Six Republicans File in Illinois Presidential Primary, but not All File Complete Delegate Slates

Posted on by January 6, 2012
Reply

On January 6, filing closed for the Illinois presidential primaries. The only candidate who filed in the Democratic primary was President Obama. In the Republican primary, six candidates filed the 3,000 signatures needed to be listed on the “beauty contest” presidential choice portion of the ballot. However, not all of the Republicans filed complete slates of candidates for delegate, because delegates require additional petitions of 600 signatures from any particular U.S. House district. Illinois has 18 districts. See this story.

The six presidential candidates who will appear in the Republican primary are: Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Rick Perry, Buddy Roemer, Mitt Romney, and Rick Santorum. Notable by his absence is Jon Huntsman. Santorum only filed delegates for 41 of the 54 slots; Perry only filed one delegate candidate; Roemer only filed three. Gingrich, Paul and Romney filed complete slates. Santorum was the last to file; his petitions came in at 4:22 p.m. on the last day. UPDATE: Santorum filed 46 delegate candidates; thanks to the commenter below for this news.

It is conceivable that some petitions could be challenged, but it is very rare, almost unheard of, for presidential primary candidate petitions to be challenged in Illinois or any other challenge state.

California “Top-Two” Supporters Hope to Eliminate Write-in Space on California General Election Ballots at January 10 Hearing

Posted on by January 6, 2012
Reply

On January 10, at 1:30 p.m., the California Senate Elections Committee will hear AB 1413. The bill abolishes write-in space on general election ballots for Congress and partisan state office. It also makes various other technical changes that will alter the top-two system passed by the voters in June 2010, when they approved Proposition 14 by a 53.7-46.3% margin.

Existing law says the ballot should contain write-in space, but that write-ins cannot be counted. It is wildly irrational for the existing law to leave write-in space on the ballot and yet say they can never be counted. There are two obvious ways to fix this: either repeal the law that says write-ins can’t be counted; or change the law to eliminate write-in space on ballots. The author of AB 1413, Assemblyman Paul Fong, has chosen the more repressive choice.

The California Senate Elections Committee has five members: Democrats Lou Correa of Orange County, Kevin deLeon of Los Angeles County, and Ted Lieu of Los Angeles County; and Republicans Doug LaMalfa of far northern California, and Ted Gaines from the Sacramento suburbs. If you happen to live in the district of any of these five Senators, please communicate to them before January 10 that you favor keeping write-in space on ballots.

The proponents of Proposition 14, despite their high-flown rhetoric about voter choice, are responsible for persuading the bill’s author to act against voter choice. Not all proponents of Proposition 14 favor eliminating write-in space, but the most powerful proponents, including the Nielsen Merksamer law firm, are strongly pushing to eliminate write-in space.

Wisconsin State Court Says Election Officials Must Check Gubernatorial Recall Petition for Duplicate Names

Posted on by January 6, 2012
Reply

On January 5, a state court in Wisconsin ruled that state election officials must determine how many duplicate signatures exist on the petition to recall the Governor. In Wisconsin, anyone who is eligible to register to vote is permitted to sign petitions. Furthermore, election officials assume any petition that has enough raw signatures to match the required number is valid, and leave it up to opponents of the petition drive to challenge if they feel the petition lacks sufficient valid signatures. See this story.

The number of signatures is so huge (over 400,000), the Governor and his supporters sued, arguing that they almost certainly will want to challenge the petition when it is finally submitted, and that they don’t have the resources, in the short amount of time permitted, to find all the duplicates. There is apparently some evidence that some voters have signed the petition more than once.

Massachusetts Secretary of State Says 2012 Non-Presidential Primary Will Remain on September 6, Despite Conflict with Democratic National Convention

Posted on by January 6, 2012
Reply

According to this story, Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin says it is not practical for the legislature to move the 2012 non-presidential primary, which is set for September 6, a Thursday. Many Democratic Party activists are upset with that date because it is also the last day of the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, North Carolina.

The Democratic Party presidential convention of 2012 is the latest national presidential convention ever held by a major party in the United States. Because that national convention is so late, all states have had to permit any qualified party to wait until September 6 to certify the names of their presidential and vice-presidential nominees. Until recently, Texas required such certification on an earlier date, but the state ignored that deadline in 2008 and since then has relaxed it.

Rick Perry Makes Additional Arguments in Virginia Ballot Access Case

Posted on by January 6, 2012
Reply

On January 5, Rick Perry filed an amended complaint in his Virginia ballot access case, Perry v Judd. This is the lawsuit in which Governor Perry hopes to win a court order, placing him on the Virginia Republican presidential primary ballot. The original complaint argued that Virginia’s law, banning out-of-state circulators, should be declared unconstitutional. The amended complaint retains that argument, but adds two more reasons why Perry should be put on the ballot.

The first new reason is that the statute literally does not require petitions to get on the ballot. The Virginia law, sec. 24.2-545B, says, “Any person seeking the nomination of the national political party for the office of President of the United States, or any group organized in this Commonwealth on behalf of, and with the consent of such person, may file with the State Board petitions signed by at least 10,000 qualified voters…”. Perry argues that the verb “may file” means that the petition is voluntary, not mandatory.

By contrast, the Virginia law concerning petitions for independent and minor parties says that petition “shall be filed.”

The other new argument Perry makes is that the Virginia Republican Party did not pre-clear the instructions for the 2012 petition with the U.S. Justice Department. Virginia is covered by section five of the Voting Rights Act, and under the U.S. Supreme Court decision Morse v Republican Party of Virginia, 517 U.S. 186 (1996), when political parties in states covered by section five change the rules for a candidate to be nominated, such party rules must also be pre-cleared. The Republican Party’s rules for the 2012 petition are somewhat different than the rules for that petition from 2008. It is somewhat ironic that the Governor of Texas is depending on the Voting Rights Act to help win his lawsuit, when Texas is also arguing simultaneously in the U.S. Supreme Court that Section Five of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional. The U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments in the Texas redistricting case on January 9, and Texas has defended the legislature’s redistricting plan partly on the theory that the Voting Rights Act, as applied in the redistricting case, violates the U.S. Constitution.