On September 9, opponents of Washington state’s referendum #71 said they will not appeal the lower state court decision in Washington Families Standing Together v Reed. That decision had said signatures are valid, even if the signers were not registered at the time they signed the petition. The signatures count as long as the person who signed registers before the Secretary of State’s office checks the petitions.

The decision also said that signatures are valid, even if the circulator didn’t sign off on any particular petition sheet. The decision is thus an important liberalization of Washington state’s procedures on petition validity. The contrast between this recent Washington decision, and the Oregon Supreme Court’s decision in 2004 on Nader’s independent petition, is dramatic. The Oregon Supreme Court had invalidated Nader’s petition because some of the circulators had signed some sheets with their initials instead of their full name.

On September 8, the Idaho Attorney General’s office filed a brief in Daien v Ysursa, the case challenging Idaho’s ban on out-of-state circulators for independent candidates. The plaintiff, Donald Daien, lives in Arizona but says he wants to help future independent presidential candidates get on the Idaho ballot. Idaho is in the 9th circuit, which ruled in an Arizona case last year that states may not ban out-of-state circulators, at least for the purpose of working on independent presidential petitions.

Idaho’s brief says the 9th circuit precedent from Arizona should not apply in the Daien case, because Arizona required circulators to be eligible to register in Arizona, but Idaho only requires circulators to be Idaho residents. The difference, as the brief points out, is that Idaho lets minors and non-citizens circulate such petitions.

Idaho’s brief also says that Idaho requires fewer signatures for an independent presidential candidate than Arizona does. Idaho is mistaken. Arizona requires a petition signed by 3% of the number of registered independents (although any registered voter may sign). Idaho’s brief misstates the Arizona law and claims that Arizona’s petition is 3% of the entire electorate. Idaho requires independent presidential candidates to submit a petition of 1% of the last presidential vote, and Idaho claims this is obviously easier.

The truth is that Arizona’s 3% of the number of registered independents is virtually tied with Idaho’s 1% of the last presidential vote. It is expected that the attorneys for Daien will point this out in the next brief.

On September 10, a poll was released for the upcoming special election to fill the vacant New York 23rd U.S. House district. It shows 30% for Republican Dede Scozzafava, 20% for Democrat Bill Owens, and 19% for Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman. The other 31% are undecided or favor someone else.

This poll was paid for by the Hoffman campaign. The special election date hasn’t even been set yet, because the incumbent still hasn’t resigned to take up his new job in the Obama administration.