan Meek (see his comment #2 below) for this re-write. The Oregon Secretary of State’s office says it will soon rule on the status of the Constitution Party.

All of the other statewide Libertarian nominees all met the vote test and even if they hadn’t, the Libertarian Party has enough registrations so that it need not pass the vote test.

Congress Passes Bill Easing Federal Restrictions on Who can Run for Partisan Office

On December, Congress passed S2170, which eases some of the Hatch Act restrictions on who can run for partisan office. Under the terms of the bill, state and local government employees whose salaries are paid for partly (but not entirely) by federal funds will now be able to run for partisan office.

There will be no change in the existing rules that make it illegal for federal employees, as well as state/local government employees who are paid entirely with federal tax dollars, to run for partisan office.

S2170 also eases the punishment for employees who do file to run for partisan office.