10th Circuit Strikes Down Oklahoma Ban on Out-of-State Circulators

Posted on by December 18, 2008
27

On December 18, the 10th circuit struck down Oklahoma’s ban on out-of-state circulators for initiatives. Yes on Term Limits v Savage, no. 07-6233. The decision is here. It is 16 pages long and says that there is no strong evidence that out-of-state circulators are more likely to engage in fraud than in-state circulators. Also it says that if Oklahoma needs to question circulators after the petition has been submitted, the state is free to pass a law saying that circulators must agree to return for questioning.

There are now four circuits that have invalidated bans on out-of-state circulators (the 6th, 7th, 9th and 10th), and only one circuit, the 8th, that has upheld them. Furthermore, the 8th circuit decision was from North Dakota, a state that has no voter registration, and therefore the 8th circuit decision can be said not to apply to the other 49 states that do have voter registration.

This decision is good news for Paul Jacob and his associates, who have been in jeopardy of a criminal prosecution for conspiring to bring out-of-state circulators into Oklahoma.

Fewer Votes Cast for President in Six States

Posted on by December 18, 2008
5

Every state has finished compiling the votes cast for president, for the candidates who were on the ballot. Some states are still working on their write-in tallies. In six states, fewer votes were cast for president in 2008 than in 2004. They are Maine, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.

Overall, according to Curtis Gans, turnout in the U.S. was 63.0%. Gans calculates that 208,323,000 people could have voted if they had wished, although of course that would have meant that they needed to register. Gans calculates that 131,257,542 votes were cast for president, which yields the 63.0% figure. Gans calculates 60.6% for 2004, and 54.2% for 2000. This suggests that 2008 did not have a huge improvement in turnout. The 2004 gain in turnout (compared to 2000) was more dramatic than the 2008 turnout gain.

Curtis Gans has been working on turnout data for many decades, and is associated with American University.

California Bill for Non-Partisan State Office Elections

Posted on by December 18, 2008
10

On December 16, California Assemblymember Charles Calderon introduced ACA 6, a proposed state constitutional amendment. It would provide for non-partisan elections for state legislature and the state executive elected posts. All candidates for a particular office would run in the primary, and if anyone polled 50%, that person would be elected.

The only difference between state office elections (under ACA 6) and California’s present elections for county and city office, would be that the ballot for state office would include the party of registration for each candidate. However, a party is free to issue a blanket rule that its name should never appear on the ballot for state office.

Since this is only a proposed Constitutional Amendment, and not a bill, many details aren’t specified, such as whether a candidate registered into an unqualified party could have that party label next to his or her name.

U.S. Supreme Court Goes Home Until January 9

Posted on by December 17, 2008
4

The U.S. Supreme Court last met on December 15, and won’t return until January 9, when it will hold another conference. On the agenda for that day is whether the Court wishes to hear Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number One v Mukasey, no. 08-322. This case, which originated in Texas, challenges the constitutionality of section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Although the entire Voting Rights Act has been upheld before, some specialists in this area of the law feel there is a chance the Court will hear this case. The Court must either agree to hear it, or summarily reaffirm the lower court decision, since it came from a 3-judge U.S. District Court.

Also on the January 9 conference is Berg v Obama, 08-570, the only case concerning presidential qualifications before the Court that is a simple request that the Court accept the case. The other actions on this subject have been requests for injunctive relief.

The only election law case already argued in the U.S. Supreme Court, but which hasn’t had a decision yet, is Bartlett v Strickland (on how to apply the Voting Rights Act to North Carolina’s legislative redistricting process).