Virginia held a special State Senate election on November 7. The vast majority of votes have been counted. The results: Lewis, Democrat, 10,197; Coleman, Republican, 10,175, and 8 write-ins. See this story. The State Senate is tied, with the Democratic Lieutenant Governor breaking the tie. If Republicans could win this election, then they could organize the State Senate.
On January 7, the news was released that former New York city Mayor Michael Bloomberg recently gave $2,500,000 to a PAC that spends independently on behalf of Democratic nominees for the U.S. Senate. See this story. In a rational system, Bloomberg could have given the money directly to the Democratic Party, or its U.S. Senate nominees. Instead, this spending must be conducted independently of the Democratic Party and its various nominees.
On January 6, 2014, the North Carolina Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Dickson v Rucho, 201 PA 12-2. The issue is whether the state’s U.S. House districts, and its state legislative districts, are valid. The lower state court had upheld the districts. The plaintiffs have several arguments, but their most important one is that the Republican majority deliberately put as many African-American voters in certain districts as possible, even to the extent of splitting precinct boundaries. This technique “wastes” Democratic votes, so that the other districts are more likely to choose Republicans.
In November 2012, Republicans won 9 U.S. House seats and Democrats won 4 seats in North Carolina. But Democrats got 2,218,357 votes for U.S. House and Republicans got 2,137,167. Three Libertarians also ran for U.S. House and got 24,142 votes. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the news.
David Atkins has this article in Calitics, showing how California’s Proposition 14, the top-two system, has strengthened the state’s major party organizations. The Atkins piece first talks about the U.S. House race, 31st district, in 2012, a story that is somewhat well-known. But then he discusses a little-known aspect of the law, its consequences for elections for party office.
Because there are no partisan primaries in mid-term years, the legislature in 2012 passed a bill giving 4-year terms, instead of 2-year terms, to county central committee members. They are only up for re-election in presidential years, when they can be put on the same partisan primary ballots used for the presidential primary. Giving these party officials 4-year terms instead of 2-year terms reduces internal democracy in the parties.
On January 7, U.S. District Court Judge Michael H. Watson ruled that due process requires that Ohio not implement its new ballot access barriers for minor parties for the 2014 election. The 28-page opinion depends on the fact that the Ohio legislature did not pass the new requirements until November 2013, after various candidates of the minor parties had already been circulating petitions to place themselves on their own party’s primary ballot. The case is Libertarian Party of Ohio v Husted, southern district, 2:13cv-953.
The decision also depends on the fact that the new law doesn’t take effect until February 2014. The Republican majority in the legislature wanted the new requirements to take effect immediately, but the bill would have needed 60% in each House of the legislature to take effect immediately, and because some Republican legislators voted against the bill, the bill did not pass with 60% in the State House.
The decision says, “The Ohio Legislature moved the proverbial goalpost in the midst of the game. Stripping the Plaintiffs of the opportunity to participate in the 2014 primary in these circumstances would be patently unfair.”
