On April 2, the Maryland Senate defeated SB546 by 23-24. It would have set up public funding for candidates for the legislature.
Reply
The Kentucky legislature adjourned on March 30. Bills to abolish the straight-ticket device, to enact the National Popular Vote Plan, and to expand public funding, failed to pass.
On April 4, the Missouri House passed HB 894, moving the petition deadline for all independent candidates to March. The bill makes no exception for presidential independents. Therefore, it is clearly unconstitutional as to presidential independents, because it conflicts with Anderson v Celebrezze (the 1983 U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down Ohio’s March 20 petition deadline for independent presidential candidates).
In addition, the bill conflicts with the U.S. District Court decision McCarthy v Kirkpatrick, a 1976 decision that declared Missouri’s old April deadline for all independent candidates to be unconstitutional.
All of the 16 “No” votes were Democrats, except for one Republican, Kevin Wilson. The Democrats voting “No” are Judy Baker, John Burnett, Michael Daus, Michael Frame, Beth Low, Jeanette Oxford, Brad Robinson, Jeff Roorda, Ray Salva, Ed Schieffer, Mike Talboy, Michael Vogt, James Whorton, Terry Witte, and Jake Zimmerman.
In September 2006, the 7th circuit held Illinois ballot access law unconstitutional, relating to independent candidates for the legislature. Illinois had asked for a rehearing en banc, but that had been denied on January 3, 2007. Illinois then had until April 3, 2007 to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the decision (called Lee v Keith). However, Illinois did not appeal, so the case is completely over.
Attorneys for Connecticut are trying to persuade a federal court to rule that the state’s discriminatory public funding law is constitutional, and that the court should not even hold a trial to gather evidence. The law, passed in December 2005, provides for public funding for the nominees of parties that polled 10% in the last election. Other nominees cannot get public funding unless they submit petitions of up to 20% of the last vote cast.
The Green Party filed a lawsuit against the law on July 6, 2006. All sides originally assumed their would be a trial. However, now the state argues the law is so obviously constitutional, there is no need for any further evidence. The Brennan Center for Justice has intervened on the side of the state. The ACLU’s brief on behalf of the Green Party, arguing that summary judgment is inappropriate, is due April 27.