The two bills to improve Arkansas ballot access for minor parties will be heard in the House State Agencies and Governmental Affairs Committee on Wednesday, 10 a.m., February 4. The bills (1) ease the vote test so that any statewide office counts; (2) expand the petitioning period for a petition for new parties to get on the ballot.
On Sunday, February 1, the Idaho Republican Party state committee reaffirmed its commitment to the pending lawsuit in U.S. District Court called Idaho Republican Party v Ysursa. See this news story. The lawsuit asks that the party be allowed to close its primary to people who do not indicate that they are Republicans.
Massachusetts state representative Charles Murphy (D-Bedford) has reintroduced the National Popular Vote Plan bill. Bills in Massachusetts have not yet been assigned bill numbers. Murphy was the chief sponsor last year as well. Last year the bill passed both houses of the legislature. But Massachusetts also requires a separate vote of the legislature to send a passed bill to the Governor, and the Massachusetts legislature went home last year before doing that.
Columbia Law School Professor Nathaniel Persily has this interesting article about the U.S. Supreme Court’s election law decisions in the terms covering the latter part of 2007, and all of 2008. Thanks to Rick Hasen’s Electionlawblog for the link. The article is 31 pages. Especially interesting is the “Regulation of Political Parties” section of the article, which begins on page 23. It says, “The Rehnquist Court’s decisions concerning the rights of political parties tended to follow two themes. The first was a general disregard for minor parties’ claims either for ballot access or other associational rights. The second was robust protection for major parties’ rights.”
Columbia Law School Professor Nathaniel Persily has this interesting article about the U.S. Supreme Court’s election law decisions in the terms covering the latter part of 2007, and all of 2008. Thanks to Rick Hasen’s Electionlawblog for the link. The article is 31 pages. Especially interesting is the “Regulation of Political Parties” section of the article, which begins on page 23. It says, “The Rehnquist Court’s decisions concerning the rights of political parties tended to follow two themes. The first was a general disregard for minor parties’ claims either for ballot access or other associational rights. The second was robust protection for major parties’ rights.”
