Skip to Main Content

State of Elections

A student-run blog from the Election Law Society

The Expense of Raising School District Taxes in Texas: A Vignette of Booker ISD

January 8, 2013

by Andrew Lindsey

Texans are very hands-off when it comes to taxes. Unlike many other states, Texas has no state personal income tax, property tax, or inheritance tax, and local taxes are not allowed to exceed low percentages of the state taxes that do exist. In addition, all local taxes are subject to further taxpayer protections collectively referred to as “Truth in Taxation” laws, which is a combination of state constitutional and statutory provisions that restrain local governments from raising taxes through accountability mechanisms such as requiring notice of higher tax proposals and the holding of public hearings for citizens to question and oppose proposed tax increases.

School boards are just one of the many kinds of local government entities that Texans support through their taxes. Even if one does not work for a local school or send children there, it is obvious that the maintenance of a public school system is one of the most important (and expensive) government functions for any community. Perhaps for this reason, Texas law treats the process for setting school district tax rates differently than other local tax rates. Truth-in-taxation requirements were expanded for school districts during the 79th Texas legislative session through an initiative originally contained in House Bill 1006, and eventually incorporated into House Bill 1. This initiative both lowered the tax rate that school districts would be allowed to charge in the future, and made it more difficult to increase those rates above what was charged in the preceding year. One component of this increased difficulty (in addition to notice and public hearings) is that school districts must hold a district-wide election for the approval of tax rates which exceed the statutory default rate by a certain amount of cents. If a simple majority of voters support the new tax rate, then the district may adopt it. These elections are known as “tax ratification elections” (or TREs). (more…)

Hurricane Sandy: A Catalyst to Ingenuity and Accommodation in Voting

January 2, 2013

by Aaron C. Carter

With an estimated cost in the neighborhood of $50 billion dollars in damage, Hurricane Sandy ravaged much of the tri-state area causing catastrophic damage.  New Jersey got the worst of the violent storm and its damning effects. Flooding, fires, power outages and gas shortages have changed life considerably for many residents in the Garden State.   Routine activities are no longer routine.  Elected officials and residents have been forced to rethink various aspects of everyday life.  With Election Day fast approaching in the wake of a tragedy of titanic proportion, the time for accommodation and ingenuity arrived by necessity.  Races for New Jersey’s 14 electoral votes, 13 congressional seats, a senate seat and local elections, forced flexibility and adaptation to make sure residents are able to vote and have their voices heard. (more…)

NYC League of Women Voters vs. Sandy and Partisanship: The Triumph of Community Over Mother Nature and the Need to End the Partisan Election Process

January 2, 2013

by Brenden Dougherty

The October surprise for the 2012 election cycle turned out not to be a terrorist attack or an extramarital affair, but rather a devastating super-storm that flooded portions of New York City and cut out power to millions of customers.  Many wondered if the damage to the city would cripple efforts to get voters to the polls on Election Day.  However, the League of Women Voters of New York City refused to surrender to the destruction.

The League of Women Voters of the City of New York is an organization whose goal is to inform citizens about election matters and encourage citizens to vote. On November 6, 2012, the organization pursued this mission with incredible vigor by assisting those voters affected by Hurricane Sandy.  Members set up a telephone hotline days before the election to answer questions from voters about whether their polling places would be open despite the damage from the floodwaters.  On the day prior to the election, league members answered more than 200 calls, and when the big day finally came, the League of Women Voters kept their phone hotline open from 8 in the morning until 9 at night.  Indeed, the organization was intent on ensuring that every resident in the city knew where to vote and how to get there, with particular emphasis on those without access to the Internet and those who were unable to withstand the heavy call volume coming into the Department of Elections.  As the League’s President Ashton Stewart stated on Election Day, “Our people power is minimal, but we’ve been keeping our four phone lines engaged all day, just letting people know where their nearest poll site is.”  Once the votes had been cast, the league’s work continued, with members traveling to polling locations to report the numbers to the Associated Press. (more…)

Challenges to Direct Democracy: The Massachusetts Right to Repair Ballot Question

January 1, 2013

by Jaclyn Petruzzelli

In an exercise of their democratic freedoms under state law, Massachusetts residents successfully petitioned to have three distinct initiatives posed to voters on November 6th. Of those three ballot questions, two received widespread media attention: (1) the legalization of medical marijuana, which ultimately passed by a wide margin, and (2) the legalization of prescribing medication to end life, which, after passionate debate, was defeated by a relatively small percentage of voters. Meanwhile, results for the third ballot initiative regarding the availability of motor vehicle repair information for independent repair shop owners, more commonly referred to as the “right to repair,” were not so much as acknowledged by major news organizations. However, after receiving strong voter support on Election Day, the right to repair initiative has begun to gain some media attention.

On August 8th, over a month after the deadline was met to have the right to repair initiative placed on the ballot, Governor Deval Patrick signed Bill H.4362 into law. This act “protecting motor vehicle owners and small businesses in repairing motor vehicles” included variations of many of the provisions within the right to repair initiative, all of which had been thoroughly debated between legislators and leaders in the automobile industry; and subsequently were passed with unanimous bipartisan support. Proud of their accomplishments, legislators urged voters to ignore the right to repair ballot question in order to avoid having to reconcile Bill H.4362 with the statute drafted by the citizens. (more…)

Missouri Election Round-Up

December 28, 2012

Issue 1 – “Lax” Campaign Finance Laws – How did the candidates do? Where does the state go from here?

To better understand the effects of Missouri’s “lax” campaign finance laws, the first part of this blog will explore how the political contributions affected this election cycle as well as describe where the state goes from here in this realm.  In an attempt to affect the outcome of the election, large political donors targeted Missouri because the State has “no limits on [political] contributions and [is] the only state without limits on what lobbyists can donate.”  Rex Sinquefield, a retired St. Louis businessman, has spent over $5 million this election cycle on Missouri state elections, which has caught the attention of major news outlets across the country.  Sinquefield’s spending supported groups and candidates that he hopes will get rid of the State’s income tax.  Sinquefield spent a total of $785,000 on the losing Republican candidates for secretary of state and lieutenant governor, but spent $285,000 on the winning Democrat candidate for the attorney general race.  (more…)

Rumble Because of the Jungle: How the “Jungle Primary” has Lead to a Vicious Same Party Battle for a Congressional Seat

December 27, 2012

by Erica Woebse

In the contemporary era of American politics, Congressional races tend to be bitter partisan battles waged between one Republican and one Democratic candidate.  Third parties operate peripherally, typically only able to bring up issues for the major party candidates to address or maybe steal votes away from one of the major partisan contenders.  However, this has not been the case in the congressional race in district 3 of Louisiana.  In district 3, a vicious battle between two Republican incumbents forced the opposing Democratic candidate into the role so often reserved for third party contenders.

The November 6th election resulted in incumbent Republican Representative Charles Boustany winning 45% of the vote, while opposing Republican incumbent Jeff Landry, with strong support from the Tea Party and conservative Republican groups, captured 30%.  As dictated by the terms of Louisiana’s jungle primary system, because neither candidate captured a majority of the vote, these Republicans will be forced to square off again in a December 8th runoff election.  Many political commentators blame Democratic candidate Ron Richard for the need to hold a run-off election.  While Richard was an underdog to win the seat, the 24% of the vote he earned stole votes from the Republican frontrunners and prevented either Republican candidate from capturing a majority of the votes.    (more…)

All Bark, No Bite: How California’s Top-Two Primary System Reinforces the Status Quo

December 10, 2012

by Nathan Yu

During the November 6 general election, the state of California saw the effects of one fascinating component of its electoral system:  its top-two open primary.

Over two years ago, California voters proposed and passed Proposition 14, a ballot initiative that drastically reformed the state’s primary system. Prior to Prop 14, California conducted closed primary elections, which meant a voter could only vote for candidates in his own political party. The candidate with the most votes from each “qualified” political party—the Democratic Party, Republican Party, American Independent Party, Americans Elect Party, Green Party, Libertarian Party, and Peace & Freedom Party—advanced to the general election where he would face the candidates who advanced from the other parties. In a sense, the old system guaranteed that a third party or independent candidate could secure a spot on the November general election ballot. (more…)

There’s No Place Like Kansas: Redistricting School Science Standards

November 30, 2012

by Katherine Paige

Tornado season may be over, but the run up to the 2012 election kicked up a quite a storm in Kansas.

From an investigation into President Obama’s citizenship launched by the Secretary of State in response to a petition challenging the President’s place on the election ballot, to a federal appellate court ruling upholding the state’s system of tracking party affiliation, the months leading up to the general election were wrought with political and legal controversy. Incidentally, November was the first major election since the state’s enactment of a controversial voter identification law in 2011. Despite these challenges, it is the new state districting maps, released in June by a three-judge federal court panel, that will likely prove to be the biggest game changer for some this election. (more…)

The Changing Face of Elections Technology in New Jersey: An Interview with Paula Sollami Covello, County Clerk, Mercer County, New Jersey

November 27, 2012

by Melanie Walter

On October 19, 2012, I had the opportunity to speak with Paula Sollami Covello, the County Clerk in Mercer County, New Jersey. She is responsible for ballots, positioning on the ballots, and Election Day counting of returns. She was first elected to this office in 2006.

Mrs. Covello described the three offices responsible for running elections. “The Clerk’s office draws the ballots and positions. We also print the ballots, and prep sample and print and issue vote-by-mail ballots…The Clerk’s office also counts votes on Election Night.” She also described the roles of the other two offices, “The Superintendant of elections deals with voter registration… The Board of Elections is a bipartisan board, two Democrats and two Republicans. The Board counts all the vote-by-mail ballots. They are also in charge of polling locations and training poll workers.” Mrs. Covello expressed faith in this process, saying that this three-office system “provides good checks and balances. There are multiple offices with responsibilities, and it functions in a bipartisan way. The County Clerk is elected, but the staff is all civil servants, and the Superintendant is from one party, but the deputy Superintendant is from the other major party.” (more…)

Is there a Religious Exception for Voter Discrimination? New York’s Hasidic Community and Community Council Elections

November 26, 2012

Earlier this year, The New York Times published an article describing the requirements for voting for the leadership of the Crown Heights Jewish Community Council in Brooklyn. The requirements are the following:“Jewish and religiously observant residents of Crown Heights, married, previously married or at least 30 years old, male.” The article raises the question of constitutionality of the gender discrimination in this policy, which I would like to explore further in this blog post.

The Crown Heights Jewish Community Council is described as a “social service agency” and receives annually about $2 million in government grants. Their service to the community includes distribution of food stamps and housing subsidies. While the council includes the word “Jewish” in its name and requires that voters for its leadership are “Jewish and religiously observant,” it is not a religious organization. The council’s reasons for not allowing women to vote for its leadership have ranged from female modesty to “marital tranquility”, to claiming that the discrimination against women is in fact a “one couple/one vote” rule. This specific community council has changed its policy since the publication of the article, but this is just one Hasidic community in a state that boasts the largest population outside of Israel. Hasidic Jewish communities can be found throughout Brooklyn and the “Borsht Belt” in upstate New York. This issue may come up again as more Hasidic women challenge policies that leave them disenfranchised in their own communities. (more…)