According to this article, the Working Families Party will assist in enlarging the ongoing protest on Wall Street.
Reply
On September 29, a lower state court in Arizona heard testimony in a lawsuit over whether Olivia Cortes should remain on the ballot in the upcoming recall election of State Senate President Russell Pearce. See this story. In Arizona, when a recall petition succeeds, the office-holder being recalled is on the ballot, along with any other candidates who have petitioned to run in the same recall election. The election is non-partisan. The person who gets the most votes wins.
Three candidates are on the ballot: Pearce, an opponent of Senator Pearce (who hopes to out-poll Pearce) and a third candidate, Olivia Cortes. Evidence suggests that Cortes only got on the ballot with the help of Pearce supporters, that she is a “sham” candidate, as the story makes clear. Pearce supporters know that Pearce is unpopular with most Hispanic voters, and presumably put Cortes on the ballot to split the anti-Pearce vote. However, there is no logical or legal principle that would eliminate someone from the ballot, based on her motivation or on who helped get her on the ballot. The pending case is somewhat similar to a case in Arizona in 2010, when the Green Party went to court to remove some of its nominees from the ballot on the grounds that they were “sham” candidates, recruited by Republican activists. Although some of the 2010 “sham” Greens voluntarily withdrew, the court ruled that there was no legal basis to remove candidates from the ballot, no matter what their motivation for running. A decision in the current case is expected on Monday, October 3.
This SurveyUSA poll surveys Florida Republicans who are likely to vote in that state’s presidential primary next year. It shows that Mitt Romney has 27% support, and Herman Cain is second at 25%. But, it also shows that Republican voters under age 65 prefer Cain to Romney. It also shows that males of all age groups prefer Cain above all other contenders. Thanks to Political Wire for the link.
Sponsors of the Missouri bill to move the presidential primary from February 7 to early March have given up. The bill is considered dead. Therefore, the 2012 primary will be on February 7. However, the state Republican Party has decided that the primary will be a “beauty contest” only, and that the state party will use March caucuses to choose the delegates to the national convention.
Missouri will also be holding presidential primaries for the Democratic, Constitution, and Libertarian Parties. These are also “beauty contest” presidential primaries, which don’t actually chose delegates for those parties either.
The bill to move the date of the presidential primaries also would have raised the filing fee to run in a presidential primary from $1,000 to $5,000 in 2012, and $10,000 thereafter. The failure of this bill to pass increases the odds that candidates who are seeking the Constitution Party nomination, or the Libertarian Party nomination, will now file. Missouri Libertarians have used their presidential primary in the past, just to test the voter appeal of the various candidates. Missouri does not have registration by party, and any voter is free to choose any party’s presidential primary ballot. Thanks to Frontloading HQ for this news.
On September 28, the Fifth Circuit issued this 28-page opinion in League of United Latin American Citizens v City of Boerne, 10-50290/10-50416. Boerne, Texas, has been embroiled in lawsuits over how it elects its city council since 1996, and the controversy is still not over. Originally Boerne used at-large elections for all five of the city council seats. The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) sued, charging that under the at-large system, no Hispanic had ever won any seat. The city settled by promising to use Cumulative Voting, and under Cumulative Voting, one Hispanic did get elected and re-elected.
However, then the city and LULAC asked the court to modify their consent decree, to switch to single-member districts, and the court did then approve single-member districts. But then a Boerne voter, Michael R. Morton, intervened in the case, saying that he opposed modifying the consent decree, because modifying it was causing him to lose his ability to cast a vote for all five seats. The U.S. District Court then ruled that Morton lacked standing. But the 5th circuit ruled he does have standing. The case now returns to the U.S. District Court, where it may again reinstate district elections, but only if the evidence shows that there is a good reason to do that. It is possible that cumulative voting will be reinstated, because it does have a good track record; under cumulative voting, a Hispanic was elected. There are no longer any Hispanics on the council.
Cumulative voting gives a voter several votes. He or she is free to cast all the votes for a single candidate, or disperse them to different candidates. Boerne elects two city council members in odd years, and three in even years, so the number of votes a voter has in each election is either two or three, depending on what year it is.