On October 2, a Siena College poll was released for the November 3, 2009 election for U.S. House in New York’s 23rd district. It shows Republican Dede Scozzafava 35%, Democrat Bill Owens 28%, Conservative Doug Hoffman 16%, undecided or other 21%.
In 2008, the California legislature passed AB 583, which would institute public funding in California, starting in 2014, only for the Secretary of State race. The law cannot go into effect unless it is approved by the voters, so it will be on the June 2010 ballot.
On August 25, 2009, the Institute of Governmental Advocates filed a lawsuit in state court to remove the measure from the June 2010 ballot. The Institute represents lobbyists. The bill provides that most of the money to pay for public funding would be raised by increasing the fee to register as a lobbyist, from $25 every two years, to $700 every two years. The case is Institute of Governmental Advocates v Bowen, Superior Court, Sacramento, 34-2009. Here is the Complaint. The Institute argues that the measure is a tax increase, so it should have been passed by two-thirds of each house of the legislature to have any effect (the California Constitution doesn’t permit tax increases without a two-thirds vote in the legislature). The Institute also argues that the amount of the tax violates the First Amendment.
Faye Coffield, an independent candidate for U.S. House in Georgia last year, brought a lawsuit in federal court last year, alleging that the requirements are so severe for an independent to get on the ballot for U.S. House, that they are unconstitutional. They have not been used since 1964, and back then no one checked the signatures, they were due in October of the election year, and congressional boundaries followed county lines (except that Fulton County was split into two districts).
The U.S. District Court ruled against Coffield on April 30, 2009, and she appealed. Her 11th circuit brief was submitted on August 17, 2009, and the state’s response was due September 17. However, according to the Clerk’s office at the 11th circuit, the state neither filed a brief, nor asked for more time. So, the case has been submitted to the judges, whose identities are not known.
It is very rare for a state to fail to file a brief in a constitutional ballot access case. In 1988, when Lenora Fulani challenged the start date for an independent petition to begin circulating in California, the state of California accidentally didn’t respond, and the U.S. District Court Judge declared the start date unconstitutional. When the state asked for permission to file a brief late, the Judge accepted a late brief, but she did not reverse her opinion, and so Fulani won the case. The state was forced to move the start date for independent presidential petitions from June to April of the election year. Such petitions were (and still are) due in August.
On October 1, the first gubernatorial debate of 2009 was held in New Jersey. Three candidates participated, including independent Chris Daggett, who seems to have done well. Here is one account.
Earlier in 2009, the New Mexico Secretary of State’s office had been saying the blank petition forms to qualify a new party for the 2010 election would not be available until October 1, 2009. The reason they would not be available earlier was that the Secretary of State might wish to alter them.
However, in response to a lawsuit filed on May 7, 2009, by the New Mexico Libertarian Party and the New Mexico Green Party, the state submitted an affidavit on September 21, 2009, saying “The forms minor parties must use to collect the signatures required by Sec. 1-7-2(A) are available to the public at any time.” Although this concession comes too late to be particularly helpful for the upcoming election, it certainly will be helpful in the future. Thanks to Alan Woodruff for this news. The lawsuit is proceeding, and the New Mexico Secretary of State participated in a deposition on September 25.
