Last week, British Columbia held an election for its provincial legislature. The two major parties in British Columbia elections are the New Democratic Party and the Liberal Party. Before the election, most observers expected the New Democratic Party to win a majority in the legislature. However, instead, the Liberal Party won. Because the Green Party had candidates in 61 of the 85 districts, and because the New Democratic Party is considered to be “left” of the Liberal Party, some commentators wrote that the Green Party had “spoiled” the election for the New Democratic Party.

Canada, like the United States, does not have proportional representation and does not use ranked-choice voting.

Chad Skelton, writing for the Vancouver Sun, here reports his research into whether Green Party voters would have supported the New Democratic Party over the Liberal Party, if the Green Party had not been in the race. To his surprise, he found that the Green Party campaigns did not cause the defeat of the New Democratic Party.

On May 20, late in the night, the Minnesota legislature adjourned for the year. The legislature did not pass the Senate version of the omnibus election law bill. That bill, SF 677, would have moved the primary from August to June, and automatically would have created earlier petition deadlines for a newly-qualifying party, and also an earlier petition deadline for non-presidential independent candidates.

The legislature did pass the House version of the omnibus election law bill, HF 894, but that bill does not change primary dates or any petition deadlines. That bill expands the types of voters who can use absentee voting, but does not provide for early voting.

Other bills that failed to pass include bills to provide that if a presidential elector votes in the electoral college differently than had been expected, he or she is deemed to have resigned, and would be replaced by someone chosen by the other electors. Those bills were HF 526 and SF 464. Also, the bills to let non-charter cities use ranked-choice voting, SF 335 and HF 367, failed to pass. The National Popular Vote Plan bills also did not pass.

On May 21, U.S. District Court Judge Timothy C. Batten, an appointee of President George W. Bush, issued an 81-page opinion in Georgia State Conference of NAACP v Fayette County Board of Commissioners, northern district, 3:11cv-123. The ruling finds that Fayette County, Georgia, is in violation of the federal Voting Rights Act because of its method of electing county commissioners and members of the Board of Education.

Both bodies have five members. They are elected at-large, in numbered posts. That means, instead of the ballot telling voters, “Vote for Five”, each candidate for County Commission and Board of Education runs for one particular numbered seat. Although the county is 20% black, no black has ever been elected to either body. The county uses districts, but only for the purpose of a residency requirement for candidates.

The opinion suggests that at-large elections might have been upheld if it weren’t for the numbered seats provision. If all the members were elected at-large, in a single space on the ballot, it would be easier for a discrete minority to elect one of its preferred candidates by simply voting for that one candidate, and no others. But the numbered seat provision, making each separate seat a separate contest, makes that impossible.