This story focuses on an internal Republican Party disagreement in Arizona on whether to put a ballot measure on the presidential primary ballot set for February 28 to repeal the Independent Redistricting Commission. The Governor must call a special session by November 30 to make that happen. Most neutral observers would probably say that it is unfair to put such a partisan measure on the presidential primary ballot, when it is expected that the only parties holding a presidential primary will be the Republican and Green Parties.

If Arizona didn’t have an Independent Redistricting Commission, the legislature and the Governor would be in charge of redistricting, and Republicans control both those branches of government. So repealing authorization for the Commission is something that, likely, Democrats would oppose strongly. But because there will be no Democratic presidential primary, turnout of Democrats would probably be very low.

Independent Political Report has this story, saying Gary Johnson’s campaign manager has said that the probability that Gary Johnson will seek the Libertarian Party presidential nomination is 99%.

The Libertarian Party was able to place its presidential nominee on the ballot in either 50 states, or 49 states, in 1980, 1992, 1996, and 2000. The Libertarian Party has a possibility of placing its presidential nominee on the ballot of all 50 states in 2012. Much will depend on whether the party’s national officers decide to spend money on the ongoing Oklahoma petition drive, which currently has 30,000 signatures. The law requires 51,739 valid signatures by March 2012.

A newspaper story recently reported that Americans Elect will have spent $10,000,000 on ballot access, by the time petitioning for the 2012 election is over. 50-state ballot access for a party (other than the Democratic and Republican Parties) is a precious asset. Yet some members of the Libertarian Party National Committee are reluctant to spend relatively small amounts of money on ballot access during the odd years before presidential election years, even though petitioning in the odd years before election years is less expensive.

At the November 8, 2011 in Derby, Connecticut, one of the Democratic Party nominees for a seat on the Board of Apportionment and Taxation was James R. Butler. However, whoever prepared the ballots erroneously listed him as James J. Butler. It happens that the town does have a resident by that name, and he is the son of James R. Butler. According to this news story, the Connecticut Secretary of State has ruled that James J. Butler has therefore been elected, even though he apparently doesn’t want the job.

The Connecticut Secretary of State’s ruling seems faulty. There may be other relevant facts that the news story doesn’t mention. One wonders what the Secretary of State would have said if no one by the name of James J. Butler lives in Derby, or if there were several people in the town with that name. Thanks to Randall Hayes for the link.