Peace & Freedom Party Candidate Files Lawsuit Against New California Rules for Petitions in Lieu of Filing Fee

On January 31, Peace & Freedom Party candidate Daniel Frederick filed a lawsuit in state court in Sacramento, contesting the interpretation and constitutionality of the California Secretary of State’s rules for candidates who choose to file a petition in lieu of a filing fee, rather than paying the filing fee. The lawsuit especially contests the rules for special elections, which frequently give candidates only one or two days after the Governor has called the special election to complete these petitions. Furthermore, that problem (which is an old problem in California, for special elections) is compounded by the severe increase in the number of signatures in lieu of filing fee, caused by the Secretary of State’s interpretation of Proposition 14 and its implementing legislation.

In the past, candidates who are members of small qualified parties needed 150 signatures in lieu of a filing fee for any partisan office, but now they need 1,500 to run for Assembly. The case is Frederick v Bowen, 34-2011-80000773-cu-wm-gds. It will be heard by Judge Kinney in Sacramento Superior Court. Frederick wishes to run for the Assembly in the 4th district. A special election is being held there because the seat is vacant. It is vacant because Assemblymember Ted Gaines, who won that seat in November 2010, recently resigned because earlier this year he won a special election to the State Senate in the First District. That seat, in turn, had been vacant because State Senator Dave Cox had died on July 13, 2010, in the middle of his term.

Peace & Freedom Party Candidate Files Lawsuit Against New California Rules for Petitions in Lieu of Filing Fee

On January 31, Peace & Freedom Party candidate Daniel Frederick filed a lawsuit in state court in Sacramento, contesting the interpretation and constitutionality of the California Secretary of State’s rules for candidates who choose to file a petition in lieu of a filing fee, rather than paying the filing fee. The lawsuit especially contests the rules for special elections, which frequently give candidates only one or two days after the Governor has called the special election to complete these petitions. Furthermore, that problem (which is an old problem in California, for special elections) is compounded by the severe increase in the number of signatures in lieu of filing fee, caused by the Secretary of State’s interpretation of Proposition 14 and its implementing legislation.

In the past, candidates who are members of small qualified parties needed 150 signatures in lieu of a filing fee for any partisan office, but now they need 1,500 to run for Assembly. The case is Frederick v Bowen, 34-2011-80000773-cu-wm-gds. It will be heard by Judge Kinney in Sacramento Superior Court. Frederick wishes to run for the Assembly in the 4th district. A special election is being held there because the seat is vacant. It is vacant because Assemblymember Ted Gaines, who won that seat in November 2010, recently resigned because earlier this year he won a special election to the State Senate in the First District. That seat, in turn, had been vacant because State Senator Dave Cox had died on July 13, 2010, in the middle of his term.

New York Credico Case Moves Forward

The pending federal lawsuit against New York state’s discriminatory policy on fusion is beginning to move ahead. The case is Credico v New York State Board of Elections, in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn, cv10-4555. In 2010, Randy Credico was the U.S. Senate nominee of both the Libertarian Party, and the Anti-Prohibition Party. New York state refused to list him twice on the ballot, even though New York state listed many other candidates of the nominees of two, or three, or sometimes even four, parties. New York won’t list someone twice if he or she is the nominee of two unqualified parties.

On January 28, the state answered the complaint. The briefing should be complete by the end of March. The case had not moved in three months because the state had asked for, and received, more time to file its answer.

Republican Delegates from Utah Enclave Lose Ability to Help Choose New Republican Legislator

Utah’s Constitution says that when there is a vacancy in the legislature, the Governor fills the vacancy from a list submitted by the committee of the political party that had last held the seat. The Republican committee that represents the 57th State House is voting on January 29 on whom to recommend to fill the vacancy.

The reason the 57th district seat is vacant is that the Republican elected on November 2, 2010, Craig A. Frank, was later determined not to live in that district. A mapping error had caused elections officials to assume that Cedar Hills is part of the 57th district, but it isn’t. Because Frank lived in that area, he was forced to resign his seat.

Residents of that enclave who are Republican delegates to the party committee were told that they cannot participate in the meeting to determine a new representative. They sued in state court, arguing that they must be permitted to participate, because they were all mistakenly barred from participating in the other district’s election in November 2010, because of the error. They said that they will have been barred from participating in both districts if they cannot get any relief. But, a court denied them relief. See this story.

New York Conservative Party Unknowingly Nominated a Dead Person for State Senate in 2010

This New York Times story explains that the Conservative Party nominee for State Senate, 31st district, in 2010, was deceased before the party nominated him. Dr. Raphael M. Klapper, of the Bronx, died in May 2010. But during June and July, a petition was circulated to qualify him for the Conservative Party primary. He was dutifully nominated without opposition, and his name appeared on the November 2010 ballot. An investigation is underway to determine how this happened. Most of the district is in Manhattan.

The Conservative Party nominated 55 candidates for the 62 New York State Senate seats last year. They included 47 candidates who were also Republican nominees, one candidate who was also the Democratic nominee, and 7 candidates who weren’t the nominee of any other party. Dr. Klapper was one of the party’s nominees who wasn’t also a major party nominee. In the general election he received 1.62% of the vote. By contrast, in 2008, when the Conservative Party also ran someone in this district who wasn’t a major party nominee, the Conservative nominee only received .74%. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.

Kansas Bill to Eliminate Presidential Primary

Josh Putnam of Frontloading HQ has this post about a bill introduced in Kansas to abolish the presidential primary. The bill, HB 2126, was introduced at the request of the Secretary of State, in order to save money. Kansas has only actually held presidential primaries twice, in 1980 and 1992. Since then, generally the legislature passes a bill before each presidential election year, suspending the presidential primary for the upcoming election only. But the new bill seems to do away with the presidential primary completely.