Arizona Supreme Court Hears Case in Which Governor Sues Legislature

On June 23, the Arizona Supreme Court heard arguments in Brewer v Burns, cv-09-0168, the case over whether the State Constitution requires the legislature to send budget bills to the Governor in a moderate amount of time, or whether the legislature can withhold them until the start of the fiscal year (July 1). The Governor wants to veto the budget and then she wants the legislature to pass a new budget. But the legislature seems to feel that if it withholds the budget bill until the beginning of the new fiscal year, the Governor won’t dare veto the bill because it would cause a certain amount of chaos. Here is a description of the argument.

California Legislature Gains an Independent Member

On June 23, California newspapers reported that Assemblymember Juan Arambula has recently changed his registration from “Democratic” to “Independent.” It is not known exactly when he did this. He cannot run for re-election in 2010 because of term limits. He represents part of Fresno and Tulare Counties. See this story.

California’s last independent state legislator who had been elected as an independent had been San Francisco Senator Quentin Kopp, who had been elected to the Senate as an independent in 1986, 1990 and 1994. Also, Audie Bock (elected to the California legislature as a Green in 1999) had, while in office, re-registered as an independent, although when she ran for re-election as an independent in 2000, she was defeated. Thanks to Bob Richard for this news.

Louisiana Bill Requires Candidates to Have Filed All Tax Returns

Louisiana HB 420, the Secretary of State’s omnibus election law bill, was amended recently to include a provision that requires all candidates to certify that they have filed all federal and state income taxes that are due. The bill includes candidates for federal office. Therefore, it violates Article One of the U.S. Constitution, which does not permit states to add to the constitutional qualifications to run for Congress.

Randall Hayes, a sharp-eyed Louisianan who follows election law, noticed this amendment. He has communicated with members of the Louisiana House about the problem with the amendment.

Florida Initiative Qualifies for Ballot

On June 22, the Florida Secretary of State announced that the “Florida Hometown Democracy” Initiative has qualified for the 2010 ballot. It is the only initiative that has qualified for that ballot so far. It needed 676,811 valid signatures, and it had 698,562 valid. The group took 4 years to collect its signatures. The initiative only qualified because a week earlier, the Florida Supreme Court invalidated a 2007 law that lets initiative petition signers remove their names. Opponents of the initiative had been out in public, circulating the paperwork for signers to delete their names.

The initiative would require city and counties to hold a referendum before changing their comprehensive land use plans. Opponents of the initiative will now circulate their own counter initiative, which would also permit such local votes, but only after a group upset by the change had completed a petition within that city or county signed by 10% of the registered voters. Initiatives need 60% approval to pass in Florida.

Alaska Libertarian Party Makes Headway on Ballot Access

The Libertarian Party of Alaska has increased its registration by approximately 1,000 voters in the last three months. The party will be removed from the ballot unless it gets its registration up to 9,786 in the next year. It now has 7,000 registrants, which makes it already the strongest Libertarian Party state affiliate in the nation, when each state is compared on what share of the state’s voters are registered Libertarians.

In 2004, the legislature made ballot access more difficult for parties that qualify by registration, but only for mid-term years. The 2004 law is somewhat irrational, and requires a party to have registration of 3% of the last vote cast. Since turnout in presidential years is about 30% higher than in midterm years, this means the requirements shoot up after a presidential election, and then go down again. If the 2004 amendment had not passed, parties in Alaska would need 7,120 registrants for 2010 instead of 9,786.