South Dakota U.S. House-at-Large Debate Includes All Three Candidates

South Dakota’s U.S. House-at-large race this year has three candidates on the ballot:  Independent B. Thomas Marking, Democrat Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, and Republican Kristi Noem.  On August 11, all three debated each other.  See this story.

South Dakota has a tradition of inclusive debates.  In 2006, all four candidates on the general election ballot for Governor debated each other, and all three candidates for U.S. House debated each other.  Similarly, in 2002, all three gubernatorial candidates debated each other.

Jana Kemp, Independent Candidate for Idaho Governor, Protests Her Debate Exclusion

Jana Kemp, an independent candidate for Governor of Idaho who is a former state legislator, is protesting the decision of the Boise City Club to invite only the Democratic and Republican nominees for Governor.  See this story.

The story says that the Club thinks that the IRS has a rule limiting debates to candidates with 15% support at polls.  If this is what the Club officials think, they are mistaken.  There is no such IRS rule.  Perhaps the Club is confusing the IRS with the Commission on Presidential Debates.  The Commission is not a governmental body.

Arkansas U.S. Senate Debate Controversy

Four candidates are on the ballot for U.S. Senate in Arkansas this year, but the Association of Arkansas Counties (which receives some government funding) is sponsoring a debate on October 13 and has only invited the Democratic and Republican nominees.

The Association of Arkansas Counties now says its criterion is that candidates must be at 5% in a poll to be invited, but no poll has been held in Arkansas that lists all four candidates.  See this story.

U.S. District Court in Washington State Keeps Names and Addresses of Petition Signers Private for Now

On August 11, U.S. District Court Judge Benjamin Settle ruled that the names and addresses of people who signed the 2009 petition concerning the Washington state civil unions law should remain private, pending the next phase of the lawsuit.  Doe v Reed, C09-5456.

On June 24, 2010, in this same case, the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled that names and addresses of people who sign ballot measure petitions do not automatically receive privacy protection.  Instead, the Court said each petition secrecy controversy should be decided on its own merits.  If a court finds a likelihood that signers would be harassed, the names and addresses should not be released; otherwise they should be.

The August 11 order simply says that the names and addresses will remain private while the U.S. District Court holds a trial on whether harassment is likely or not.  See this story.