On January 18, the Arizona Secretary of State released a new voter registration tally. There is little change since November 2012, but the percentage of voters registered in the state’s three recognized minor parties increased, and the percentage of independent voters also increased. Here is a link to the data on the Secretary of State’s web page.

The November 2012 percentages were: Republican 35.88%, Democratic 30.50%, Libertarian .71%, Green .156%, Americans Elect .0076%, independent 32.76%.

The January 2013 percentages are: Republican 35.63%, Democratic 30.49%, Libertarian .73%, Green .157%, Americans Elect .0080%, independent 33.00%.

It is somewhat surprising that the only two categories to decline are Republican and Democratic, since the state’s paper voter registration forms have a checkbox for each of the two major parties, but if the voter wants to register independent or into one of the minor parties, the voter must write-in that choice. The constitutionality of that voter registration form will be decided any day now; the matter is pending in U.S. District Court in Tucson.

Connecticut Representative Timothy Bowles (D-Preston) has introduced HB 6098, to lower the statewide minor party and independent candidate petition from 7,500 signatures to 5,000 signatures. The Green Party is responsible for the existence of this bill.

The Green Party tried and failed to get its presidential nominees on the Connecticut ballot in both 2008 and 2012; also the Libertarians failed to get on for President in 2008. Connecticut petitioning, like petitioning in all the New England states, is more difficult than petitioning in other parts of the country, because the signatures must first be taken to the town clerks for checking and then collected and submitted to the state. Therefore, the existing 7,500 requirement is more difficult than it appears. Thanks to Ken Krayeske for this news.

On February 13, the Ninth Circuit will hear Chamness v Maldonado, 11-56303, in Pasadena, California. This is the lawsuit that challenges California’s ban on the ballot label “independent” in elections for Congress and partisan state office. California does not ban “independent” for presidential independent candidates, but the implementing language for the top-two system oddly does ban that word for other office.

The State Supreme Courts of Massachusetts and Minnesota have both ruled in the past that “independent” is such an important term for independent candidates, that states cannot ban it from appearing on the ballot. Nevertheless, the U.S. District Court in 2011 had upheld the law.

The hearing will be at the Courthouse at 125 South Grand Avenue, in a residential part of western Pasadena. The judges will be Marsha Berzon, Paul Watford, and James Carr, a visiting U.S. District Court Judge from Ohio.