Text of Congressional Anti-Gerrymandering Bill

On June 24, Congressmember John Tanner (D-Tennessee) introduced HR 3025, which sets up federal standards for states when they draw U.S. House districts. Here is the 21-page bill. It says that each state must have an Independent State Commission to draw these districts.

The Commissioners would be chosen by the leaders of the two political parties that have the most seats in each state’s legislative bodies (i.e., Democratic and Republican legislative leaders, except in states with non-partisan legislatures, although Nebraska is the only such state). The Commission’s plans must not take into consideration the voting history of a district (unless a separate state law requires it). The plans must not taken into account the partisan registration of any areas, nor the location of residence of incumbent members of the U.S. House.

St. Paul Puts IRV on November 2009 Ballot

On June 24, the city council of St. Paul, Minnesota, voted unanimously to put a ballot question on the November 3, 2009 ballot. The measure will ask voters if they wish to use Instant Runoff Voting. The measure is actually an initiative, and the initiative had been submitted two years ago, but the Council had refused to certify it for the ballot because opponents had said use of IRV might violate the Minnesota Constitution. But because the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled earlier this month that there is no conflict between the State Constitution and IRV, the St. Paul vote will now proceed.

Three California Cities Now Somewhat More Likely to Use IRV in 2010

According to this story in the Daily Planet of Berkeley, California, the cities of Berkeley, Oakland, and San Leandro now have a fair chance to use Instant Runoff Voting in their own city elections. The voters of those three cities had long ago voted to use IRV, but IRV has not yet been used in those cities because of limitations on the vote-counting machines. However, those difficulties may be resolved soon.

Ninth Circuit Strikes Down Seattle Park Ban on Approaching "Captive Audiences"

On June 24, the 9th circuit invalidated Seattle regulations that control First Amendment activity in the Seattle Center (location of the Space Needle). One of the regulations struck down made it illegal for anyone to engage in “speech activities” within 30 feet of a “captive audience.” “Captive audience” is defined in the regulation as “any person or group of persons: (1) waiting in line to obtain tickets or food or other goods or services; (2) attending or being in an audience at any Seattle Center event; (3) seated in any seating location where foods or beverages are consumed.” Here is the opinion. The Seattle Center is an 80-acre government-owned park that attracts over ten million visitors annually.

Ninth Circuit Strikes Down Seattle Park Ban on Approaching “Captive Audiences”

On June 24, the 9th circuit invalidated Seattle regulations that control First Amendment activity in the Seattle Center (location of the Space Needle). One of the regulations struck down made it illegal for anyone to engage in “speech activities” within 30 feet of a “captive audience.” “Captive audience” is defined in the regulation as “any person or group of persons: (1) waiting in line to obtain tickets or food or other goods or services; (2) attending or being in an audience at any Seattle Center event; (3) seated in any seating location where foods or beverages are consumed.” Here is the opinion. The Seattle Center is an 80-acre government-owned park that attracts over ten million visitors annually.