Cain Polls Forty Times as Many Votes in South Carolina as in New Hampshire

Posted on by January 22, 2012
Reply

On January 21, South Carolina’s Republican Party held its primary. The unofficial vote totals, according to Politico, are: Gingrich 243,153; Romney 167,279; Santorum 102,055; Paul 77,993; Cain 6,324; Perry 2,494; Huntsman 1,161; Bachmann 494; Johnson 213.

When one compares the New Hampshire Republican primary vote for the candidates who had withdrawn by the time of that primary, one sees that Herman Cain’s vote in South Carolina is significantly larger than his New Hampshire vote, something that is untrue for the other candidates who were on both ballots but who had withdrawn when New Hampshire voted.

Three candidates were on the ballot in both states, and had withdrawn before either primary: Michele Bachmann, Gary Johnson, and Herman Cain. In the New Hampshire Republican primary, Cain only polled 161 votes; Bachmann polled 350 votes; and Johnson polled 181 votes. The Bachmann vote in both states was about the same in each state; the Johnson vote in each state was about the same; but the Cain vote in South Carolina was forty times bigger than his New Hampshire vote. Furthermore, the final South Carolina returns will probably show slightly bigger totals for each candidate. Stephen Colbert seems to have made his influence felt.

Romney’s Illinois Presidential Primary Challenged Because Romney Used Massachusetts Notary Instead of Illinois Notary

Posted on by January 21, 2012
Reply

According to this article, Mitt Romney’s presidential primary petition is being challenged in Illinois because Romney signed his declaration of candidacy and then had it notarized by a Massachusetts Notary Public, instead of an Illinois Notary Public. The challenge to Romney’s petition was filed by someone who is working for Rick Santorum.

Kansas “Repealer Commission” Suggests Laws for Repeal, but Ignores Unconstitutional Ban on Communist Party

Posted on by January 21, 2012
Reply

On January 20, the office of the “Repealer”, a Kansas Commission charged with identifying laws that should be repealed because they are unconstitutional or obsolete, submitted a list of 51 laws that ought to be repealed. However, the Repealer did not include Kansas Election laws 25-116 and 25-117, which ban the Communist Party from the ballot.

All such laws were held unconstitutional in 1974 in a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court opinion, Communist Party of Indiana v Whitcomb, 414 U.S. 441. Kansas is one of six states that still bans either the Communist Party, or “subversive” parties, from the ballot, or requires a loyalty oath for parties or candidates. The others are Arizona, Arkansas, California, Illinois and Pennsylvania.

Several years ago, the Kansas Secretary of State tried to persuade the legislature to repeal the Communist Party ban, but the bill to do that was defeated by one vote in committee.

The “Repealer” list in Kansas has received extensive publicity because the list also omits the law banning two individuals of the same sex from having certain kinds of sex. Those laws were declared unconstitutional by a 2003 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, Lawrence v Texas.

Political Parties Win Campaign Finance Lawsuit Against City of San Diego

Posted on by January 21, 2012
Reply

On January 20, a U.S. District Court struck down several campaign finance restrictions enacted in 1973 by the city of San Diego. Here is the 32-page opinion in Thalheimer v City of San Diego, 09-cv-2862. Probably the most important part of the decision is the deference that the court paid to political parties.

The decision upholds a contribution limit of $500 from individuals to candidates for city office. It also upholds a ban on direct corporate contributions to candidates. But it strikes down a contribution limit of $1,000 from political parties to candidates. The decision explains that parties are intended to represent their members, by aggregating contributions and broadcasting messages more wisely than individual contributors generally could afford to do.” Because parties are large groups of like-minded citizens, they are entitled to a larger contribution limit.

There are other issues in the case. The decision strikes down a law that prevents candidates from contributing to their own campaign more than a year before the election (the city didn’t even try to defend that law), but upholds a law making it illegal for anyone else to make a contribution more than a year before the election. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.