Missouri Bill Advances, Would Ease Initiative Petitioning

Posted on by April 22, 2009
Reply

Missouri SB 569 passed the Senate Finance, Government Organization & Elections Committee on April 15. It makes it easier to qualify initiative petitions. It says that if a registered voter signs an initiative, the signature counts, regardless of any problems involved because the circulator was a person not entitled to be a circulator (Missouri does not permit out-of-state circulators for petitions for new parties).

The philosophy behind this bill is sound, and ought to be embraced by all states. If the signer is entitled to sign a petition, that signature should count, regardless of any characteristics of the circulator. By analogy, votes cast by legally qualified voters ought to count as well, no matter what errors are made by officials at the polling place.

Approximately 10 states don’t even require that petition circulators sign the bottom of the petition, or otherwise identify themselves, and those 10 states seem to have no trouble with that permissive policy.

The Missouri bill makes other changes also, such as legalizing a signature even if the voter signed a petition sheet meant for residents of some other county. However, the petition must clearly indicate the signer’s county of residence. SB 569 is sponsored by Senator Jim Lembke (R-St. Louis). Unfortunately the protections in the bill do not also apply to candidate petitions, or petitions to establish a new party. Thanks to Ken Bush for this news.

Other Missouri bills that affect minor parties, independent candidates, or the initiative process, have not made any headway. They include the bill to delete the requirement that a petition to qualify a minor party must include the party’s presidential elector candidates, and the bill to move the independent candidate petition deadline from July to March, and the bills to outlaw paying initiative circulators on a per signature basis, and bills to lower the number of signatures needed for statewide initiatives.

Pennsylvania Ballot Access Case Filed in Federal Court

Posted on by April 21, 2009
Reply

On April 21, the Constitution, Green, and Libertarian Parties filed a federal lawsuit against certain Pennsylvania election laws. The Constitution Party of Pennsylvania, et al v Cortes, no. 09-1691, eastern district. It challenges (1) the law that says only parties with registration membership of 15% are entitled to have their nominees placed on the November ballot automatically; (2) the Pennsylvania practice of forcing petitioning candidates and parties to run the risk that they will be exposed to tens of thousands of dollars in court costs if their petitions are rejected; (3) Pennsylvania practice of not providing a state tally for most write-in candidates, and the practice of certain counties of never counting any write-in votes.

The 15% registration threshold is so severe, if it were law in Utah, the Democratic Party would need to petition for all its nominees; if it were law in the District of Columbia, or Massachusetts, or Rhode Island, the Republican Party would need to petition for all its nominees. Although the 15% registration test was nominally upheld in a 1993 U.S. District Court decision, that case introduced no evidence about the 15% registration test.

Most states that permit write-in votes count all the write-ins, for write-in candidates who declared their intention to be write-in candidates in advance of the election. Pennsylvania has no such procedure as a write-in filing declaration. Pennsylvania law plainly requires elections officials to count and tally all write-ins, but that law is routinely ignored. After the November 2008 election, Pennsylvania state officials refused to tally the write-ins for Cynthia McKinney. Although some counties did count them, others did not. Here is a link to the complaint.