Minnesota has three ballot-qualified parties, all of which will choose their nominees on primary day, August 10.  On July 2, TPT, a public television station in Minnesota, sponsored intra-party gubernatorial debates.  See the one-hour broadcast here.

However, the TV station determined that only the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, and the Independence Party, have significant intra-party contests for Governor.  So, TPT held a 25-minute debate between two leading candidates for the Independence Party nomination, as well as a 25-minute debate between three leading candidates for the Democratic-Farmer-Labor nomination.  The station determined that in the Republican primary, only one candidate has a strong campaign, so it did not hold a Republican debate, but instead broadcast a 10-minute news story about that one Republican.

The Independence Party gubernatorial debate was between Tom Horner, the candidate endorsed by the Independence Party leadership, and Rob Hahn.  However, the party has five candidates on its primary ballot for Governor.  The others are Phil Ratte, John Uldrich, and Rahn Workcuff.  It is very unusual for any minor party in the United States to have as many as five gubernatorial candidates on its primary ballot.  Probably the only other minor party ballot with more than two choices for any office this year is the Arizona Libertarian Party primary ballot for Governor, which has four candidates listed:  Ron Cavanaugh, Barry Hess, Bruce Olsen, and Alvin Yount.  The Arizona Libertarian Party web page has this link for anyone interested in learning about each of those candidates.

On July 7, a wealthy Republican candidate for Governor of Florida filed a lawsuit against the part of Florida public funding that provides extra public funds for candidates who have opponents with a great deal of private funding.  Florida has had public funding for gubernatorial candidates since 1998.  The Florida law says that if a publicly funded candidate has an opponent who spends more than $24,900,000, then the publicly-funded candidate may receive extra public funds.  Specifically, the publicly-funded candidate will receive extra funding that equals that amount the privately-funded candidate spends in excess of $24,900,000.

The case is Scott v Roberts, U.S. District Court, northern district, 4:10-cv-283.  Similar lawsuits are pending in Arizona and Connecticut.  In the Arizona case, the 9th circuit had upheld the extra public funding, but then the U.S. Supreme Court had stayed the order of the 9th circuit and will probably hear the case next term.  In the Connecticut case, the U.S. District Court had invalidated the provision for extra public funding and the state’s appeal is pending in the 2nd circuit.  Here is a story about the Florida lawsuit.

Utah’s Lieutenant Governor, who is in charge of state elections in that state, has issued interim rules on how initiative signatures may be obtained electronically.  See this story.  The Lieutenant Governor’s office will also ask the Utah legislature next year to codify such rules into the election code.

This action is a consequence of the  Utah Supreme Court ruling in Anderson v Bell, handed down June 22, determining that electronic signatures on an independent candidate’s petition are valid.  Thanks to Rob Latham for the link.