Columbus Dispatch Explains Prospects for Passing Ohio Ballot Access Bill

Posted on by May 17, 2010
7

Both houses of the Ohio legislature passed comprehensive election law bills last year. The bills are SB 8 and HB 260. Both bills are extremely long and deal with many election law issues.

The Columbus Dispatch has this story, explaining why neither bill has yet passed. The two bills differ. One has the ballot access improvements, and one doesn’t. The Democrats control one house and the Republicans control the other house, and so far the legislators haven’t been able to work the two bills into a single version that is acceptable to both major parties. The article holds out some hope that eventually one of the bills will pass.

The ballot access improvements are needed because the state’s existing law for ballot access for minor parties was ruled unconstitutional in 2006 and no new legislation has ever passed to replace it. While Ohio is in this position, the state has no ability to keep any parties off the ballot if they can show a modicum of support. Parties that have done that in both 2008 and 2010 are the Constitution, Green, Libertarian and Socialist Parties.

U.S. Supreme Court Won’t Hear Mississippi Ballot Access Case

Posted on by May 17, 2010
2

On May 17, the U.S. Supreme Court said it won’t hear the Mississippi ballot access case, Moore v Hosemann, 09-982. Two other ballot access cert petitions are still pending, one from Alabama, and one from Louisiana.

The original issue in the Mississippi case was whether Brian Moore, Socialist Party presidential candidate, should have been on the November 2008 ballot. His presidential elector paperwork had been submitted ten minutes past 5 p.m. The chances of this case being heard in the U.S. Supreme Court were probably diminished when the Mississippi legislature this year passed a bill, saying such paperwork is due at 5 p.m. (previously, the law set a date for the deadline, but not a time).

The U.S. Supreme Court has said that ballot access lawsuits are not moot just because the election is over. But this case had a different type of mootness problem. This year, after Moore had filed his brief with the U.S. Supreme Court, the legislature had fixed the law that had been complained about. The Court had never before taken any election law case in which the legislature had already fixed the problem complained about while the case was pending.

Several California Newspapers Carry Story on Libertarian Nominee for Secretary of State

Posted on by May 17, 2010
2

A feature story about Christina Tobin, head of Free and Equal, and the Libertarian Party candidate for California Secretary of State, has appeared in several newspapers. Here is the article as it ran in the Contra Costa Times.

It is somewhat unusual for California newspapers to give publicity to minor party candidates for lesser statewide office, especially in primary season. The third paragraph of the story has a flaw; Proposition 14, the top-two primary measure, is on the June 8 ballot, not the November ballot.

British Poll Shows Big Lead for Instant Runoff Voting

Posted on by May 16, 2010
9

The new British government has promised to hold a referendum on whether Great Britain should use the “alternative vote” method for House of Commons elections. That is another term for one version of Instant Runoff Voting. This poll shows that the idea is leading 59% to 32%, with the other 9% undecided. Thanks to Robb Richie for the link.

Two Influential California Weeklies Endorse “No” Vote for Proposition 14

Posted on by May 16, 2010
1

The Pacific Sun of Marin County, California, recommends a “No” vote on Proposition 14. See the recommendations here. The Pacific Sun prints 80,000 issues, and is the nation’s second-oldest alternative free weekly newspaper in the United States, second only to the Village Voice.

Also, the Bay Area Reporter, the largest publication in the San Francisco Bay Area that is intended primarily for gay readers, recommends a “No” vote. Proposition 14 is the top-two primary ballot measure.