On January 26, the Virginia House Privileges and Elections Committee passed HB 1132, to allow write-in votes in primaries. Virginia already permits write-in votes in general elections. It is ironic that at the same time Virginia is adding write-in space on some ballots, the California legislature is about to pass AB 1413, which eliminates write-in space on general election ballots for Congress and state office.

The Virginia committee vote was 19-3. The only three “no” votes were two Republican delegates, Jackson H. Miller and Israel O’Quinn; and one Democrat, J. M. Scott.

The same Virginia committee also defeated HB 769, which would put party labels on general election ballots for local partisan office. Currently, parties in Virginia nominate candidates for many local offices, but no party labels appear on the ballot for these local offices. Other states in which parties nominate candidates for certain offices, but party labels are omitted from the general election ballot, are judicial races in Michigan and Ohio.

Before 2001, Virginia even omitted party labels from the November ballot for Congress and state office.

As noted earlier, on January 25 the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that the legislative district boundaries are unconstitutional, but has not yet explained the basis for its opinion. State legislators feel they can’t work on a new plan until they understand what is wrong with the old plan. Two of the State Supreme Court Justices are now attending a conference in Puerto Rico. According to this story, legislative leaders are frustrated with these justices, because legislative leaders want the full opinion as soon as possible. Thanks to How Appealing for the link.

On January 26, the California Assembly Elections Committee unanimously passed AB 1413, which tweaks several aspects of the top-two system, and which also removes write-in space from November ballots for Congress and partisan state office. Some of the legislators appeared to believe that write-in space on the ballot is a good idea. But they still voted for the bill, apparently for two reasons: (1) California elections officials say the bill must pass quickly or they will not be able to administer the election. Some legislators fear that if the bill were amended to leave write-in space on the ballot and to provide that write-ins may be counted, the bill would lose support; (2) the proponents of top-two are vehemently opposed to allowing write-in space on the November ballot, at least in the 2012 election.

The primary funder for the legal defense of the top-two system, Dr. Charles Munger, Jr., attended the hearing, along with four attorneys who are with the law firm that has been defending the top-two system in court. Dr. Munger did not testify. But after the hearing, he spoke of his great satisfaction that in 2012, California voters in the general election for Congress and state office will be forced (if they vote at all) to vote for one of the two candidates listed on the ballot. He spoke disparagingly of voters who persist in voting for candidates who can’t win. This is an authoritarian approach to voting rights, and Dr. Munger seems to have no empathy for voters whose political values are such that they may not be able to vote for either of the two listed candidates. Of course, this approach to voting has the effect of reducing voter participation.

It is possible that a bill to restore write-ins will be introduced soon, but it could not take effect in time for the November 2012 election.