Vermont and Citizens United – An Interview with Gubernatorial Candidate Matt Dunne
March 3, 2010
 |
| Democratic candidate Matt Dunne |
Matt Dunne is a former Vermont State House Representative and State Senator. He served as the Director of the AmeriCorps*VISTA under both the Clinton and Bush administrations. Dunne plans to run for Governor in Vermont this November. On February 15th, he spoke with State of Elections about how Vermont may be affected by the decision in Citizens United.
Vermont, like many other states, may soon see the effects of the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. FEC. Currently, the Vermont legislature is looking at a small number of options to deal with the anticipated changes in corporate election spending during in their fall midterm elections. One option Dunne supports is mandatory disclosure of any corporate expenditure related to supporting a candidate. Ideally, Dunne believes this reporting method should be published “instantaneously, real-time or daily.” The federal government also plans to institute strict reporting methods through recently proposed legislation. With the upcoming elections, Dunne believes Vermont faces a similar time crunch. He urges, “We need to codify standards now.” (more…)
Know Campaign Update
March 1, 2010
In January, we brought you a piece about the Know Campaign and the privacy of your voting history. This post is an update on the lawsuit and changes to the statute:
Here’s a quick rundown of the situation: a non-profit wants to increase voter turnout by telling neighbors who voted in which election. Studies show that it would work. Turns out, only candidates and parties can legally get access to that information (the reality is another thing…). Virginia’s State Board of Elections tells the non profit to stop and they do. Then the non-profit sues b/c the voter history list should be open to all or closed to all.
Two weeks ago the lawsuit was dismissed in the Richmond Circuit Court. According to Bill Sizemore of the Pilot, a settlement was reached, though the group promised to re-file the suit if the law wasn’t changed to allow wider access to the information.
But there’s no guarantee that the changes to the statute will include wider access to the list. A legislative subcommittee has recommended that the list be closed to everyone, according to the Times-Dispatch’s Tyler Whitely. A list closed to everyone means that even candidates wouldn’t have access to a voter’s history either.
To legislators who want to save stamps or avoid knocking on the doors of their unpersuadable neighbors – this would be a huge problem. Campaigns already cost plenty, and according to some legislators this would drive up the cost of their races.
On the flip side of candidate convenience is voter privacy. While at first blush this may sound like the fox guarding the hen house, remember there are plenty of privacy advocates in the Virginia legislature who don’t have regular, expensive races to keep their seats.
The legislative session should end soon, so we’ll have an answer about what the elected officials think on this issue. The next move will be the Know Campaign’s.
Brian Cannon is President of the William & Mary Election Law Society
State of Elections Gets a New Look!
March 1, 2010
State of Elections has made a few changes to the appearance of the site. We have a brand new logo, a new search feature in the right column, and a crisper look overall. Our popular “CU and the States” feature has been moved to the top right of the page, under the new logo. It can also be found under the “Pages” category in the left column.
The transition to the new look has been relatively seamless, but if you experience any technical difficulties with the site, please email editor@stateofelections.com.
Weekly Wrap Up
February 26, 2010
Every week, State of Elections brings you the latest news in election law.
– The Hawaiian Office of Elections has set May 22nd as their target date for a special election to replace Congressman Neil Abercrombie. Due to that state’s budget troubles, the election will be held entirely by mail. For an overview of Hawaii’s recent election problems, go here.
– Senators Chris Dodd and Tom Udall have proposed a constitutional amendment to overrule the Citizens United decision. The amendment would allow the federal and state governments to place limits on the amount of contributions that can be made to a candidate and on the amount of expenditures that can be made by a candidate.
– A Georgia program for verifying voters’ citizenship has ruffled some feathers over at the Department of Justice. Under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, the DOJ has the right to stop any state election administration laws from taking effect. The DOJ has objected to the Georgian program, as it claims the state has not demonstrated that the program does not have a discriminatory purpose.
– The ALCU has appealed a federal court ruling that upheld Montana’s ballot access laws. Independent candidates seeking to run for statewide office in Montana must meet some of the stringent requirements in the country, including an early filing deadline and steep filing fees.
Interview with Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie
February 24, 2010
 |
| Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie |
Mark Ritchie, the 21st Minnesota Secretary of State, oversaw the state-wide recount of the 2008 U.S. Senate race between Norm Coleman and Al Franken. After the official canvass of votes following the 2008 election, the margin separating the top two candidates was less than .5% of votes cast, triggering a mandatory recount. Ritchie, as chair of the State Canvassing Board, oversaw the recount. The widely publicized recount took 47 days. Under Minnesota law, the candidate losing a recount has a right to judicial review. Norm Coleman did request a judicial review, a process that took an additional six months.
State of Elections co-editor Laura Deneke recently spoke with Sec. Ritchie regarding the state’s electoral process. (more…)
The Legislature Strikes Back: Citizen Initiatives in Washington State
February 22, 2010
 |
| Initiative proponent/Dark Lord of the Sith Tim Eyman appears in front of the Washington Secretary of State’s Office |
This past January, for the second time in two years, a bill has been filed with the Washington State legislature to amend the State Constitution, removing the provisions allowing for citizen initiatives and referendums. If passed by the state legislature, the measure would be sent to the voters for their approval at the next general election. Citizen initiatives are the process by which citizens and nongovernmental organizations can directly propose legislation. If the proposed legislature receives a certain number of signatures (a number equal to 8% of the voters in the previous gubernatorial election), the proposal is then voted on by the people of the state, completely bypassing the legislature. Referenda require fewer signatures, but the proposed legislation must still be voted on by the legislature.
The bill, proposed by state Senator Ken Jacobsen, would remove the entirety of Article II, Section 1 of the Washington Constitution, as well as other sections that acknowledge the initiative and referendum process. The initiative process is constantly being challenged by lawmakers, and this bill is just the latest debate in a long battle in a number of states, mostly in the West, where the use of initiatives is common. Proponents of citizen initiatives argue that they are vitally important to ensuring the people have a say in their own government, while opponents argue that they interfere with the functioning of the legislature and government.
The initiative process has often been seen as the purest form of direct democracy, giving the most voice to individual citizens. Tim Eyman, intuitive guru and anti-tax crusader, had harsh words for Jacobsen and his initiative, as well the sponsors of other bills that would regulate the signature-gathering and initiative-filing process. Eyman calls the bill a “legislative jihad”, and claims that Ken Jacobson “is the most honest elected official on this issue. He’s openly pushing to take our rights away from us. The sponsors of the other anti-initiative bills…hide their opposition and seek to impose unneeded, costly requirements on citizens so as to effectively repeal the initiative process with a stealth “regulate to death” strategy.” (more…)
Weekly Wrap Up
February 19, 2010
Every week, State of Elections brings you the latest news in election law.
– The Alabama House is considering a bill that would require voters to present a photo ID before voting.
– According to a Washington Post – ABC poll, 80% of Americans oppose the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United. 65% say they strongly oppose the ruling.
– Project Vote and Advancement Project, two voter protection organizations, have filed a lawsuit against Virginia election officials for failing to provide access to rejected voter registration applications. The organizations heard reports about unusually large numbers of rejected voter registration applications from Norfolk State University, a historically black college, and asked to review those applications to determine if qualified voters were being unlawfully rejected. A Virginia law prohibits the disclosure of those records, and so the state refused to disclose the registration applications. Project Vote and the Advancement Project believe that the Virginia law is a violation of the National Voter Registration Act.
– Hans A. von Spakovsky has posted an editorial discussing the recent redistricting lawsuit in Texas. For a brief summary of the lawsuit, see our previous Weekly Wrap Up.
Election Law Society Symposium!
February 17, 2010
Every year, the William & Mary Election Law Society holds a Symposium to discuss a pressing election law issue. This year is no different. The Election Law Society is proud to announce its fourth annual Election Law Symposium, “Back to the Drawing Board: The 2010 Census and the Politics of Redistricting.” Here’s the official blurb:
Speakers at previous Election Law Symposiums have included Robert Bauer, President Obama’s personal attorney, longtime chief election lawyer for the Democratic Party, and current White House Counsel; Benjamin Ginsberg, previously chief counsel for the Bush-Cheney Presidential Campaigns and current partner at Patton Boggs LLP; Michael Toner, former Chairman of the Federal Election Commission and current head of the Election Law and Government Ethics Practice at Bryan Cave LLP, and numerous other distinguished speakers.
If you’re interested in coming or have questions you’d like asked to the panelists, please email us for more information at editor@stateofelections.com
https://stateofelecdev.wpengine.com/2010/02/17/election-law-society-symposium/
Redistricting Reform Part 4
February 15, 2010
Let’s make some sausage, the first half
When we last saw our intrepid hero…. He was explaining why redistricting by partisan actors is a bad thing. It’s been about a month, so it may be worthwhile to go back and read the last few in the series.
 |
| The magic answer to redistricting |
So you’ve decided you’re going to change the world and fix redistricting. Great! Now let’s talk about how. How, you ask? Yeah, how. It’s not like you’ve got the magic answer to the problem. Unless you’re smarter than, well, everyone, you have to make a lot of difficult decisions when you’re trying to reform an integral (constitutional!) part of the government.
This piece will outline the first half of decisions you have to make along the way as you develop a reform proposal. This may not be entirely applicable to every place in the country, but it’s what we went through in Virginia. (more…)
Weekly Wrap Up
February 12, 2010
Every week, State of Elections brings you the latest news in state election law.
– The Kentucky House has voted overwhelmingly to pass a proposed constitutional amendment that would restore felon voting rights in that state. Currently, the governor must approve the restoration of voting rights, but the proposal would automatically restore voting privileges upon the completion of their sentence.
– In Texas, a lawsuit has been filed over the creation of new city council districts. The new districts were created without distinguishing between voting citizens and non-citizens, so according to the plaintiffs, there are wide disparities in the number of voting age citizens from district to district. They claim the new districts, due to this disparity, are a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause
– The Hawaiian legislature has struck down two bills that would have significantly changed how elections are conducted in that state. Hawaiian elections are overseen by an appointed chief elections officer and the office of elections, but given the recent problems in that state, the legislature is looking for new ways to handle elections. The bills would have put a constitutional amendment on the ballot to create a new office of Secretary of State to oversee elections.
– The Florida Supreme Court has ruled that state election codes do not automatically pre-empt local laws. The controversy began when voters in Florida’s Sarasota County approved a proposal that banned touch screen voting machines. The state government banned touch screen machines some time later, but the state questioned the constitutionality of the Sarasota County proposal, claiming that state election codes trumped local legislation. The Court rejected this argument, and upheld the right of local officials to take steps to ensure the accuracy of elections.
– Adam Fogel at Fairvote has written this article about the growing controversy over universal voter registration.