One state legislative election in the November 2, 2010 Massachusetts election is still unsettled. See this story. The election was so close between the two candidates, even after a recount, that the dispute went to court. The judge now says he will need another week to decide who won the election for the Worcester 6th district, for State House of Representatives.
U.S. House member Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) has introduced HR 453, to require states to use “bipartisan” commissions to draw U.S. House district boundaries. The text of the bill is not yet available, but the press release says the bill requires “the minority and majority leaders” of each state’s legislature to appoint an equal number of members of these commissions. One wonders how the bill would apply to Vermont, a state in which three political parties are represented in the legislature and each of the three parties has its own legislative leaders. One also wonders how the bill would apply to Nebraska, which has a non-partisan legislature. Thanks to Rick Hasen for this news.
Also, U.S. House member Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.) has re-introduced his bill to require the states to have a redistricting process that is open to public scrutiny. This year it is HR 419. He introduced the same bill last year.
Two bills are pending in the New York legislature to decrease the number of signatures needed for petitions. Assemblymember Barbara Clark (D-Queens) is the lead author of both bills. A2939 would cut the number of signatures in half for all types of petitions, both those to get candidates on a primary ballot, and those to get a candidate on the general election ballot. For example, the statewide petitions would drop from 15,000 signatures to 7,500. A2939 has six co-sponsors.
Clark has also introduced A3664, which only cuts the number of signatures for a candidate for U.S. House in the general election, from 3,500 signatures, to 2,000.
Another bill would provide privacy for people who sign ballot access petitions. A847 says “No person shall post or publish or permit the posting or publishing of any document obtained under any provision of this chapter that contains copies of original signatures except in connection with a review of such signatures for the purpose of objecting to a petition.” The authors are Audrey Pheffer (D-Far Rockaway) and John McEneny (D-Albany).
On January 26, the U.S. House of Representatives voted by a margin of 239 to 160 to suspend the presidential public funding program. The bill is HR 359. Although press reports say the bill repeals the program, technically the bill just says that the program is terminated for future presidential elections. No existing part of the law is actually repealed.
The vote was mostly party-line, with only one Republican voting “No” and only ten Democrats voting “Yes.” There is an identical bill in the U.S. Senate, S194, introduced by U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell.
Tennessee State Senator Stacey Campfield (R-Knoxville) has introduced SB 129, which has two purposes. It lowers the number of signatures to qualify a new or previously unqualified party, from 2.5% of the last gubernatorial vote, to 1% of the last gubernatorial vote.
Also, it provides that the voter registration form ask voters if they wish to register into a party, and provides that voters would not be allowed to vote in a primary unless were registered members of the party. However, an exception would be made for voters voting in their first primary after the bill took effect. Currently, Tennessee doesn’t have registration by party.
The bill is faulty for not recognizing that political parties have a right to invite independent voters into their primaries if they wish. Also the bill is vague because it doesn’t explain whether or not voters could register into an unqualified party.
The portion of the bill that lowers the number of signatures to qualify a new party is in response to the September 2010 decision of a U.S. District Court that the old petition requirement is unconstitutional. However, the bill still implies that signing a petition means the signer is a member of the party, and the court decision said that was impermissible. Voters must be allowed to say that they desire that a new party be recognized, without necessarily being members of that party. The bill retains the wording that says “For one year after petitioning successfully, a political party which has a membership equal to 1% of the total number of votes cast for gubernatorial elections as shown by petitions to establish a political party” is qualified. The term “membership” should be deleted from the description of the petition, if the bill’s sponsor wants a law that is constitutional. Also, the bill does nothing to alter the April petition deadline, which the court said is too early.
Maine Representative Ben Chipman (I-Portland) has introduced LD 142, to remove the requirement that a qualified party, or a group attempting to qualify as a political party, must hold a municipal caucus in at least one town in each county in the state. Ballot access requirements that require support from each county in a state, or even support from any particular number of counties, have been held unconstitutional. Illinois, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Wisconsin, and Wyoming, all had ballot access requirements in the past that required support from a certain number of counties, but none of those laws exist any longer. Nebraska still has a county distribution requirement for non-presidential statewide independent candidates, passed in 2007, but that law is under attack in U.S. District Court. Nebraska’s county distribution requirement for petitions for a new party was held unconstitutional in 1984.
Maine has 16 counties, ranging in population from 17,000 (Piscataquis County) to 278,000 (Cumberland County).