Arizona Bill Signed for Tea Party License Plates

Posted on by April 30, 2011
11

On April 28, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed SB 1402, which adds ten new categories of specialized license plates, including a “Don’t Tread on Me” plate that will raise money for an Arizona Tea Party Committee (see section 28-2439.01 of the bill). Groups that wish to profit by any of these specialized license plates take some risk, however. They must pay $32,000 to the state to start the process. Then the state manufactures and sells the license plate for $25, and the sponsoring group receives $18 for each plate sold. Obviously, if the plate is unpopular, the sponsoring groups may lose money.

The part of the law concerning the Tea Party says that the Tea Party Committee’s mission is to bring together, empower, and train tea party groups, to work for these goals: (1) promoting the Constitution; (2) promoting limited government; (3) protecting state sovereignty; (4) standing for the security of borders with other nations. Thanks to Ken Bush for this news.

Americans Elect Explains Why it is Using More Difficult Procedure to Qualify as a Party in California

Posted on by April 30, 2011
5

Americans Elect’s web page has this article, explaining why it is circulating a petition to qualify as a party in California, instead of using the easier registration method. California lets a new party qualify if it has registration equal to 1% of the last gubernatorial vote, or if it submits a petition signed by a number of voters equal to 10% of the last gubernatorial vote. Americans Elect is using the latter method.

Courts have unanimously invalidated ballot access petition requirements for new parties and independent candidates that exceed 5% of the number of registered voters. The California 10% petition has never been invalidated, however, because it is not mandatory. Groups are free to use the 1% registration method. The 10% petition method has been in the law since 1937 and it has only been used once, in the autumn of 1947 and the spring of 1948, by the Independent Progressive Party that ran Henry Wallace for President in 1948 (Wallace was a former vice-president of the United States). By contrast, since 1937, every other party that qualified in California has used the alternate 1% registration method. The newly-qualifying parties that used the 1% registration method are the Townsend Party in 1938, the American Independent Party in 1967, the Peace & Freedom Party in 1967, the Libertarian Party in 1979, the Green Party in 1991, the Natural Law Party in 1995, and the Reform Party in 1995.

Before 1937, groups could qualify as a party in California with a 1% petition.

Indiana Legislature Passes Bill, Clarifying that Republican Party is Still Ballot-Qualified Even if its Secretary of State Nominee is Found to have Been Ineligible

Posted on by April 30, 2011
6

On April 29, the Indiana legislature passed HB 1242, an omnibus election law bill. One part of the bill clarifies that even if Republican Secretary of State Charlie White is found to have been ineligible to run in 2010, the Republican Party is still ballot-qualified. Indiana defines “political party” as a group that polled at least 2% for Secretary of State. There is some possibility that White will be found ineligible to have run, because he may not have been registered to vote properly in 2010. Thanks to Bill Van Allen for this news.

If White is found ineligible, the Democratic nominee from 2010, who placed second, will assume the office. But if White resigns before that happens, then Governor Mitch Daniels, a Republican, can appoint a replacement. Or if White is found guilty of the crime of voting at a precinct at which he did not live, the Governor could replace him. However, White is fighting to clear his name and is not expected to resign.

Alicia Garza & Esperanza Tervalon-Daumont Article about Big Money Campaign Against Instant Runoff Voting in San Francisco

Posted on by April 30, 2011
16

Esperanza Tervalon-Daumont and Alicia Garza have this article in New America Media, explaining that the San Francisco Chronicle and the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce have been carrying on a public relations campaign against Instant Runoff Voting in San Francisco and Oakland. The article does not mention the lawsuit against San Francisco’s Instant Runoff Voting system, but that lawsuit is also part of the campaign against IRV. It is called Dudum v City and County of San Francisco.

The same law firm, Nielsen Merksamer, that is trying to overturn IRV in San Francisco, is the same law firm defending California’s top-two election system in the lawsuits Field v Bowen and Chamness v Bowen. Thanks to Rob Richie for the link to the article.

Arizona Governor Signs Bill that Puts Green Party on 2012 Ballot

Posted on by April 30, 2011
9

On the evening of April 28, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed HB 2304, an omnibus election law bill. Among many other provisions, it says that when a party qualifies for the ballot, it gets the next two elections, not just the next election. Because the Arizona Green Party had successfully petitioned in 2010, it is now automatically on the 2012 ballot, even though it didn’t meet the already-existing requirements for a party to remain on the ballot (that it poll 5% for Governor, or that it have registration of at least two-thirds of 1% of the state total).

The bill also legalizes out-of-state circulators for all types of petitions, not just petitions for independent presidential candidates. The legislature’s web page still does not show that HB 2304 has been signed, but this newspaper article carries the news of the Governor’s actions on Friday evening relative to bills.