On February 7, the Montana Senate passed SB 194. It provides that parties, and the campaigns of independent candidates, must submit the names of two candidates for presidential elector for each available seat. One is the elector and one is the alternate. If that party or campaign carries the state, and one of the presidential electors votes for someone for either president or vice-president other than the person expected, then that elector is deemed to have resigned and the alternate assumes the role and cast a vote.
On February 9, a special committee of the Massachusetts House determined that the new election to fill the disputed election in the Worcester 6 district won’t be held until May 10. The original election, of course, had been on November 2, 2010. The original returns showed the Republican challenger, Peter Durant, defeating the Democratic incumbent, Geraldo Alicea, by four votes. A recount showed Durant winning by one vote. Alicea then sued and the judge determined that the true results were a tie, and that a new election should be held. Now the legislative committee, which was charged with the details of the new election, has apparently determined that there must be a new primary as well. The new primary will probably be held on April 12 and the new election on May 10. See this story. In the meantime, Alicea holds the seat.
The 8th circuit will hold an oral argument in Libertarian Party of North Dakota v Jaeger, 10-3212, although the exact date hasn’t been set yet. It will be in late March or early April. This is the case that challenges the North Dakota law that does not permit a qualified party to run candidates for the legislature in November, unless approximately 10% to 15% of all the voters who show up to vote in the primary choose that party’s primary ballot. Because the overwhelming majority of primary voters, in North Dakota and generally, are more interested in voting in the major party primaries, in effect this means that minor parties can never have nominees for the legislature on the November ballot.
No minor party has appeared on a November ballot in North Dakota, for a state legislative race, with the party label, since 1976, when the American Party managed to attract an usually high vote into its primary.
March will be a very important month for constitutional ballot access lawsuits. The hearing in the 3rd circuit against the Pennsylvania system of putting minor parties and independent candidates at risk of paying fees of up to $110,000, if their statewide petition doesn’t have enough valid signatures, will be in the middle of March. And in March, the U.S. Supreme Court is likely to say if it will hear Ralph Nader’s ballot access case from Hawaii.
Maryland State Senator Edward J. Pipkin (R-Stevensville) has introduced SB 630. It clarifies that petition signatures do not need to exactly match the name of that voter in voter registration records. Several years ago, the state’s highest state court issued a ruling that seemed to say that petition signatures must match perfectly with the form of the name on voter registration records. For example, if a person showed a middle initial on the voter registration record, and yet signed a petition without that middle initial, the signature is void. Late last year, the same court seemed to retract that, but the court still hasn’t issued a complete explanation of its order, so the matter is still in doubt.
The bill says the signature is valid if the identity of the signer reasonably can be determined. Thanks to Brian Bittner for the news about this bill.
The Omaha World-Herald has this story about the bill in the Nebraska legislature to eliminate the ability of each U.S. House district in Nebraska to choose its own presidential elector. The bill to return Nebraska to a winner-take-all system is likely to pass this year, according to the story. The bill is LB 21 and it will be heard in committee on February 23.
The same committee will also hear LB 367 on February 23. That is the bill promoted by the Commission on Uniform State Laws to require each party to submit two candidates for presidential elector for each slot, one elector and one alternate. Then, if the elector votes for someone his or her state party didn’t wish, the elector is deemed to have resigned, and the alternate becomes the elector instead.