Minnesota: New online voter system challenged | Star Tribune

Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie launched an online voter registration system last month with little fanfare, but now the state’s legislative auditor is underscoring lawmakers’ questions about whether he had any authority to do so. Ritchie created the system without explicit permission from the Legislature. A nonpartisan analysis, which Legislative Auditor James Nobles highlighted on Thursday, said the secretary of state could have followed the lead of top election officials in other states and asked for lawmakers’ approval before creating the online system. “We wouldn’t have the controversy if he had,” Nobles said. The wrangling over the online registration system is the latest clash between the DFL secretary of state and the GOP. Last year, Republican lawmakers questioned whether Ritchie used his office to campaign against the amendment to require a photo ID for voting. In another incident, the Minnesota Supreme Court decided Ritchie overstepped his bounds when he tried to write new titles for constitutional amendments.

Massachusetts: Voter registration drive targets homeless | Boston Globe

Daniel Farquharson registered to vote for the first time ever Wednesday, at the age of 58. Homeless since 2007, the Quincy native said his top issue in the upcoming city election is deeply personal. “Get more affordable housing,” said Farquharson, who was living in a shelter even before he recently lost his job. “When I was working, I didn’t make enough to afford a decent place.” Farquharson said he hasn’t decided whether he will give his vote for mayor to Councilor John R. Connolly or state Representative Martin J. Walsh but said he was satisfied they prevailed in the 12-candidate preliminary election. “The two that they finally settled on would have been my pick,” he said. Conventional wisdom says Boston elections are won and lost in high-turnout neighborhoods such as West Roxbury and South Boston, but advocates for the homeless are working to ensure that voters with no permanent address also make their voices heard. At a Wednesday afternoon voter registration drive at the Pine Street Inn, Lyndia Downie, the shelter’s executive director, said voting has a symbolic as well as practical value for the shelter’s residents. “For many of our folks, they’re feeling very isolated and feeling forgotten about,” Downie said, “and getting ready to vote means they’re thinking about being part of a community again.”

Montana: Lawyers: Wrong standard used in Indian voting case | Associated Press

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will soon decide whether American Indians in rural Montana were wrongly denied on-reservation satellite voting offices that the plaintiffs say are needed to make up for the long distances they must drive to reach county courthouses. Attorneys representing tribal members and the U.S. Justice Department on Thursday told judges in Portland that a federal judge used the wrong legal standard when he denied a request to establish satellite election offices on three reservations. The attorneys said U.S. District Judge Richard Cebull overlooked the fact that some Indians are denied equal access to voting because they can’t afford to travel up to 150 miles to county courthouses. Cebull since has retired after forwarding an email with a racist joke about President Barack Obama. Montanans can vote by mail with early absentee ballots or by delivering ballots in person to county offices; late registration begins at county offices a month before Election Day.

North Carolina: In skirmish in national voting-rights wars, student once thrown off ballot wins race | Washington Post

Being thrown off the ballot was the best thing that ever happened to Montravias King. The national coverage that rained down on the Elizabeth City State University student when a local elections board in North Carolina rejected his initial City Council bid surely helped him break out from the field of candidates. He got the chance to plead his case, and his views, before millions, reaching many more people than a meager campaign budget could ever allow. This week, according to preliminary results, the university senior was the top vote-getter and will get to represent the ward where his school is located. Was turnout affected by the actions of the board in an increasingly partisan state atmosphere where restrictive voting laws have drawn legal action from many groups, including the U.S. Justice Department? King, who never stopped thinking local, didn’t take any chances, knocking on 365 doors for votes, he said in the News & Record. He said that in addition to his fellow students, he had gotten a “great and amazing” reception from older voters. That he had also discussed the issue of voter suppression with MSNBC host Rachel Maddow, who went to North Carolina for the story, was an unexpected extra.

Editorials: North Carolina local elections find students fired up to fight rights rollbacks | Facing South

If the local elections that took place across North Carolina this week are any indication, the Republican effort to roll back voting rights in the state and enact other regressive policies have inspired students at historically black schools to stand up, soldier forth, and fight back at the ballot box. After Elizabeth City State University student Montravias King declared his intention to run for a local city council seat earlier this year, he faced a legal challenge from Pasquotank County GOP chair Richard “Pete” Gilbert. Gilbert claimed King should be disqualified because he was registered to vote at his college dormitory, arguing that it is only a temporary residence. Gilbert had previously challenged registrations of students at the historically black school for the same reason but not of students at the nearby largely white Christian college. The Pasquotank County Board of Elections sided with Gilbert and struck King from the ballot. But with the help of attorneys with the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, King appealed the local board’s decision to the state elections board, which last month unanimously upheld his constitutional right to run for office.

Editorials: Tennessee’s Voting Machines | Memphis Flyer

On the political scene, growing numbers of observers have been worrying out loud about the vulnerability of our voting devices, especially those — like the ESS-manufactured machines in use in Shelby County — which depend so heavily on the computerized processing of results. Opponents, like local investigator Joe Weinberg, contend that both the hardware and software of these machines, and electronic devices like them, are inherently unreliable and subject to being hacked. Anybody who has looked into the fruits of Weinberg’s researches will realize, at the very least, how complicated these mechanisms are and how complex the potential problems they present. Rich Holden, the current administrator of the Shelby County Election Commission, has insisted that the margin for error of these election machines is infinitesimally small, and he contends that, as instruments for measuring the vote, they are far more efficient, less time-consuming, and more accurate by far than the old practice of voting via paper ballots. He sees that method as retrograde and believes that a return to it is the true goal of those who criticize the now-prevailing method.

Virginia: Chesterfield registrar delays purge of voter rolls | Richmond Times-Dispatch

The Democratic Party of Virginia is seeking a preliminary injunction to stop the State Board of Elections and the commonwealth’s 132 local registrars from purging names from their voter registration lists. The move, less than a month before statewide elections, comes ahead of the Oct. 15 deadline to register to vote. A judge will hear the injunction request Oct. 18 in U.S. District Court in Alexandria. The purge list of 57,000 voters — broken down by locality and provided to local registrars by the State Board of Elections — is “replete with errors” and includes thousands of voters who reside in Virginia and who are lawfully registered to vote, according to a memorandum filed late last week in support of the Democratic Party’s motion. The State Board of Elections said in a statement that it is required by federal law to “conduct list maintenance activities to ensure the accuracy of the voter rolls.” It says it does not cancel voters by itself but directs local registrars to “carefully review all data” to ensure it properly cancels registrations.

Australia: Palmer claims Electoral Commission ‘rigging’ recount | Brisbane Times

Clive Palmer believes the Australian Electoral Commission will “rig” the Fairfax recount and deliver victory to his LNP opponent. Mr Palmer says he’s odds on to lose the contest with the LNP’s Ted O’Brien, despite finishing ahead in two previous counts. “I think in the end Ted O’Brien will win because the AEC will put him there,” Mr Palmer said on Friday. “I’ve said that while I’ve been leading all along because the system is very corrupt. Mr Palmer originally finished with 36 more votes than Mr O’Brien. His lead was whittled down to a mere seven votes after a full redistribution of preferences. The AEC is now conducting a full recount which isn’t likely to wind-up for at least another week.

Australia: Electoral Commission to recount over a million WA senate votes | ABC Perth

After a successful appeal by the Greens and the Australian Sports Party, all the above-the-line ballot papers in WA will be recounted. As the result currently stands, Palmer United Party (PUP) candidate Zhenya Wang and Labor’s Louise Pratt have won the last two West Australian Senate seats, while sitting Greens Senator Scott Ludlam has narrowly lost out. The WA Electoral Officer Peter Kramer initially refused the Greens’ request for a recount, but an appeal to the Electoral Commissioner has overturned that decision. All the ‘above-the-line’ votes cast in Western Australia will be recounted, Peter Kramer says that is just under 1.3 million ballot papers.

Maldives: Go away and vote again – democracy under threat in the Indian Ocean | The Economist

Masked men with machetes and metal rods burst into a television studio in Male, capital of the Maldives, early on October 7th. They stabbed a security guard and set the place ablaze in a clumsy attempt to intimidate Raajje TV, which is aligned with the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP). That afternoon, another blow: the Supreme Court annulled the first round of the presidential election, held on September 7th. The MDP’s modernising candidate, Mohamed Nasheed, had won with 45% of the votes. Before a run-off, the court suspended polling. Then, on the basis of a “secret” police report that even the electoral commission was not allowed to see, it scrapped the election.

National: Supreme Court Again Weighs Spending Limits in Campaigns | New York Times

The Supreme Court on Tuesday seemed prepared to strike down a part of federal campaign finance law left intact by its decision in Citizens United in 2010: overall limits on direct contributions from individuals to candidates. The justices seemed to divide along familiar ideological lines, and they articulated starkly different understandings of the role of money and free speech in American politics. “By having these limits, you are promoting democratic participation,” Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said. “Then the little people will count some and you won’t have the super-affluent as the speakers that will control the elections.” Justice Antonin Scalia responded, sarcastically, that he assumed “a law that only prohibits the speech of 2 percent of the country is O.K.” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who probably holds the crucial vote, indicated that he was inclined to strike down overall limits on contributions to several candidates, but perhaps not separate overall limits on contributions to several political committees.

Arizona: Officials say rule may keep thousands from voting | Los Angeles Times

An Arizona plan to tighten voter registration would create a two-tiered voting system in time for next year’s elections but affect only several thousand people, some of whom could be denied participation in state and local elections, state officials said Tuesday. Voting rights activists, however, said that many more eligible voters probably would choose not to participate because of confusion over the new plan, which is expected to be challenged in court. The new system will essentially have separate voter rolls. Those who registered using a state form and documented their U.S. citizenship will receive a full ballot for federal, state and local elections, and those who registered using a federal form but whose citizenship could not be fully verified would be able to vote only in federal elections. In a practical sense, just because a potential voter registered using a federal form doesn’t automatically exclude that voter from participating in local and state elections, experts and county officials said.

Florida: Many questions, few answers on state’s voter purge plan | Miami Herald

Florida Secretary of State Ken Detzner’s mea culpa tour to tout the state’s revamped noncitizen voter purge led to a tense exchange Wednesday with an election supervisor miffed about the state’s botched efforts last year. Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections Susan Bucher peppered Detzner and his staff with questions about the process and the accuracy of the data to be used in the purge. “Where does that data come from, how often is it updated: every 10 years or every 10 minutes? … I have a lot of concern that the people we got the database from are saying this is not comprehensive and definitive,” Bucher said during a meeting at Broward County’s Voting Equipment Center in Lauderhill. Bucher’s questions revolved around the federal SAVE database that the state will use this time to search for non-citizen voters. Detzner explained that state agencies currently use SAVE data to verify that Floridians are eligible for millions of dollars in entitlements. “This is the best database we have to deal with,” he said. “This is important to get it right…It can be done and it will be done correctly.” But Bucher wasn’t satisfied, nor were voting activists who egged her on at times in the audience. A Democrat elected to a nonpartisan office, Bucher continued to ask multiple questions.

Hawaii: Judge to determine if Hawaii primary election system is ‘severe burden’ to free association | Associated Press

A federal judge said at a hearing that he will likely rule in favor of a lawsuit challenging Hawaii’s open primary election if he finds there’s a “severe burden” on the First Amendment right to free association. Judge J. Michael Seabright said at Monday’s hearing that the case could ultimately end up before the U.S. Supreme Court. The Democratic Party of Hawaii’s lawsuit claims the primary system allowing every registered voter to participate in the party’s nomination process is tantamount to forced political association and is unconstitutional. The party wants to ensure Democrats are selected at the primary stage by those willing to identify as Democrats. “What the party does not want is anonymous persons deciding its candidates,” Tony Gill, an attorney representing the party, told the judge.

Editorials: McCutcheon and the two-pronged attack on voting rights | Facing South

Rev. William J. Barber, the most visible civil rights leader in North Carolina today, stood in front of the U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. this week as the court heard arguments on whether campaign contribution limits are constitutional. The president of the North Carolina conference of the NAACP and architect of the Moral Monday movement was speaking at a rally organized by a coalition of groups asking the court to maintain the limits as a way of protecting democracy from corruption. While he was there to discuss McCutcheon v. FEC, Barber also referenced another case. “A few months ago, this court, on a day that shall live in infamy, gutted the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the crown jewel of the Second Reconstruction movement my parents and grandparents fought for,” said Barber. An “extremist anti-democracy faction” in North Carolina’s state legislature, he said, “celebrated the infamous Shelby decision by rolling out the worst voter suppression bill in the country, and they are just waiting to see what the court will do here.”

Editorials: Don’t split the baby, Chief Justice Roberts | Michael McGough/Los Angeles Times

Going into Tuesday’s Supreme Court oral argument, supporters of limits on campaign contributions were afraid, very afraid, that a majority of the court would signal that it was ready to declare them unconstitutional. Based on questions and comments from Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., widely viewed as the swing vote in the case, their trepidation seems at least partly justified. The issue before the court is whether it violates the 1st Amendment to limit donors to an “aggregate” limit on what they can donate to all candidates and party committees combined; the current ceiling is $123,200. Shaun McCutcheon, a Republican donor from Alabama, has challenged the aggregate limit, though not the “base” limit on what a donor can give an individual candidate ($2,600 in the current election cycle).

Editorials: An upside-down campaign finance system | Jennifer Rubin/Washington Post

The Supreme Court argument in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission on aggregate limits on campaign donations was odd, to say the least. Justices who were inclined to uphold the limit seemed to agree that the limits on what an individual can give to all candidates and the national and state parties collectively is there to prevent a few billionaires from controlling elections. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, for example, asked, “Is there any information on what percentage of all contributors are able to contribute over the aggregate?” Justice Elena Kagan later echoed this concern: “Now, having written a check for $3.5 million to a single party’s candidates, are you suggesting that that party and the members of that party are not going to owe me anything, that I won’t get any special treatment?” The solicitor general asserted the same: “Aggregate limits combat corruption both by blocking circumvention of individual contribution limits and, equally fundamentally, by serving as a bulwark against a campaign finance system dominated by massive individual contributions in which the dangers of quid pro quo corruption would be obvious and inherent and the corrosive appearance of corruption would be overwhelming.”

Voting Blogs: Mr. McCutcheon—and the Parties—Before the Court | More Soft Money Hard Law

The Justices yesterday pondered and puzzled over various hypotheticals about how large donations can flood into the political system. All advocates were highly able and performed well, but the discussion never came to a clear agreement about what the law would allow, or when its proper enforcement would require the Federal Election Commission to challenge underhanded activity. There was uncertainty about contribution limits and the various uses of the terms “transfers” and “contributions”; disagreement about how far the earmarking rules reached; distinctions blurred between “hard” and “soft” money; and differences over which schemes for evading the limits could be considered “realistic” predictions of political behavior. Justice Breyer offered one hypothetical and a view of the legal implications, then conceded he or his law clerk might have it wrong and would have to review the rules again. Justice Breyer also had views of how easily circumvention could be accomplished and how open to public view it was. It was “pretty easy,” he said, “to have not one person control … 4,000 PACs,” and “if you want to say, is this a reality? Turn on your television set or internet. Because we found instances, without naming names, where it certainly is a reality.” Transcript of Oral Argument at 8, McCutcheon v. FEC, No. 12-536 (Oct. 8, 2013).

Arizona: Counties: At least 1,400 affected by AG ruling on voting/citizenship proof | Cronkite News

At least 1,400 Arizonans would be allowed to vote only in federal elections under a rule announced this week by Attorney General Tom Horne, according to a survey of county election officials. The rule requires counties to maintain one list for voters who used state registration forms or provided proof of citizenship and one for those who used a federal form and didn’t provide evidence of citizenship. Horne issued the opinion at the request of Secretary of State Ken Bennett, who asked how to comply with both a state law requiring proof of citizenship to vote and a U.S. Supreme Court decision that said the state cannot require people who use the federal form to provide additional proof of citizenship. Horne’s office said Arizona has filed suit to change the federal form to allow the state to require proof of citizenship. In Maricopa County, Recorder Helen Purcell said around 900 people used the federal form but didn’t include additional proof of citizenship, such as a driver’s license number.

Arkansas: Voter ID Law Rules Approved, ACLU Promises Challenge | Arkansas Matters

The American Civil Liberties Union renewed its stated intention Wednesday to challenge a new law in Arkansas requiring voters to present a photo ID when appearing at the polls. Staff attorney for ACLU of Arkansas, Holly Dickson, told reporters a challenge in state court is coming but declined to provide a specific timeline.  The new law takes effect January 1. “We firmly believe that this voter ID law is not consistent with the Arkansas constitution,” Dickson says. “The Arkansas constitution has greater protections for voters than almost any other state in the nation and we take that seriously.”

California: Study finds downsides for off-year local elections | Los Angeles Times

Off-year municipal elections like those held this year in Los Angeles reduce overall voter turnout and appear to draw disproportionately small numbers of voters from minority groups, according to a study by the Greenlining Institute to be released Monday. “Our analysis strongly suggests that holding local elections in odd years … almost certainly skews the makeup of the electorate,” said Michelle Romero, director of the group’s Claiming our Democracy program. In addition, holding local elections separately from state and federal elections raises per-voter costs, the study found.

Florida: State Defends New Effort to Clean Up Voter Rolls | New York Times

Paving the way for a new attempt to remove noncitizens from voter rolls, Florida’s election chief tried to stoke confidence on Wednesday in the revamped plan before a largely skeptical crowd in immigrant-heavy South Florida. Maria Matthews of Florida’s Division of Elections and Ken Detzner, the secretary of state, met with election supervisors. For Ken Detzner — Florida’s secretary of state and the man in charge of elections — the meeting’s combative tone was the latest measure of the distrust engendered by the state’s move last year to try to weed out noncitizens from registration lists months before the polls opened. The Republican-driven decision to review the rolls took on political overtones because Hispanics in Florida vote largely for Democrats. Mr. Detzner, capping a five-city tour, defended his decision — if not the breakdown in the process last year — saying it is his obligation to ensure the integrity of the state’s voter rolls. Only American citizens are permitted to vote in elections.

Massachusetts: Lawmakers start push for early voting | Lowell Sun Online

The Legislature on Wednesday advanced a constitutional amendment aimed at facilitating early voting and more widespread use of absentee voting in Massachusetts, but Senate President Therese Murray said the lengthy amendment process is just one option available to reform supporters. “I would like to see it happen. I would like to see it come through as legislation so it could be done sooner. A lot of people are disenfranchised, particularly people who live in my communities who travel to work sometimes north of Boston, leave before the polls open and get home when the polls are closed,” Murray told the News Service after she gaveled her proposal forward and then closed down the convention until next March. Lawmakers meeting in a brief Constitutional Convention Wednesday advanced the constitutional amendment (S 12) that would allow registered voters in Massachusetts to cast their ballots at polling places during the 10 days leading up to a scheduled election. The amendment would also allow any voter to request an absentee ballot, regardless of the circumstance.

Minnesota: State gets ready for electronic voting roster test run as officials examine costs, benefits | Star Tribune

Voters who show up at some Minnesota polling places next month will encounter sign-in stations equipped with iPads or bar code scanners as part of an experiment designed to test whether more technology would cut wait times, save money and inspire more confidence in the election process. The electronic roster, or e-poll book, pilot project will take place in fewer than 10 cities and counties, but the results are being closely monitored by election officials across the state because lawmakers could broaden the technology’s use — if the price is right. On that score, a task force of lawmakers, elections administrators and others watching over the project met Wednesday to discuss programming challenges, hardware costs and data security. “We’re not rushing into this,” said Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, the state’s chief elections official. The rosters are an alternative to paper sign-in sheets at precincts. They contain the same type of information: registration data, an indication if someone already voted or has had a challenged registration status.

Kansas: Kris Kobach laying groundwork for two-tier voting system in Kansas | Wichita Eagle

With court action over the state’s proof-of-citizenship voting law looming, Secretary of State Kris Kobach is laying groundwork for a system that would allow some voters to vote in all elections while others could only vote for Congress and presidential tickets. Rep. Jim Ward, D-Wichita, an opponent of the proof-of-citizenship law, said he received confirmation from the Department of Legislative Research this week that Kobach is moving forward with the plan to limit voters who follow federal registration rules to voting only in federal elections. Separately, a memo to all the state’s county election officials outlines procedures for identifying and tracking voters who use the federal form and creating a separate category for them in voting databases. “Many counties probably have had very few federal forms submitted over the years,” said the memo from state Election Director Brad Bryant, dated July 31. “Regardless of the number, beginning now you must track which voter registration applicants in your county have applied using the federal form since January 1, 2013.

Virginia: Purging voter rolls is tricky business | HamptonRoads.com

State elections officials have told local registrars to remove names from their voter rolls based on data from an information-sharing program used by 26 states. According to the program, some 57,000 voters have registered to cast ballots in Virginia and other states. If all of those voters were, indeed, ineligible to vote in Virginia, they should be kicked off the roll. But all of them are not. And that’s why the Democratic Party of Virginia has turned to the courts to block the effort. The party contends the lists include names of people who shouldn’t be removed and that state officials haven’t provided sufficient guidance, or established a consistent process, to assist local registrars in properly removing names. Lawrence C. Haake III, general registrar in Republican-heavy Chesterfield County, has offered support for Democrats’ case in a sworn statement submitted to the federal court. “The list sent to us from the (State Board of Elections) is clearly inaccurate and unreliable,” Haake said, describing the information-sharing program as new and saying that “its accuracy is not proven.”

Australia: Senate recount ordered in Western Australia | The Australian

The Australian Electoral Commission has ordered a recount in the desperately tight Senate race in Western Australia. The recount of more than a million votes follows an appeal by Greens senator Scott Ludlam, who lost his Senate seat in the initial count, and the Australian Sports Party’s Wayne Dropulich. An earlier request for a partial recount was refused. WA Electoral Commissioner Ed Killesteyn said he had now decided to agree to a recount of WA Senate ballot papers where electors had marked their ballots above the line. This would involve over 96 per cent of votes, or approximately 1.25 million of the 1.3 million formal votes. The recount will also re-examine informal votes. Mr Killesteyn said the closeness of the count was not in itself the basis for a recount.

Azerbaijan: Oops: election results released before voting had even started | Washington Post

Azerbaijan’s big presidential election, held on Wednesday, was anticipated to be neither free nor fair. President Ilham Aliyev, who took over from his father 10 years ago, has stepped up intimidation of activists and journalists. Rights groups are complaining about free speech restrictions and one-sided state media coverage. The BBC’s headline for its story on the election reads “The Pre-Determined President.” So expectations were pretty low. Even still, one expects a certain ritual in these sorts of authoritarian elections, a fealty to at least the appearance of democracy, if not democracy itself. So it was a bit awkward when Azerbaijan’s election authorities released vote results – a full day before voting had even started.

Guinea: Poll observers report voting irregularities | BBC

International election observers in Guinea have voiced concern over “irregularities” during the first parliamentary poll since the 2008 coup. A joint statement said “breaches” were observed in eight out of 38 constituencies. The opposition coalition has already called for the 28 September vote to be annulled over “fraud”. Some provisional results have yet to be released by the electoral commission 11 days since the vote. Most of the 38 directly elected seats in the 114-member parliament have been announced, but not the 76 chosen by proportional representation.

Editorials: Supreme Court of India – Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trails Must Be Used | James Tyre/EFF

Three years ago, I wrote of the controversy surrounding the use of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) in India. A study by 2010 EFF Pioneer Award winner Hari Prasad and others showed that the EVMs could be hacked. For his troubles, Prasad was charged criminally for alleged theft of the EVM that was studied. The charges against Prasad have long since been dropped, but the controversy surrounding India’s electronic voting machines continues. Some have advocated that the EVMs be abandoned completely, and that India should go back to using old fashioned paper ballots. Others have claimed that the EVMs can be made more secure, but only if a Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) is added. For a significant time, the Election Commission of India continued to maintain that the EVMs were tamper proof. However, a number of different lawsuits were brought challenging the use of EVMs without VVPATs. The most significant was a public interest litigation action brought byDr. Subramanian Swamy. Yesterday, the Supreme Court of India ruled in favor of Dr. Swamy, reversing an earlier ruling by the High Court of Delhi.