On July 9, the Massachusetts House passed HB 678, the National Popular Vote Plan bill. The vote was 119-36. The Senate will vote next week. If the bill is signed into law, the Plan will be 23% of the way toward having enough states to go into effect.
On July 8, the 9th circuit heard oral arguments in Lemons v Bradbury, 08-35209, over whether the U.S. Constitution protects the right of a petition signer to have his or her signature count, if indeed the petitioner is eligible to sign. The case arose in Oregon and concerns an initiative petition. The 9th circuit panel said it would rule by the end of July, since the initiative sponsors hope to have it on the November ballot. Here is an account of the oral argument, which was held in Portland.
On July 9, Robert Owens, Constitution Party nominee for Ohio Attorney General, was certified for the November 2008 ballot, as an independent candidate. Ohio is holding a special election for that office because the incumbent elected in 2006 resigned a few months ago. The law required Owens to submit 750 valid signatures. He was given only 10 days to collect them. The state took two months to check the petitions.
It is conceivable that someone will challenge Owens’ position on the ballot, since he voted in the March 2008 Republican primary. Ohio does not have registration by party, but Ohio elections officials keep a record of which party’s primary ballot a voter chooses.
Just in case Owens is challenged, he filed a federal lawsuit on July 9 arguing that it would violate the U.S. Constitution for Ohio to keep him off the ballot just because he voted in the Republican primary. Ohio has no law that says an independent must not have voted in a primary. It does have a vague law that says an independent must not be “affiliated” with a qualified political party. That law was upheld in Morrison v Colley, but in that case, the independent candidate had run for party office in a partisan primary, which is different than just voting in a party primary. The new case filed by Owens is Constitution Party of Ohio v Brunner, 2:08-cv-666. If Owens is not challenged, he will dismiss the lawsuit.
On July 9, the 9th circuit struck down two Arizona ballot access restrictions: (1) an independent presidential petition deadline in early June; (2) a law that out-of-state residents may not circulate petitions in Arizona. The case is Nader v Brewer, 06-16251.
The vote was 3-0. The decision striking down the ban on out-of-state circulators, by its logic, would apply to any type of petition. Judge Mary M. Schroeder wrote the opinion.
The decision might have an impact on the 2008 election. It may make it possible for Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party presidential candidate) to qualify in Arizona. He would need 21,759 valid signatures by mid-August.
The decision will help the proposed Oklahoma ballot access case soon to be filed by Bob Barr, and it also makes it more likely that the pending ACLU lawsuit against Montana’s March petition deadline (for office other than president) will win.
On July 7, the Arizona Republic (daily newspaper of Phoenix) published this interesting story about modern-day challenges to organzations that conduct polls. The article discusses the fact that 15% of Americans no longer have land lines and depend entirely on cell phones. Then, the article discusses the extra problems presented by cell phones. Thanks to ElectionUpdates for the link.
