Mark Schmitt, writing for The New Republic, comments here on Americans Elect, and then goes on to recommend Instant-Runoff Voting in presidential general elections. He also recommends that states permit fusion (i.e., letting two parties jointly nominate the same candidate).

Schmitt says only five states permit fusion, although he does not name them. Actually more states than that permit fusion. They are Connecticut, Idaho, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, South Carolina, and Vermont; and Pennsylvania permits it for certain partisan offices. In Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont, fusion only can be accomplished via write-in votes in primaries.

But Schmitt also understates the number of states that permit fusion for President. Approximately half the states permit fusion for president. This is because so many state anti-fusion laws are worded to only apply to candidates nominated in direct primaries. But presidential elector candidates are not nominated by primary in any state; generally presidential elector candidates are nominated in state conventions.

The District of Columbia Board of Elections has released all the write-in tallies for the April 3, 2012 Green Party presidential primary. It had already been known that Jill Stein won that primary, because Stein was the only name on that ballot, and her total (previously released) is 216, whereas all write-ins put together total only 164.

The Board’s breakdown shows that Roseanne Barr and President Obama each received 72 write-ins. No one else received more than 2 write-ins.

The Board says it does not intend to put these results on its web page, so historians of the future will probably overlook these returns. The Board does not publish any book that contains official election returns, so the only official evidence will be a piece of paper in the Board’s files.

On April 30, the Connecticut House passed HB 5024, which makes it possible for unregistered individuals to register on election day. Here is the text of the bill. The vote was 83-59. Now the bill goes to the Senate. See this story, which says the House debated for five hours on this bill.

The leading opponent of the bill in the House debate said that this bill would make it possible for “some brat from Virginia” to vote twice for President, once in Virginia and once in Connecticut. But this was already possible and not necessarily illegal. Because the Electoral College system exists, and because early voting exists in so many states, it is possible and legal for individuals to vote for President in more than one state. If a voter is domiciled in one state, he may vote in that state’s selection process for presidential electors, by using early voting. Then, in theory at least, that voter might change domicile to another state, and he or she could then legally vote in that other state’s process for choosing presidential electors. Technically, the two elections are separate elections. In each election, the true candidates are candidates for presidential elector, and the election in one particular state over whom the electors should be for that state is a separate election from the other state’s choice of presidential electors. This is one of the flaws of the Electoral College system.

Thanks to Josh Van Vranken for this news.