The period October 12-15 will make election law news. In California, Governor Schwarzenegger must sign or veto three election laws. One makes it more difficult for initiatives to get on the ballot; one makes it easier for write-in votes to be counted; one expands Instant Runoff-Voting.

In Illinois, the fate of the National Popular Vote Plan should be decided.

In New Jersey, a state court is likely to rule on whether the Libertarian who qualified for public funding can have “Clean Elections Candidate” printed on the November 2007 ballot next to his name (his Democratic and Republican opponents will have such a label next to their names. The Libertarian qualified but without a court order, he doesn’t get the “Clean” label). The ballots need to be printed so this decision can’t wait.

New Hampshire HB 48, which eases ballot access for parties, has a third subcommittee hearing, on October 17. This meeting will probably settle on what exactly should be in the bill.

Oregon supporters of the “top-two” primary system are circulating an initiative petition to put that idea before Oregon voters in November 2008. Meanwhile, the State Supreme Court is receiving briefs, arguing over what the ballot title ought to be. Supporters of the initiative are suing the Attorney General because his ballot title refuses to refer to the initiative as an “open primary.” Opponents of the initiative are counter-suing because the Attorney General’s Ballot Title doesn’t mention that the initiative would restrict the November ballot to just two candidates. The case is Keisling v Myers, S055161.