Sixth Circuit Refuses to Rehear Decision on Counting Provisional Votes

Posted on by March 29, 2011
1

On March 29, the 6th circuit refused to rehear Hunter v Hamilton County Board of Elections, so now the provisional ballots will finally be counted in a local partisan judicial race from the November 2, 2010 election. Ohio election law says provisional ballots are not valid if they are turned in to the wrong precinct. However, several hundred voters turned in their provisional ballots at the wrong precinct (although in the right building) because poll workers gave them mis-information. Because Hamilton County had already decided to count another set of provisional ballots that were legally shaky, the U.S. District Court and the original 6th circuit panel had ruled that Hamilton County must also count these disputed ballots. The two candidates in that election have been waiting a long time for a complete vote count. Thanks to Moritz for this news.

Illinois Bill Advances, Would Limit Who can Be an Independent Candidate

Posted on by March 29, 2011
2

On March 29, the Illinois House passed HB 2009, which restricts who can be an independent candidate. The vote was 75-38. The bill says if anyone ran for any partisan office in the primary and lost, he or she cannot run for any partisan office in the general election under a different designation. Also, anyone who won a partisan primary but withdrew cannot then run under a different designation for any partisan office in November.

The vote does not seem to have been based on partisanship. The 38 “No” votes included 24 Democrats and 14 Republicans. The Democrats who voted “No” are: Acevedo, Arroyo, Berrios, Daniel Burke, Burns, Chapa LaVia, Crespo, Currie, Farnham, Ford, Franks, Gabel, Greg Harris, Jefferson, Lang, Mayfield, McCarthy, Mendoza, Mussman, Osterman, Soto, Turner, Williams, and Yarbrough.

The Republicans who voted “no” are: Barickman, Brown, Coladipietro, Eddy, Hammond, David Harris, Kay, Bill Mitchell, Reboletti, Reis, Rose, Rosenthal, Roth, Sacia.

National Popular Vote Plan Bill Introduced in California with Significant Republican Support

Posted on by March 29, 2011
7

On March 29, California Assemblymember Jerry Hill amended one of his election law bills to encompass the National Popular Vote Plan bill for presidential elections. The bill will be co-sponsored by Assemblymember Brian Nestande (R-Palm Desert), caucus chair for the Assembly Republicans. The bill has also been endorsed by several prominent former Republican legislators. The bill is AB 459.

Idaho Ballot Access Bill Passes House

Posted on by March 29, 2011
1

On March 29, the Idaho House passed HB 275, 65-2. It makes many election law changes, including two ballot access improvements. It lowers the number of signatures for an independent presidential candidate from 1% of the last presidential vote (about 6,000 signatures) to exactly 1,000. It also says that out-of-state circulators may circulate an independent presidential candidate petition.

Assuming this bill also passes the Senate, Idaho will have the easiest procedure for an independent presidential candidate that it has ever had. Before 1977 Idaho had no procedure for an independent presidential candidate to get on the ballot. Idaho is one of the states that independent presidential candidate Eugene McCarthy sued, to force them to create procedures for independent presidential candidates. McCarthy won all of these lawsuits. However, most states that he sued reacted by passing procedures that were very difficult. For instance, New Mexico passed a procedure in 1977 requiring independent presidential candidates to submit a petition of 3% of the last vote, whereas at the time minor parties only needed 100 signatures. Texas passed a procedure requiring independent presidential candidates to get approximately 40% more signatures than independent candidates for other statewide office need. Oklahoma passed a procedure requiring an independent presidential candidate to submit a petition of 3% of the last presidential vote, whereas independent candidates for other office didn’t need any signatures. Idaho passed a procedure requiring an independent presidential candidate to submit 1% of the last presidential vote, when other statewide independent candidates only needed 1,000 signatures.