Maine: Election official, lawmakers question legality of ranked-choice voting proposal | The Portland Press Herald

A ballot question that would swap Maine’s traditional election system for one in which seats in Congress and the State House are filled by ranked-choice voting could violate the Maine Constitution, according to a top state election official. Deputy Secretary of State Julie Flynn, the longtime head of the elections office, said the issue involves whether Maine’s governor and legislators can be chosen by majority of votes, rather than a plurality, as the Constitution provides. She said she’s concerned that if voters approve the ranked-choice system in November, candidates elected under the system could be challenged in court. Flynn said her office has discussed the issue with the Maine Attorney General’s Office, and an attorney there who advises the agency “is in agreement with our concerns about constitutionality.”

South Dakota: Secretary of State approves nonpartisan election measure for ballot | Associated Press

Secretary of State Shantel Krebs says an initiated amendment to the South Dakota Constitution establishing nonpartisan elections will appear on the November ballot. Krebs says the measure’s sponsor turned in more than 44,000 signatures to her office. A 5-percent random sampling determined that 67.8 percent of the signatures the 29,924 signatures were in good standing, more than 2,000 above what is necessary for an amendment.

National: How Democratic Are Ballot Initiatives? | The Atlantic

Paul Spencer, a teacher and part-time pecan farmer in Arkansas, drafted a ballot measure for 2016 to reform the state’s campaign-finance laws so his fellow voters could know who paid for election ads on TV. But he and fellow activists there knew they couldn’t do it alone. They sought the help of national election-reform groups because in Arkansas, as in many other states, initiatives can cost millions of dollars to pass. Liberal groups working at the national level are using state ballot initiatives as their weapon of choice for 2016, but given the costs, they’re carefully planning exactly where to push these measures. And Spencer’s Arkansas proposal didn’t make the cut for 2016.

California: Low turnout prompts initiative extravaganza for November ballot | San Francisco Chronicle

Measures ranging from a $9 billion school bond to a condom requirement for actors in pornographic movies are set to join the presidential candidates on November’s California ballot, with plenty more still to come. Battle lines are being drawn in what could be one of the busiest — and most expensive — initiative seasons in California history. “It’s likely to be a very long ballot,” said Jamie Court of Consumer Watchdog, a progressive group that’s sponsored a number of consumer-oriented initiatives over the years. Besides the seven measures that have already qualified for the ballot — including one of nationwide interest that would cut prescription drug prices for state agencies — supporters of others are out on the streets, haranguing passersby in an effort to collect enough signatures to go before the voters next year.

Ohio: New Evidence Emerges of Vote Counting Chicanery in Ohio Pot Ballot Initiative | Alternet

More evidence is emerging calling into question the officially reported results of Tuesday’s marijuana legalization vote in Ohio, where Issue 3 was defeated by a two-to-one margin. On Friday, the Columbus Free Press published a series of screenshots of live televised election returns from Dayton’s WHIO-TV provided by Ohio’s Secretary of State. The sequence showed hundreds of thousands of votes flipped within minutes from the “yes” to “no” column of Issue 3. The controversial measure would have established a state-licensed cartel of 10 licensed growers operating regulated indoor grow sites of up to 300,000 square feet each. The pro-marijuana activist community was divided on the measure. The screenshots, posted below, show hundreds of thousands of votes flipping from the “yes” to the “no” column in 11 minutes, even though the number of precincts reporting only increased by 6 percent. In the first screenshot, with 39 percent of precincts reporting, the pot measure is winning 65-to-35 percent. In the second screenshot those percentages are reversed, even though the number of precincts reporting results has only increased by 6 percent. Look at the number of votes in each column and you will see that hundreds of thousands have been jumped from supporting to opposing the measure.

Minnesota: Duluth voters reject ranked-choice voting | Duluth News Tribune

In what turned out to be one of the most hotly debated issues on this year’s ballot, Duluthians sent a strong message Tuesday in favor of their current voting system.Voters resoundingly rejected a citywide referendum that called for a shift to a ranked-choice voting system. The city of Duluth’s tally showed 15,564 “no” votes to 5,271 “yes” votes. The ballot initiative, which called for a change in the way Duluth has voted for more than a century, sharply divided local leaders and led to aggressive campaigning by supporters and detractors alike.

National: Three Ballot Initiatives That Could Change How Americans Vote | BillMoyers.com

While everyone is paying attention to the 2016 primary battles unfolding in both parties, its easy to forget that we have another election coming up this Tuesday, Nov. 3. And while we won’t be choosing our next president, in three places — Maine, Seattle and Ohio — voters will be able to weigh in directly, through ballot initiatives, on how their future elections will work. Both Maine and Seattle’s ballot initiatives are aimed at limiting the power that special-interest donors wield in the political process. For over a decade, Maine has been cited as a prime example that publicly financing elections can work. The state’s Clean Elections Act offers public financing to any candidate who collects enough small donations to demonstrate widespread support, and who swears off large contributions. Passed in 1996 and implemented in 2000, the system worked, with the majority of Maine’s legislators opting in. But the system was undermined by two Supreme Court decisions — Citizens United and Arizona Free Enterprise v. Bennett, the latter of which went after public financing direct

California: Airbnb wages $8 million campaign to defeat San Francisco measure | Reuters

Airbnb has spent more than $8 million and hired a top political operative to defeat a San Francisco initiative on the ballot Tuesday that could threaten the growth of one of the most valuable global technology companies. Proposition F, which would limit short-term rentals, was brought by affordable housing advocates fed up with the city’s housing stock being used as rentals for tourists while residents face skyrocketing rents and evictions. For Airbnb, a defeat in its hometown of San Francisco would be mostly a symbolic blow. Should similar measures be introduced elsewhere, however, the company could face serious financial consequences. At stake is its ability to continue adding rentals at the same speed, increase revenue and maintain its $25.5 billion valuation, all of which fall under greater scrutiny as it moves closer to an initial public offering.

Washington: Seattle Voters Take Aim at Big Money in Politics | Al Jazeera

Running for re-election, Seattle City Council Member Mike O’Brien knows firsthand that the campaign chase for donors is often at odds with the hunt for votes. “Most candidates spend about 10-15 hours a week on the phone dialing for dollars,” he estimates. “You start by looking up the people who can write the big checks. Often they aren’t even in your district and can’t even vote for you but they have the capacity to finance your election.” In the 2013 election two-thirds of all of the money raised by Seattle candidates came from just 0.3 percent of the city’s residents, according to a report by the Sightline Institute, a nonprofit think tank. This makes for heavy competition as dozens of candidates try to appeal to a very narrow slice of the electorate. “Of course everyone else is calling those same people so you’re fighting with other candidates whether they’re in your race or not, to convince the donors that you’re their guy and they should write you a check,” O’Brien said.

Ohio: Court: Wording of pot legalization ballot is misleading | The Washington Post

Ohio’s Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that part of the ballot wording describing a proposal to legalize marijuana in the state is misleading and ordered a state board to rewrite it. Supporters of the measure, known in the fall election as Issue 3, challenged the phrasing of the ballot language and title, arguing certain descriptions were inaccurate and intentionally misleading to voters. Attorneys for the state’s elections chief, a vocal opponent of the proposal, had said the nearly 500-word ballot language was fair. In a split decision, the high court sided with the pot supporters in singling out four paragraphs of the ballot language it said “inaccurately states pertinent information and omits essential information.”

Michigan: All-mail voting ballot initiative among petitions going before Michigan board | MLive

Michigan would join a small group of states that conduct all voting by mail under a potential 2016 ballot proposal. Let’s Vote Michigan, a ballot committee formed by Jackie Pierce of Pellston, is one of three groups going before the Board of State Canvassers on Thursday seeking pre-approval to begin circulating petitions. The proposal was inspired by low turnout in recent Michigan elections, according to Pierce, who pointed to increased participation rates in states with voting-by-mail. “I live in Northern Michigan, and sometimes in November, you never know if you can even make it to the polls,” she said. “Seeing the low voter turnout concerned me, so I started talking to people. Since then, we’ve had meetings around the state, and everybody seems to think it’s a good idea.”

Maine: House spikes bill to make ballot initiatives more difficult | The Portland Press Herald

The House of Representatives on Monday defeated a bill that would have made it more difficult for Mainers to create new laws through ballot initiative. The House voted 92-54 to approve the bill, but the margin was short of the two-thirds support required to advance it to the Senate. The proposal would have asked voters if they want to amend the Maine Constitution to require sponsors of ballot campaigns to obtain a percentage of voter signatures from each of Maine’s two congressional districts. The vote on Monday marked the end of a bill that had orginally garnered bipartisan support. The bill received two-thirds support in initial votes in the House and Senate, a margin that would have sent the bill to voters for final ratification.

Nevada: Measure that would raise bar on voter initiatives fails | Associated Press

A Nevada committee has defeated a proposal that critics say would make it more difficult to file voter-led initiative petitions. The Assembly Legislative Operations and Elections Committee voted 4-6 on Tuesday to defeat SB434. The measure would have required petitions to gather at least 1,000 signatures from registered voters before being filed with the Secretary of State, and included more judicial review and oversight in submitting ballot questions.

Kansas: New state law to bring voters better access to explanations of ballot questions | Topeka Capital-Journal

A Kansas law passed last year should give voters better access in the future to explanations of municipal ballot questions, deputy Topeka city attorney Mary Feighny indicated Thursday. Feighny responded after readers complained on The Topeka Capital-Journal’s website that a ballot question Topeka voters approved Tuesday wasn’t accompanied by an explanation of what the measure would do. Readers also were critical of the wording of the ballot question. … The ballot question specifically said: “Shall Charter Ordinance No. 114 changing the voting powers of the Mayor entitled: ‘A Charter Ordinance introduced by Deputy Mayor Denise Everhart, amending City of Topeka Code A2-24 concerning the duties of the mayor’ take effect?”

Arkansas: Bill on petition process advances | Arkansas News

A Senate committee on Monday advanced a bill that would impose new restrictions on the petition process for ballot initiatives. The Senate State Agencies and Governmental Affairs Committee gave a “do pass” recommendation to Senate Bill 860 by Sen. Jimmy Hickey, R-Texarkana. Under the bill, the sponsor of a statewide initiative or referendum would be required to obtain background checks of all paid canvassers, at the sponsor’s expense, and register the results with the Arkansas State Police. Each paid canvasser also would have to sign a statement swearing that he or she has never been convicted of a felony, a violation of an election law, fraud, forgery or identity theft.

California: State’s ballot initiative process remade, and both parties agree | San Francisco Chronicle

After more than a century in California’s political spotlight, the state’s initiative process will be getting a major revise next year. Even more surprising, both Democrats and Republicans in the famously partisan Legislature are happy to see it happen. While Republicans made up most of the limited opposition when SB1253 made its way through the Legislature, the two GOP leaders, state Sen. Bob Huff of Diamond Bar (Los Angeles County) and Assembly member Kristin Olsen of Modesto, both voted “aye.” “It was a bipartisan effort,” said former state Sen. Darrell Steinberg of Sacramento, the Democrat who authored the bill. “People like the initiative process but believe it can be improved.” The measure opens the way for increased collaboration between lawmakers and backers of initiatives by requiring the Legislature to hold a joint public hearing on a proposed initiative as soon as 25 percent of the required signatures are collected. It also calls for the attorney general to open a 30-day public review before approving an initiative for circulation and lets supporters amend the initiative during that time. “The No. 1 benefit is this allows two sources to work together to solve a problem or make an initiative better,” Steinberg said.

Florida: Democrats want to change an election law they created to help them win again | The Washington Post

In 1960, when Richard Nixon carried Florida’s 10 electoral votes, an unknown Republican gubernatorial candidate named George Petersen won just over 40 percent of the vote against Democrat Farris Bryant. Democrats who controlled the state legislature were worried that holding their gubernatorial elections in presidential years, when more Republican voters showed up at the polls, threatened their solid grip on state politics. So a group of rural segregationist Democrats called a special statewide election to change the year in which Florida elected its governors. Voters approved the change, shifting gubernatorial elections to midterm years, rather than presidential years. Fast forward half a century, and the political calculus has changed: Now it’s Democratic voters who are more likely to turn up in a presidential year. Democrats have won Florida’s electoral votes in three of the last six presidential elections, but they find themselves in the midst of an historic gubernatorial losing streak.

Switzerland: Voters reject plan to hoard gold, limit immigration | Associated Press

Swiss voters overwhelmingly rejected three citizen-backed proposals to protect the country’s wealth by investing in gold, drastically limit immigration and eliminate a special tax that draws rich foreigners. The separate proposals — put to voters nationwide Sunday by conservative politicians, ecologists and a liberal group — had needed a majority of voters and Switzerland’s 26 cantons (states) to pass. A proposal to require the central bank to hold a fifth of its reserves in gold was opposed by 77.3 percent of voters, according to final results from Swiss broadcaster SRF. It would have forced the Swiss National Bank to buy massive amounts of gold within five years, likely causing its global price to jump.

Oregon: GMO labeling measure heads into recount range as opposition margin narrows dramatically | Oregonian

The battle over a measure to require labeling of genetically altered food appeared headed to a recount Thursday as new totals showed it losing by fewer than 1,500 votes. Measure 92 moved into range of an automatic recount after Multnomah County released results that included a final batch of nearly 7,200 ballots that leaned heavily in favor of the initiative. Sandeep Kaushik, a spokesman for the Measure 92 campaign, was encouraged by the prospect of a recount, but he acknowledged that “the math is daunting” because recounts don’t usually turn around a race unless the margin is less than a few hundred votes. Pat McCormick, a spokesman for the opposition campaign, said by email that despite the latest results, “We are confident Measure 92 has been defeated.” In part, the race tightened more than some analysts — including at The Oregonian — expected because supporters took advantage of a new Oregon law publicly identifying voters who cast what are known as challenge ballots. Those are ballots in which the signature of the voter doesn’t match the signature on file or in which the voter neglected to sign the ballot.

National: Justices Take Cases on Redistricting and Judicial Elections | New York Times

The Supreme Court on Thursday added 11 cases to its docket, including ones on redistricting, judicial elections and discrimination in housing and employment. … The redistricting case will consider the fate of an independent commission created by Arizona voters in 2000 in an effort to make the process of drawing congressional district lines less partisan. The court’s decision is likely to affect a similar body in California. The Arizona commission has five members, with two each chosen by Republican and Democratic lawmakers. The final member is chosen by the other four. Republican lawmakers have complained that the commission’s latest efforts favored Democrats. The Republican-led State Legislature sued, saying that the voters did not have the power to strip elected lawmakers of their power to draw district lines. They pointed to a provision of the federal Constitution that says, “The times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each state by the Legislature thereof.”

Ohio: Judge Strikes Down Ohio’s Ban on Campaign Lies | Wall Street Journal

A federal judge on Thursday struck down an Ohio campaign law making it illegal to lie about political candidates. The ruling by U.S. District Judge Timothy S. Black overturned a post-Watergate law aimed at cleaning up the political process that came under challenge by two conservative groups on First Amendment grounds. Among its provisions is a ban on false statements during campaigns and on ballot initiatives. Judge Black, in his opinion, said the law placed an unjustifiable burden on free speech:

In short, the answer to false statements in politics is not to force silence, but to encourage truthful speech in response, and to let the voters, not the Government, decide what the political truth is. Ohio’s false-statements laws do not accomplish this, and the Court is not empowered to re-write the statutes; that is the job of the Legislature.

The decision came just days after the 8th U.S Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a century-old Minnesota statute that outlawed false statements about ballot proposals. The court that presided over the Ohio case is part of a different federal circuit.

Minnesota: Appeals court strikes down 101-year-old law that makes lying about ballot initiatives a crime | Star Tribune

The Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a 101-year-old law Tuesday that makes it a crime to make false political statements about a ballot question. The court overturned a decision by U.S. District Judge Ann Montgomery, who dismissed the case, and the ruling could have wide implications. “It is a huge victory because ordinary citizens can now support or oppose ballot questions, including school bond levies, without fear of being subjected to expensive litigation regarding their campaign speech,” said Bill Mohrman, a Minneapolis attorney who brought the appeals court case.

National: Ballot initiatives become pricey playgrounds of parties and corporations | The Washington Post

In a midterm election season when control of the United States Senate hangs in the balance, Democrats are increasingly turning to ballot measures to get otherwise reluctant voters to the polls. Big Business is, too: Some of the most expensive races in the country this year will be ballot measures written by, and for, major corporations. Some the hardest-fought ballot battles of 2014 won’t involve candidates at all. They’ll be questions that come with big implications for corporate bottom lines — or promise big benefits to political strategists, especially Democrats, looking to drive turnout for other races. For the first time in history, spending on the approximately 125 ballot questions facing voters in 41 states is likely to top $1 billion in campaign spending this year — and perhaps much more: Oil and gas companies in Alaska spent more than $170 for every vote they won in a successful campaign to reject higher taxes earlier this month.

Alaska: Ballot Language Confusing for Some Voters | KTUU

Ballot Measure 1 takes up more than a page of Alaska’s primary ballot. It includes technical information about tax credits for North Slope producers, and explains how a barrel of Alaska oil is valued and taxed. Many voters, however, say they’re confused by what otherwise would be a simple yes-or-no vote on the measure, which seeks to repeal Senate Bill 21. “I’ve seen a lot of ‘No on 1’ and ‘Yes on 1’ signs, but it’s really confusing what it means,” said voter Jenny Lynes. In Ballot Measure 1’s case, voting “yes” at the polls actually means “no” to SB21, Gov. Sean Parnell’s reduction of oil taxes passed by the state Legislature and signed into law in 2013. A “no” vote actually means “yes” to keeping the law on the books. The legislation itself is also complex, setting a tax rate for oil produced in the state and the profits for oil companies and the state of Alaska.  The law went into effect in January of this year. It’s the only ballot question facing voters in the Aug. 19 primary.

Editorials: Should Massachusetts bother with ballot questions? | The Boston Globe

The Senate president spoke: “So, what you want me to do, James, is manipulate procedures to ensure that there is no vote to repeal your law for one full year. Is that correct? I wouldn’t put it that way, but yes,” I said. “Done!” Bill Bulger declared. And with that, Massachusetts became the first state to require certain banks, insurance companies, and publicly traded corporations to disclose what they paid in state taxes. All because tens of thousands of signatures demanding a ballot question convinced business leaders and politicians like Governor Bill Weld that a compromise was better than what might be handed to them in the election six weeks later, when voters weighed in on the measure. Bulger agreed to back the narrower version of the proposal which still required the disclosure of corporate tax payments. But could a law that horrified corporate leaders — whose money moved Beacon Hill — really survive? That was 1992, when I lobbied on Beacon Hill as director of the Tax Equity Alliance for Massachusetts. Legislating by ballot had been made possible three-quarters of a century earlier, when the state constitution was amended to allow voters to make or repeal laws.

Missouri: Early voting supporters say they have enough signatures | Springfield News-Leader

In the quest for early voting in Missouri, Matthew Patterson says Sunday was satisfying. About a half-hour before the 5 p.m. deadline, supporters of a ballot initiative petition to establish early voting in Missouri submitted what they said were more than 300,000 signatures contained in dozens of boxes. In order to go on the ballot, the initiative petition needs approximately 160,000 voter signatures. Patterson, the Springfield-based director of Missouri ProVote, said more than 36,000 signatures were collected in the Greene County area as part of a statewide effort. Locally, the collection effort began in mid-February and lasted until this past Friday, he said.

Montana: GOP looks to end same-day voter registration | MSNBC

Voting experts say allowing people to register and vote on the same day is among the most effective ways to boost participation in the election process. So naturally, Republicans in states across the country have been looking to crack down on same-day registration. And in Montana, they got a step closer last week to ending the practice. A GOP-backed bill passed last year by state legislators would let Montanans vote this November on whether to end same-day registration. On Wednesday, the state’s Supreme Court ruled against a challenge to the legislation from labor and voting rights groups, clearing the way for the issue to appear on the ballot.

Colorado: Proposals underway to change how Coloradans elect candidates, vote | The Denver Post

A powerful chief executive who championed election reform in California and a politically disillusioned private eye are looking to upend the way elections are conducted in Colorado. The changes could create unfamiliar scenarios: Republicans and Democrats voting in each other’s primaries or unaffiliated voters automatically participating in the primaries without changing their registration. Or even replacing the primary with a preliminary election where the top two vote- getters among a pool of candidates advance to the general election, even if that means both candidates are from the same party. At least two people are leading discussions about changing Colorado’s elections. Kent Thiry of Cherry Hills Village is chief executive of DaVita, a Denver-based kidney dialysis company. Private investigator Ryan Ross of Denver is director of the Coalition for a New Colorado Election System. Both believe the current system is controlled by “partisan purists.”

Voting Blogs: Standing Aside, D.C. Federal Court May Have to Determine What “After January 1, 2014” Means in D.C. Attorney General Election | State of Elections

When asked, many District of Columbia residents will be quick to point out that the district is not a state, and is subject to the control of Congress, per the U.S. Constitution. The slogan “Taxation without Representation” adorns the city’s vehicle license plates, and it is an issue which fires up many residing in the “202″. While the merits of this question are actively debated, they are not the subject of this modest post. However, one particular consequence of constitutionally-mandated Congressional control over the district is that many laws passed by the D.C. Council, the district’s elected rulemaking body, are subject to congressional approval before they take effect.  While almost all D.C. legislation is approved by Congress – in fact, in the past 40 years Congress has only vetoed D.C. legislation 3 times – there is a congressional review period, and thus a wait-time, of 30 legislative days before D.C. legislation may be approved. This wait time can be critical, especially when elections and election cycles are fixed dates by law.

Washington: SeaTac $15 wage win tempered by recount, legal hurdles | Crosscut.com

Opponents of a ballot initiative that would raise the minimum wage for workers at some businesses in and around Seattle-Tacoma International Airport to $15 announced on Tuesday that they were calling for a recount in the narrowly decided and closely watched contest. The prospect of a recount and more legal hurdles hardly stopped supporters from celebrating their narrow victory in the three-week-long vote count by King County Elections. The initiative, SeaTac Proposition 1, which eked out a 77-vote victory, has garnered national attention as other cities, including Seattle, weigh the merits of upping their minimum wages. Supporters pointed to the measure’s potential for spurring wider action. The hot-button ballot measure continues to pit business owners, who say they can’t afford the 63 percent wage hike, against workers ,who say they can’t make ends meet. Proposition 1 is also facing legal challenges. Two small food businesses, Alaska Airlines and the Washington Restaurant Association have a case pending against the city of SeaTac, the city’s clerk and the Port of Seattle in King County Superior Court, contending the ballot measure violates state and federal laws.