New York State Promises to Reform Vote-Counting When Voter Votes for Two Parties for a Single Office

Posted on by September 11, 2011
Reply

On September 8, the New York State Board of Elections settled the lawsuit that had been brought by the Conservative Party, the Working Families Party, and the Taxpayers Party, on the subject of how to count votes when a voter erroneously casts two votes (one vote under each party label) for a single candidate. The parties had sued the Board last year, because the state was automatically giving that vote only to the party closer to the top of the ballot. In New York, the parties are listed on the ballot in order of how many votes they received for Governor, so the Democratic and Republican Parties are always closer to the top of the ballot than all other parties. Therefore, the Democratic Party, or the Republican Party, would get the vote, and the minor party would not.

In May 2011, U.S. District Court Judge Jed Rakoff had refused the Board’s request to dismiss this case. That was a signal that the judge felt the case had significant merit, although he hadn’t yet made a final ruling. So, the state decided to stop defending the old policy, and agreed to a fairer system.

The Board of Elections will cause the optical scan voting machines to alert voters when they have double-voted. The machine will display a message that says, “You filled in more than one oval for a candidate in at least one contest. While your candidate preference is clear, it is not clear which party you prefer.” The machine will then show which office is affected, and ask the voter to vote again. The message will also tell the voter that if the voter doesn’t re-do the ballot, the vote will be counted for the party listed first. If the voter wants a new ballot, he or she won’t be required to stand in line again. Also, the polling places will have signs near each voting booth that say in big print, “DO NOT VOTE MORE THAN ONCE FOR THE SAME CANDIDATE.” Thanks to Nancy Hanks for this news.

California Legislature Passes Two Important Election Law Bills in Last Week

Posted on by September 11, 2011
Reply

The California legislature has adjourned for the year. Before it adjourned, it passed SB 397, to provide that individuals may register to vote on-line; and SB 202, which says that in the future, statewide initiatives will not be placed on primary ballots; instead they will go on the November ballot. This is already policy in virtually all other states. Neither bill has been signed by the Governor yet.

Assuming SB 397 is signed into law, it will make it difficult for California to justify a policy of not permitting electronic signatures on initiatives, since registering to vote on-line involves an electronic signature.

New Jersey Democratic Party Backs Carl Lewis Ballot Access Lawsuit

Posted on by September 10, 2011
Reply

Carl Lewis, the Democratic Party nominee for State Senate in New Jersey’s 8th district, is off the ballot for the November 8, 2011 election, although he is hoping the 3rd circuit puts him back on next week. In the meantime, the Democratic Party has declined its opportunity to replace Lewis with a new nominee. See this story. The party will take the chance that Lewis can ultimately win his lawsuit, even though the party knows that if he doesn’t, the party will have no nominee on the ballot.

California State Appeals Court Hears Arguments over Injunctive Relief in Top-Two Details Lawsuit

Posted on by September 10, 2011
Reply

On September 7, the California Court of Appeals in San Francisco heard arguments in Field v Bowen. The issue is two particular aspects of the California top-two system (Proposition 14), and whether the Superior Court should have granted injunctive relief in a special election earlier this year. The lawsuit challenges (1) the discriminatory law on ballot labels, in which some candidates may put their party on the ballot and others may not; (2) the complete ban on a candidate appearing on the ballot as “independent”; (3) the law that says write-in space should be on the ballot, but write-ins can never be counted.

Almost simultaneous with the hearing, the California State Senate Elections Committee released an analysis of AB 1413, a bill that would change various details of the California top-two system. The analysis says this about the current write-in law: “One of the provisions of SB 6 prohibited write-in votes from being counted at a general election for a voter-nominated office. Other provisions of law that require that write-in spaces appear on the ballot, however, were unaffected. This could create confusion, and could mislead voters into thinking that write-in votes for candidates for voter-nominated office at a general election will be counted.” This analysis is correct. Current California law on write-ins, which will remain unchanged at least for the remainder of 2011, sets a trap for voters. The ballot shows write-in space, and nothing on the ballot, or in the voter pamphlet, or in any notice posted at the polls, tells voters that write-ins for Congress or state office will not be counted.

Saguache County, Colorado Court-Ordered Recount Does Not Go Well

Posted on by September 10, 2011
Reply

On August 12, a state court in Colorado had ruled that the 2010 ballots cast in Saguache County, Colorado, should be re-counted. The Secretary of State had pressed for this outcome, in a legal contest with the County Clerk. However, the recount process, as described in this article, has failed to satisfy the voters who originally pressed for the recount. See this story. The county uses ES&S vote-counting machines. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.