On June 21, the Pennsylvania House State Government Committee passed HB 63 by 16-13. It moves the primary for all office (in presidential election years) from April to February 12.
Reply
On June 21, the Maryland State Court of Appeals (the highest state court in that state) struck down a Maryland law that says if someone from “County A” signs a statewide petition that is supposed to be just for residents of “County B”, that the “County A” signature is invalid. The case is Nader v Maryland State Board of Elections, no. 76-Sept 2004 term. The vote was 4-3.
This is the first time any court has ever ruled that a signature must be considered valid, even if it is on the wrong petition. The fact that the state has a list of all the registered voters in the state was the key fact. Under the Help America Vote Act, all states are required to keep a centralized list of all the voters in that state. This decision may be influential for other states in the future. Thanks to Doug McNeil for this news.
Nader had filed this lawsuit in 2004. The State Court of Appeals at that time had issued a one-sentence order putting him on the ballot, which meant that the court thought the law was probably unconstitutional. However, there was no guarantee that when the court finally issued its opinion, that it would come to this conclusion. There have been times when a court issued an injunction putting a candidate or a party on the ballot, but by the time they actually wrote the opinion, they came to a different conclusion and upheld the law that had been enjoined.
According to a news story about Unity08 carried in the June 21 issue of The Politico, Unity08 now has 75,000 participants. In other words, 75,000 individuals have signed up to vote in Unity08’s proposed on-line national convention next June. See here for the story. The story also quotes Gerald Rafshoon, one of the founders of Unity08, as saying that the bulk of Unity08 activists and members seem to oppose present U.S. policy in Iraq. As far as is known, this is the first time leaders of Unity08 have even hinted at Unity08’s leanings regarding U.S. policy involving Iraq.
On June 20, the North Carolina Senate passed HB91, which moves the deadline to register to vote to only 3 days before an election. The bill had already passed the House, but in a slightly different form, so it must return there. Some newspapers call HB91 an “election-day registration bill”, but that is not strictly accurate.
On June 19, Senator Barack Obama was asked how he feels about general election presidential debates that include everyone who is on the ballot in enough states to win. Larry Reinsch, the Iowa activist who had earlier asked Senator Hillary Clinton the same question, was also the questioner for Obama.
Obama responded, “I think it’s a valid point, and I will tell you that from the perspective of the voter, if realistically, because we don’t have a Parliamentary System, you’re basically not gonna get a Libertarian elected president.” (this response, of course, was not strictly responsive to the question).
Reinsch then said, “You know why that is?”
Obama said, “Well, because we’ve got a winner-take-all system.”
Reinsch: “No, the biggest problem is because we don’t get to hear about them. If we could hear about them they’d get the polls.”
Obama: “I taught voting rights, and I’ll tell you the problem is, part of it is the structure of our democracy. When you have a winner-take-all system, then what happens, it’s very hard for third parties to get a foothold. Which is why we never really, even when guys like George Wallace did have a hearing, the worse thing when Ross Perot did have a hearing and had millions of dollars, its still very hard for them to get leverage. But the general point, my general attitude is as many people get a hearing as possible. But what we’ll hear from the networks is…look, its nice, we’re not just setting up a platform for a theoretical debate, we’re choosing the next President.”
Reinsch: “But its not up to them to decide.”
Obama: “I understand, I understand…well, that’s not entirely true, but anyway, I get your point and I’m generally sympathetic to it.”
As one can see, Senator Obama didn’t really focus very much on the specific question of whether he would be willing to debate all his opponents who are on the ballot in enough states to win (assuming he is the Democratic nominee). But, it was a start. Congratulations to Larry Reinsch for having raised this important question with two leading presidential candidates. Reinsch will be trying to get a response from former Governor Mitt Romney in the next few days.