Maine-iacs Mobilized: New Voter Registration Laws in Maine
October 12, 2011
After thirty-eight years, a sleeping (political) giant is now awake in the Pine Tree State. In June of 2011, the Maine State Legislature repealed the long-standing law permitting Mainers to register to vote on the same day as elections, and replaced it with a new law prohibiting same-day voter registration.
Pursuant to LD 1376, Maine now requires that all in-person registrations occur no later than the third business day prior to the election date. Maine’s departure from being one of the country’s eight states to offer same-day voter registration was not a landslide victory. In the House, seventy-two representatives voted in favor, while sixty-five were opposed and thirteen representatives were absent, and the Senate showed a similar divide with seventeen votes in favor, fourteen against, and four excused. The close divide in both the House and Senate illustrates the partisan divide over same-day registration which was ultimately passed under Maine’s Republican majority. Reportedly, only one House Republican and two Senate Republicans voted with Democrats to oppose the legislation. (more…)
Pennsylvania voters get carded
October 10, 2011
Pennsylvania voters may find themselves pulling out their wallets and scrounging through their purses for their driver’s licenses in upcoming elections if a recent bill makes it through the State Senate. House Bill 934 (the Pennsylvania Voter Identification Protection Act), sponsored by Republican State Representative Daryl Metcalfe, would require every voter to provide photo identification before voting. It passed the House just last June, and will soon make it to the floor of the Senate. As in many similar efforts across the country, the effort is largely Republican-led; not a single Democrat Representative in Pennsylvania voted for it.
This is Pennsylvania’s second effort at a voter identification bill. The first, which passed in the legislature in 2006, was vetoed by then-Governor Ed Rendell, a Democrat. But on an issue that tends to split down party lines, the effort this time stands a good chance. The Senate has a Republican majority of 29-20, and the governor is a Republican. Moreover, the bill includes elements, most notably providing free photo identification, that the Supreme Court cited last March when it decided (6-1) to uphold a similar Georgia statute. In short, if the bill passes, it will be there to stay unless a future legislature repeals it.
(more…)
Weekly Wrap Up
October 6, 2011
Supreme Court throws out voting machine judgment: The Supreme Court decided this week to throw out a suit against Dallas County over its use of iVotronic voting machines. The Democratic Party sued the county claiming that the confusing straight-party feature of the machines was not approved by the Justice Department. The Supreme Court considered the charge moot since the Justice Department has since approved the use of the machines.
Getting rid of the “winner-take-all” electoral system: Pennsylvania Republican Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi is looking to drop the winner-take-all method and adopt a split system for electoral voting. In the new system an electoral vote would be given to the winner of each of Pennsylvania’s 19 congressional districts with the remaining Senate votes given to the winner of the popular vote. Many PA Republicans, who lost the 2008 electoral vote, argue that a split system more accurately reflects the diversity of voters. Others have criticized the proposition stating that candidates will lose interest in the large battleground state if the vote is split.
South Carolina GOP to cover Primary Election Costs: The Republican Party in South Carolina has agreed to pay all additional costs of the primary election there. This comes after many in the state had expressed concern about covering the costs of the 2012 Republican presidential primary. Nevertheless, several counties have authorized their attorneys to use legal means to protect county interests and coffers. The Republican Party will cover “legitimate costs” over and above what the state Election Commission will reimburse counties for conducting their elections. The Democratic Party does not currently plan to conduct a primary election in South Carolina.
Meet the new Editors!
October 6, 2011
It’s a new year at William & Mary Law School, and that means State of Elections has a brand new editorial board! 1Ls Patrick Genova, John Loughney, and Brett Piersma will be taking the reins of the site and handling most editorial duties from here on out.
Here’s some information about the new editors:
Patrick Genova hails from the well-paved streets of Virginia Beach, Virginia. He is a recent graduate of Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond, Virginia where he majored in psychology with a minor in creative writing. While at VCU Patrick was Treasurer and Membership Director of Psi Chi- the International Honor Society in Psychology. His interests include voter equality, and partisan redistricting. When Patrick isn’t blogging he enjoys fine foods and terrible music.
John Loughney is a graduate from the University of Maryland with a BA in French. He loves adventure novels, crossword puzzles, playing blues and jazz on his guitar, scuba diving, fencing epee, traveling, and writing love letters in French. He’s an old-school kind of guy who enjoys gin and tonics and quality conversation. He may be the only young person left who doesn’t use Facebook. His role models include Iron Chef Hiroyuki Sakai, Kermit the Frog, Eric Clapton, and Vladimir Putin. He hopes to practice law internationally, distill his own whiskey, and build custom guitars from scratch. He has experience as a journalist, editor, and translator, and contributes to the Election Law Society his great motivation to eradicate hanging prepositions.
Brett Piersma graduated from the University of California at Santa Barbara with a B.A. in History and an M.Ed. in Education. He taught Advanced Placement American Government and European History in California for ten years before attending William and Mary Law School. He has facilitated the California History-Social Science Project, co-authored 11 workbooks for educators, and was a MetLife Fellow for the Teacher’s Network Leadership Institute. He has earned two Teacher’s Network Disseminator Grants, presented at several state and national conferences, and won the UCSB History Associates Outstanding History Instruction award. Among his many interests are the problems of non-voting, the unintentional consequences of political reform, and the impact of federalism and game theory on campaigns.
Mr. Colbert: or, How states might learn to love campaign finance reform
October 5, 2011
Its opponents deride its existence as a farce upon campaign finance law. Its supporters suggest that it is the only way to set the system straight. News of it has reached the public’s consciousness, rarified air for anything in the field of campaign finance. And we’re not even talking about Citizens United.
The Federal Election Commission’s recent decision permitting comedian Stephen Colbert to form his own Super PAC has successfully turned the media’s (and to a certain extent, the public’s) attention to the post-Citizens United world of political donations. (more…)
College students and voter fraud: Charlie Webster’s Maine problem
October 3, 2011
Maine Republican Party Chairman Charlie Webster is “on a mission to make Maine a better place.” The trouble is, the “better place” he envisions lies on the other side of what may be an insurmountable controversy.
Since famously brandishing a list of 206 alleged voter frauds—all college students—a few weeks ago, Webster has been branded the leader of a witch hunt. The chairman maintains that Maine law is very clear that residency must be established before voting. This is true, but Webster’s opponents on this issue are quick to point out that doing so is almost trivially easy, and certainly not beyond students’ ability. Webster insists on implementing several harsher residency requirements, such as paying income taxes. (more…)
New Lines in the Sand: Redistricting in the Golden State
September 30, 2011
“All politics is local.” The truth of Tip O’Neill’s famous quip may sting some senior California House members as the state’s redistricting efforts land them in newly-formed districts that they might not be able to carry.
The new district map is the product of a bi-partisan citizen’s commission established by Proposition 11. Enacted directly by voters in 2008 and expanded in 2010, the law amended the state constitution to move redistricting authority from the legislature to a bipartisan commission of Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. Tasked with redrawing not only congressional districts but State Senate, Assembly, and Board of Equalization districts as well, the commission’s work will go into effect for the 2012 election. (more…)
Updating Voter Registration in Ohio: Online is Easier
September 28, 2011
What can’t you do online nowadays? The government lets us use the internet to pay parking tickets, and several states even allow its residents to renew their driver’s licenses online, so why not update voter registration online too? That is exactly what House Bill 194 will allow Ohioans to do. (more…)
Redistricting in the Gem State
September 26, 2011
Idaho’s redistricting commission has agreed on a map for the new districts. This comes after the previous commission failed to reach a compromise. Part of the problem, perhaps, was that there are an even number of people on the commission: three Democrats and three Republicans. The Democrats went so far as to accuse the Republicans of designing this commission to fail. While evidence for that particular bit of speculation seems to be lacking, Article I Section (E)(6) of the Idaho Republican platform lists as one of its objectives, moving the redistricting responsibility back to the Idaho legislature. (more…)
Until We Meet Again: Putting the California-Amazon Battle on Hold, for Now
September 19, 2011
The lengthy dispute between the State of California and Amazon took a dramatic turn on September 10th when state lawmakers and the online retail giant agreed to a compromise bill that will put an end, pending Governor Jerry Brown’s approval, to the drawn-out sales tax controversy—at least for now. Under the new measure, Seattle-based Amazon will begin to collect sales tax from customers in California in September 2012 barring future federal legislation. Given the amount of effort Amazon exerted during its battle with the Golden State, this concession may surprise many.
Currently, California is one of 24 states that permit referendums, which are proposals brought by citizen petition, to repeal a law previously enacted by the legislature. In California, 500,000 signatures are needed to push issues onto a state ballot. Prior to the agreement, Amazon had already spent $5.25 million on its campaign to obtain the necessary number of signatures. The campaign reflected Amazon’s belief that voters, if given an opportunity, would support the repeal of the tax law. However, as part of last Friday’s deal, Amazon will ditch its campaign and drop the referendum effort. (more…)