Connecticut: Republican Party Reflects On Electoral Process After November Losses | CT News Junkie

The Republican Party hasn’t won a statewide election in Connecticut since 2006. This year’s defeat has the party leadership questioning where it can improve the electoral process. Republican Party Chairman Jerry Labriola Jr. announced the formation of an Election Reforms Subcommittee earlier this month at a Republican State Central Committee meeting. He charged the 13-member committee to report its findings by Jan. 27. “I’ve placed no boundaries on the subcommittee,” Labriola said last week. “Everything’s on the table.” That means everything, including an open primary system that would allow unaffiliated voters to participate in choosing the Republican Party’s nominee. Former Gov. Lowell Weicker, a Republican-turned-independent, has been advocating for the Republican Party to switch to an open primary system for years.

Editorials: Bringing real democracy to Illinois, one step at a time | Chicago Sun-Times

This month, the Illinois General Assembly passed a sweeping voting rights bill that brings our state’s antiquated election system into the 21st century. The landmark legislation means voting will now be a simple, high-integrity process, so all eligible Illinoisans have a voice in our democracy. Yet the bigger story is what the success of SB 172 portends for Illinois’ rising reform movement. The bill never would made it through the legislature without strong support from the diverse, nonpartisan Just Vote coalition, which mobilized people across the state to help move the common-sense election reform package forward. Just Vote represents a unique approach to political reform. In the past, good government groups often fell short because they failed to bring young people and communities of color to the table, or (worse) intentionally excluded them.

Voting Blogs: North Carolina Attempting to Run-Out Clock in Voter Suppression Lawsuit (Again!) | BradBlog

North Carolina Republicans are now seeking to delay the full federal trial challenging their massive election reform law, which has been described as the worst-in-the-nation and as a “monster” voter suppression law. The tactic threatens to, once again, undermine any ruling by the court, should it be made too close to the state’s 2016 elections. The trial in the case had previously been set, according to a timetable established in federal court in December of 2013, to take place during the July 2015 trial calendar. State Republicans, however, now argue that a separate state court challenge to one section of its massive voter suppression law, scheduled during the same period next summer, will “severely prejudice” their ability to defend themselves in the federal case which follows it. Plaintiffs argue in response that the move is “another step in Defendants continued attempts to delay the ultimate resolution of this action.”

Michigan: Bill to change electoral college vote allocation in Michigan tabled | Detroit Free Press

The opposition to changing how Michigan’s 16 electoral votes are allocated was unanimous during a committee hearing on a bill that would change the state’s winner-take-all system for presidential candidates. But House Elections and Ethics Committee chairwoman, state Rep. Lisa Posthumus Lyons, R-Alto, decided not to take a vote on the controversial issue Tuesday. “This whole process is to bring this issue up for a good discussion. I haven’t decided yet whether we’ll vote or not,” she said. “Our electoral college system in Michigan is broken, and we have to focus on making Michigan matter more in terms of having our presidential candidates give Michigan voters attention on Michigan issues.” The 14 people who testified before the committee were all opposed to the latest proposal, saying Michigan should concentrate on more sensible election reforms that would increase turnout — like allowing for no-reason absentee voting and same day registration, instead of confusing voters even more.

Voting Blogs: Court Rulings Impact Elections in 2014 | The Canvass

Users of a different kind of gavel have been busy setting rules for voters and election administrators in 2014. Courts, and not legislatures, have been the major force shaping state election laws this year, with some key rulings landing just days before voters headed to the polling places. And it’s not just district circuit justices who have been asked to rule on litigation about photo ID requirements for voters, early voting and same-day voter registration. Several notable rulings from the U.S. Supreme Court this year have addressed how elections are run. And some of those decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court have hardly settled election matters. The brief court orders in a few October cases— often two sentences— have addressed simply the timing of changes to the elections process; these cases are still to be decided on their merits by the courts with jurisdiction.

Connecticut: Merrill Wants Election Reforms, But Says ‘Political Will’ May Be Lacking | Hartford Courant

Right now, there’s no way to remove a registrar of voters who messes up an election. There’s no way to force registrars to get training, and no way for the state to take over a persistently dysfunctional local election system. After yet another troubled election, Secretary of the State Denise Merrill said Wednesday she expects to ask the legislature for reforms that could solve those issues. Merrill said she also wants state funding for technological improvements that could help reduce the chance of error in what she considers “an archaic system” for keeping track of who has voted and reporting election results. The biggest question surrounding any significant reform, Merrill said, is whether “there is the political will” in the General Assembly and the governor’s office to act. “I don’t think it’s politically impossible,” Merrill said, “but it is difficult … we’re talking about vested interests here.”

National: 5 States Put Voting Reform to the Voters | Governing

American election reform, where states look to either impede or assist people’s ability to influence government with their vote. Ballots in at least five states — Connecticut, Montana, Missouri, Illinois and Arkansas — focus on some kind of election reform. Most states have made voting harder in the past decade by enacting voter ID laws, ostensibly to guard against voter impersonation, a problem that the public believes to be more widespread than the evidence suggests. For example, a five-year crackdown by the Justice Department under President George W. Bush resulted in only 86 people being found guilty of voter fraud across all 50 states, according to a 2007 investigation by The New York Times. In part because many of these voter ID laws have already passed, the majority of the legislative activity in 2014 actually focused on making voting more convenient. … Based on interviews with state and local election officials in states with early voting, the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University Law School argues that early voting brings a host of benefits, including shorter lines and less administrative burden on election day. Nonetheless, eight states have cut back on early voting since 2010. One recent example is North Carolina, where the legislature decided to cut a week of early voting, eliminate same-day registration during early voting and reduce the hours of early voting on the final Saturday before election day.

Mississippi: Panel ponders Mississippi elections overhaul | Jackson Clarion-Ledger

Amid the turmoil over the Republican U.S. Senate primary, Mississippi Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann has a 51-member panel considering election reforms to present to lawmakers next year. Early voting, online registration, closed or open primaries – Hosemann said implementing voter ID and “having some bright lights thrown on our election process” from the Senate race makes reform likely. If the panel deadlocks on major issues, such as overhauling Mississippi’s hybrid open/closed – no one’s really sure — primary system, Hosemann said he expects the panel and legislators to at least “nibble around the edges” and make some changes. The panel is a bipartisan group of community, business and academic leaders, most with no direct political party ties or titles, Hosemann said. Its chairman, attorney and businessman James Overstreet Jr., told panelists at their first meeting Wednesday, “I’m a political novice – my experience has been limited to voting and giving a few dollars to candidates.” The panel’s first meeting Wednesday focused on primary elections.

Connecticut: Parties clash over changes to Connecticut’s election law | The Washington Post

A ballot question in Connecticut this fall could give Democrats the power to rewrite the state’s historically strict election laws. With Democrats controlling both chambers and every statewide office, this fall’s ballot initiative could spur a series of election reforms aimed at expanding voter access. Republicans argue that passing the law – which could mean changes to Connecticut’s restrictive absentee ballot or early voting policies – would lead to fraudulent voting. Currently, voters in Connecticut, as well as 20 other states, can only cast absentee ballots if they provide a reason why they are physically unable to get to the poll, such as military service or attending college out-of-state. In every other state, voters don’t need an excuse to mail in their ballots rather than appear in person. And unlike voters in a majority of states, Connecticut voters are not allowed to vote early.

Hawaii: Political party leaders say Hawaii needs better election process | KHON2

There were a couple of big hiccups in this election, leading many to criticize the Office of Elections, and there will soon be a push for change. Two party leaders KHON2 News talked with on Saturday say this is not a partisan issue. They insist things can be done to create a better election process. Actually, an elections reform commission was created back in 2001. When Republican State Senator Sam Slom was asked if he thought the problems have been solved since then, he replied “no, I think the problems have been exacerbated. We need to re-look at this and make some serious changes.” Slom said the election problems aren’t unique to this year.

Editorials: How Can We Fix the Broken Primary Election System? | Seth Masket/Pacific Standard

We’ve all heard plenty of complaints in recent years that national and state legislatures have simply grown too polarized to govern effectively. Democrats and Republicans not only can’t work together, they see each other as enemies and threats to the country. Thanks to this polarization, the country can’t solve the problems it faces. The Bipartisan Policy Center has produced a comprehensive document aimed at addressing this issue. (Disclosure: I served as a consultant on this project during an event last year.) To its credit, the Center isn’t pushing any magic bullets. There is no one simple reform that will substantially reduce polarization while allowing the United States to remain a democracy. It is, however, pushing a series of reforms that, enacted together, could potentially have some kind of impact. Given how many of us decline to even join parties in the first place, should we be encouraging, no less mandating, that such people vote in party nomination contests?

Florida: Nelson tells state Democrats to push election reform | Tampa Tribune

U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson urged House Democrats to do whatever it takes to make sure proposed election reform measures pass during the 2014 legislative session. “(House Democrats should) use every parliamentary mechanism at their disposal to try to fulfill the American dream, which is the right to vote, to be able to cast that vote and have the confidence to know that when you count that vote it is going be counted as you intended,” he said during a news conference Wednesday afternoon. Nelson, an Orlando-area Democrat, met with state lawmakers Wednesday to discuss election reform measures. He spent about 15 minute talking with House Democrats before heading over the Senate to speak with Senate Democrats.

Mississippi: Election reform bill dies in committee | Hattiesburg American

The problems plaguing the 2013 mayoral election in Hattiesburg may have captured the Pine Belt’s attention. But, in Jackson, they took a backseat to swine. At least, according to one disappointed lawmaker, Rep. Toby Barker, R-Hattiesburg. “I saw more time spent on the issue of wild hogs than I saw for meaningful discussion on our antiquated election laws,” said Barker, the principal author of the Municipal Election Reform Act of 2014. Barker and fellow Republican Pine Belt legislators unveiled the reform bill with great fanfare in mid-January. But the bill died a quick, silent death in committee just two weeks later without being brought to a vote.

Arizona: Governor signs bill to repeal 2013 election reform law, kills referendum | Arizona Capitol Times

It’s official: Arizonans won’t get the last word on a series of controversial changes in state election law. Without comment, Gov. Jan Brewer signed legislation Thursday to repeal the 2013 law. More to the point, by repealing the law the governor killed the referendum drive that had held up enactment until the voters made the final decision. Democratic lawmakers who opposed the 2013 law sought to keep the referendum on the ballot, saying voters deserved to have their say. Foes of the changes gathered more than 146,000 signatures on petitions to put the law on “hold” pending the election. But Democrats also were interested in attracting voters to the polls in November who objected to the changes forced through by the Republican-controlled Legislature. That included limiting who can take someone else’s early ballot to polling places, erecting some new procedural hurdles in the path of citizens proposing their own laws, and requiring minor parties to get far more signatures to get their candidates on the ballot.

Ohio: House panel readies for vote on new provisional-ballot rules | Cleveland Plain Dealer

A week after approving two election reform bills, a state House panel is set to vote Wednesday on another piece of legislation that would tighten rules for casting a provisional ballot in Ohio. Under Senate Bill 216, voters would be required to provide their address and date of birth when casting an absentee ballot. The measure would also reduce the amount of time provisional voters would have to produce valid identification from 10 days after Election Day to seven. Thirdly, the bill would codify federal court rulings from the 2012 campaign season that required elections officials to count ballots from voters who voted in the right polling place but the wrong precinct without being told of their mistake.

Canada: Elections Canada under fire | The Chronicle Herald

Conservative MPs took several shots Monday at Elections Canada as the House of Commons moved the government’s controversial election reform bill closer to law. The Conservative majority in the House passed Bill C-23 through second reading after a 152-128 vote. A committee of MPs will study it before it returns for final debate. Opposition parties argue the 242-page bill tilts election rules in favour of the Conservatives and muzzles the chief electoral officer. The government says its bill will prevent fraud and lead to stronger enforcement of election violations. During hours of debate Monday, Conservative MPs depicted Elections Canada as biased against them. “Elections Canada lets the Liberals off and threatens to put my volunteers in prison,” said Cambridge-North Dumfries MP Gary Goodyear.

Canada: Election reform bill an affront to democracy, Marc Mayrand says | CBC

The government’s proposed overhaul of the Elections Act includes elements that constitute an affront to democracy, according to Canada’s Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand. In an interview airing Saturday on CBC Radio’s The House, Mayrand said “my reading of the act is that I can no longer speak about democracy in this country.” “I’m not aware of any electoral bodies around the world who can not talk about democracy,” Mayrand told host Evan Solomon. Under the proposed bill, the only role of the chief electoral officer would be to inform the public of when, where, and how to vote. Elections Canada would be forbidden from launching ad campaigns encouraging Canadians to vote. Surveys and research would be forbidden under the new bill, Mayrand said. “Most of the research will no longer be published because these are communications to the public.” The chief electoral officer and the commissioner of Canada elections would also no longer be allowed to publish their reports, Mayrand said. “These reports will no longer be available. In fact, not only not available. I don’t think it will be done at all.”

North Carolina: Election official ousted for openly supporting Senate candidate | News Observer

The State Board of Elections on Friday ousted a member of the Beaufort County Board of Elections after ruling that he violated state law by openly supporting Republican U.S. Senate candidate Greg Brannon at a local tea party meeting in October. In doing so, the five-member, Republican-controlled state board made it clear that it wouldn’t take it lightly when county board members publicly practice partisan politics. Bob Hall, executive director of the election reform group Democracy North Carolina, lauded the decision, saying he believed the state board members were taking seriously their responsibility to monitor the political activities of local board members, who are charged with overseeing elections. “By their action, they’re sending a signal to the local board members that they need to obey the law, and the law is quite clear about not publicly endorsing or advocating for candidates,” Hall said.

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.”

Massachusetts: A push for election reforms | Stoneham Sun

State Rep. Jason Lewis joined his colleagues in the Massachusetts House of Representatives recently in passing important legislation that aims to increase voter participation in elections. Enacted with strong bipartisan support, the bill establishes early voting for presidential elections and online voter registration. These significant reforms will make it more convenient for people to vote and shorten lines on busy election days. The bill also provides additional training for election workers.

National: The downside of clear election laws | Washington Post

State lawmakers have introduced at least 2,328 bills this year that would change the way elections are run at the local level. Some passed, some stalled. Some are mundane tweaks, others are controversial overhauls. But if election reformers want to prevent their laws from being held up by lawsuits, they would be wise to pay attention to how they’re written, says Ned Foley, an Ohio State University professor and election law expert. “Put clarity at the top of the list of things to achieve, maybe before fairness or integrity or access or whatever, because litigators can’t fight over things that are clear,” he said, speaking on an election law panel during a multi-day conference hosted by the bipartisan National Conference of State Legislatures in Washington, D.C. “It’s amazing how much ambiguity kind of seeps into laws that is unintended.” But while clear regulations are important, too much can backfire, said Alysoun McLaughlin, deputy director of the Montgomery County Board of Elections in Maryland.

Editorials: Early voting legislation a disservice to Ohio voters | Ellis Jacobs/Cleveland Plain Dealer

During the 2004 presidential election, Ohio became famous for its dysfunctional election system. Lines snaked around city blocks in many areas, causing people to wait for hours to cast their vote or simply give up and leave. In response, the Republican legislature passed sweeping election reform in 2005 that included expanded early voting hours and no-fault absentee voting, and we haven’t seen dysfunction like 2004 since then. Until now. On November 20, the Ohio Senate passed SB 238, a bill that slammed the doors on the first week of early voting in Ohio.

Editorials: Election reform can counter political dysfunction | Henry Bonilla/Charlie Gonzalez/The Hill

It has become painfully obvious that extreme partisanship in Washington is harming our economy, national security, and the future of our country.  The recent federal budget showdowns—and resulting risk to economic growth—are only the latest evidence.  While there is no one silver bullet, election reforms at the state level—including in Ohio—can improve on our national political dysfunction and reassure Ohioans and all Americans that our government can be restored to functionality. For example, many Americans deride the practice of drawing safe Republican and safe Democratic legislative districts that produces polarized candidates, reduces real competition and leaves voters without choices on Election Day.  Many share visceral reactions at the idea that one party in control can “stick it” to the other party when they draw district lines for the next decade.

National: Poll: Americans support fine-tuning election policy | USAToday

The capital’s shutdowns and showdowns have tested the patience even of the Senate chaplain. “Save us from the madness,” he prayed at the opening of one session last week. But how, exactly? The roots of the nation’s polarized and sometimes paralyzed politics, decades in the making, are too complex and far-reaching to be easily reversed or resolved. Even so, some political scientists and politicians argue that making simple changes — expanding who can vote in primary elections, for instance, or rethinking how legislative districts are drawn — could make a difference in the kind of government that follows. A nationwide USA TODAY/Bipartisan Policy Center poll finds a majority of Americans support a range of proposals aimed at easing hyper-partisanship and building confidence in elections. Some command the sort of broad bipartisan backing rare in national politics.

Idaho: Supreme Court ruling has officials talking about election processes | Idaho Reporter

In light of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling June 25 that struck down key provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, state governments are now afforded more authority in the construction of their voting processes and procedures, and some southern states are already contemplating some adjustments. In Idaho, officials are open to election reforms, but there appears to be no discussion of urgent or eminent changes nor has a consensus on the matter emerged. “We have been making changes to our voting laws all along as the need has arisen,” said Tim Hurst, deputy secretary of state. “We have done this without any federal oversight,” he added to IdahoReporter.com. In its 5-4 ruling, Supreme Court justices said the voting act’s requirement that mainly states in the South must undergo special scrutiny before changing their voting laws is based on a 40-year-old formula that is no longer relevant to the nation’s changing racial circumstances.

Wisconsin: State committee approves revised election bill | Associated Press

Campaign donors could contribute twice as much to their favorite candidates and voters could register online under a dramatically reworked election reform bill the state Assembly’s election committee approved Monday. In a rare compromise, Republicans and minority Democrats removed language designed to reinstate voter photo identification requirements. They also dropped provisions banning in-person absentee voting on weekends and limiting local recall elections. The elections committee approved the changes 8-1, setting up a vote in the full Assembly on Wednesday. Democrats on the panel still called the bill troubling, but they thanked Republicans for changing it. The committee’s chairwoman, Rep. Kathleen Bernier, R-Chippewa Falls, still signaled the GOP plans to return to voter ID this fall. “(The compromise bill) doesn’t mean we’re not going to address other things in the future,” she told the committee.

Wisconsin: Committee approves revised election bill | StarTribune.com

Campaign donors could contribute twice as much to their favorite candidates and voters could register online under a dramatically reworked election reform bill the state Assembly’s election committee approved Monday. In a rare compromise, Republicans and minority Democrats removed language designed to reinstate voter photo identification requirements. They also dropped provisions banning in-person absentee voting on weekends and limiting local recall elections. The elections committee approved the changes 8-1, setting up a vote in the full Assembly on Wednesday. Democrats on the panel still called the bill troubling, but they thanked Republicans for changing it. The committee’s chairwoman, Rep. Kathleen Bernier, R-Chippewa Falls, still signaled the GOP plans to return to voter ID this fall.

Ohio: Chief justice starts promising debate on election reforms | CantonRep.com

Maureen O’Connor, chief justice of the Ohio Supreme Court, is following in the big footsteps of her predecessor, the late Thomas Moyer. While she is not proposing election reforms in the two areas that Moyer felt strongest about, she shares his concern about maintaining the integrity of courts across Ohio and his interest in educating Ohioans about how the courts work and how judges are elected. This leadership is welcome. The eight changes O’Connor proposed last week should start an important conversation across the state.

Florida: Elections bill moves from consensus to contentious | News-Journal

Crunch time! Only one week left in the session and legislators must pass a budget, expand Medicaid or develop some kind of statewide alternative on the fly, and while they’re at it, fix the election law that caused a mess in 2012. And that’s just the top of the to-do list. The Senate passed an election reform bill Thursday and the House must vote on it next week or try again next year. The bill’s supporters say it would prevent a repeat of the last presidential election — the long lines, the long vote count and the long ballot.

Editorials: A Simple Plan to Drastically Improve Voting, Stop Fraud, and Save Money | Trevor Potter/The Atlantic

Bipartisan agreements seem possible on immigration and perhaps even on guns. Could election reform be next? Is there an opportunity to move past the partisan rancor of the voting wars and modernize America’s out-of-date election system? We all know it needs improvement. Long lines on Election Day are only the most visible symptom, as some voters from Florida to Virginia to Ohio waited up to seven hours to make their voice heard in last year’s election. The culprit often turns out to be the old-fashioned, paper-based registration system used across the country. According to the Pew Center on the States, approximately 51 million Americans are not registered to vote but should qualify to do so. One in eight registrations contain errors or are no longer valid. Nearly 2 million dead people appear on the voter rolls. In 2008, estimates are that at least 3 million voters who thought they were registered showed up at the polls, only to be turned away because of registration problems.