Another South Dakota Bill to Move Independent Candidate Petition Deadline from June to April

Posted on by February 5, 2011
Reply

Last month, fifteen South Dakota Representatives, and six State Senators, introduced HB 1158, to move the independent candidate petition deadline (for office other than President) from early June to late April. South Dakota’s primary is in June.

The same bill had been introduced in 2009. It was HB 1234, and it had passed the House 52-17, but it was defeated in the Senate State Affairs Committee after then-Secretary of State Chris Nelson testified that if the bill were passed, it would probably be declared unconstitutional. Unfortunately, Chris Nelson did not run for re-election in 2010, and it is not known if the new Secretary of State will take a position similar to that taken by Nelson in 2009. The bill in 2009 had even more co-sponsors: seventeen in the House and eight in the Senate.

Courts in Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina, have all ruled that independent candidate petitions deadlines in advance of partisan primaries (except one day in advance) are unconstitutional. In 2000, a U.S. District Court ruled that South Dakota’s June petition deadline for independent presidential candidates was unconstitutional, and the legislature moved the presidential independent deadline to August. The bill does not propose to move the independent presidential deadline.

Hearing Held in the Latest Attempt to Overthrow the Pre-Clearance Part of the Federal Voting Rights Act

Posted on by February 5, 2011
Reply

In 1965, Congress passed the Voting Rights Act, which requires that all election law changes in part or all of certain states must be pre-cleared by the Voting Rights Section of the U.S. Justice Department. Alternatively, if the Voting Rights Section refuses to approve the change, the jurisdiction is free to ask a U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., to approve the change. Covered states, counties, and localities are also given an opportunity to opt out of the coverage requirement, but the procedure to do that is very difficult. Currently, part or all of 16 states must comply with the pre-clearance part of the Act.

On February 2, 2011, a U.S. District Court Judge in Washington, D.C., heard oral arguments in the latest lawsuit by a covered entity to find the pre-clearance of the Voting Rights Act unconstitutional. See this story. The lawsuit was filed by Shelby County, Alabama, on April 27, 2010, and is called Shelby County, Alabama v Holder, 1:10-cv-651. Although this part of the Voting Rights Act has been upheld several times by the U.S. Supreme Court, this latest lawsuit focuses on the point that when Congress extended the Act in 2006 for another twenty-five years, Congress relied on data from the 1964, 1968, and 1972 elections, to determine which areas ought to be covered by the Act. The county argues the formula is out-of-date. Shelby County, a suburban county south of Birmingham, is largely white and very Republican. In November 2008, Barack Obama got 22.8% of the vote in Shelby County.

Congressional Bill to Make it More Difficult to Obtain Primary Season Matching Funds

Posted on by February 5, 2011
Reply

Congressmember David Price (D-North Carolina) and 8 other Democrats have introduced HR414, which changes the rules for presidential public funding. The U.S. House has already passed another bill recently to eliminate public funding, so it seems clear that HR414 will not pass. HR414, like a similar bill introduced in the last session of Congress, makes it more difficult for a presidential candidate to qualify for primary season matching funds. Current law requires that the candidate raise at least $5,000 from each of twenty states, in small donations. The bill would increase that to $25,000 from each of twenty states.

The bill also eliminates public funding to pay for national party conventions, and makes other changes. Thanks to Josh Putnam for the news about the bill.

Kentucky Senate Passes Bill, Moving Presidential Primary from May to August

Posted on by February 5, 2011
Reply

On January 7, the Kentucky Senate passed SB 4 by a vote of 21-14. It makes it illegal for lobbyists to donate to candidates, and it moves the Kentucky primary (including the presidential primary) from late May to early August. The chief motivation for the bill, according to its author, State Senator Jared Carpenter (R-Berea) is that legislators typically refuse to vote on controversial bills until they know who is running against them. With the primary in May, candidates file for the primary at the end of January. Carpenter says the legislature thus wastes a lot time during January, waiting to see who will run against them in primaries. Therefore, by moving the primary to August, the entire legislative session will have been held before any legislator knows who might run against him or her.

The part of the bill that moves the presidential primary to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in August almost seems like an afterthought in the bill. The idea of holding a presidential primary in early August is not irrational, now that the major parties hold such late national conventions. In 2012, the Democratic convention will be in the first week in September, and the Republican convention is only slightly earlier. However, the national party rules do not recognize presidential primaries held later than the first week in June, although there seems to be no reason for this rule.