On October 5, U.S. District Court David Carter heard arguments in Santa Ana, California, in one of the presidential qualifications cases. This California case is the one in which Alan Keyes is a plaintiff. Here is a newspaper report from the Orange County Register about the hearing, in which government attorneys argued the case should be dismissed before any discovery takes place.
The Hill is one of the two leading newspapers published in Washington, D.C., and aimed at readers interested in government and politics. The October 3 issue of The Hill has this article about the November 3, 2009 special election in New York’s U.S. House district 23. The article says the Club for Growth has steered $275,000 toward the Conservative Party nominee, so that he is slightly better-funded than either the Democratic or Republican nominees.
On August 14, the United Citizens Party had filed a lawsuit against the South Carolina Elections Commission, challenging the Elections Commission’s 2008 rule that forces candidates to file multiple declarations of candidacy, if they are seeking the nomination of more than one political party. The party says the state didn’t pre-clear that change with the U.S. Justice Department. Before 2008, a candidate only needed to file a single declaration of candidacy, which meant more flexibility for that candidate to later decide which party nominations he or she would seek.
On October 2, a U.S. District Court Judge ruled that a 3-judge case will be convened in this case, and will be argued before those three judges on November 18. Federal lawsuits involving the Voting Rights Act usually require 3-judge courts. The case is Gray v South Carolina Election Commission, 3:09cv-2126.
This October 5 story in Newark, New Jersey’s daily newspaper has a picture of the November 3, 2009 ballot from Warren County. It shows how the Democratic nominees are in one row headed “Democratic”; the Republican nominees are in another row labeled “Republican”; and the other ten gubernatorial candidates are squeezed into a third row.
The news in the story is that Warren County has decided to change the heading of the third row from “Non-Partisan” to “Nominations by Petition.” Click on the link inside the story that says “her county’s ballot” to enlarge the ballot. The change was made after the Libertarian Party nominee, Ken Kaplan, complained. However, the change does little to fix the basic unfairness of the ballot design. New Jersey and New Hampshire are the only states in the nation that gives party column headings to the qualified parties, but not to the unqualified parties.
Each New Jersey county is permitted to design its ballot in its own way. A few New Jersey counties do not even use party columns. Instead, they simply list all the candidates for any particular office in a list, although they always print the Democratic and Republican nominees at the top of that list.
Note that the Warren County ballot puts Chris Daggett, the leading independent gubernatorial candidate, second from the end of the candidates in the “Non-Partisan” column.
According to this AP story of October 5, Connecticut legislative leaders seem to be leaning in favor of revising the state’s public funding law for candidates for state office. The existing law was declared unconstitutional on August 27, and the state has filed a notice of appeal to the Second Circuit. But that appeal might be mooted if the legislature does reconvene next month and amend the law. The article mentions that some supporters of the public funding program now regret that when the bill passed in 2005, that a severance clause was not included. A severance clause says that if any part of a law is declared unconstitutional, the remaining parts remain valid.
The law was declared unconstitutional because it discriminates severely against independent candidates and the candidates of new political parties.
