Iowa: Price tag for statewide run-off election? At least $500,000 | Radio Iowa

The potential price tag doesn’t seem to be a deterrent to the idea of holding run-off elections in Iowa to choose party nominees if the winner isn’t chosen during primary voting. Under current Iowa law, if no candidate in a Primary Election gets at least 35 percent of the vote, party delegates at a convention choose their nominee for the November ballot. Representative Guy Vander Linden, a Republican from Oskaloosa, sponsored a bill last session that would have shifted to a run-off election instead. “I didn’t like the idea of having just a very few people make the final decision and end up with a situation where they picked somebody who wasn’t even close,” says Vander Linden, who is chairman of the House State Government Committee.

Oregon: Top-two primary initiative qualifies for November ballot |Statesman Journal

Oregonians could dramatically alter the way they choose candidates if a ballot initiative to open the state’s primary elections passes in November. The open or top-two primary initiative qualified Tuesday for the November ballot with 91,716 valid signatures, according to the Secretary of State’s Office. The measure would create a new, nonpartisan primary election process where candidates from all parties appear on a single ballot. The two candidates who received the most votes in that election would advance to a general election. “We are very happy; excited,” chief petitioner James Kelly said. “We’ve been waiting a long time.” Washington and California both have open primaries, but Oregon voters overwhelmingly rejected a similar measure in 2008.

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?

California: John Pérez calls for recount in tight race for state controller | Los Angeles Times

Assemblyman John A. Pérez called Sunday for a recount in the razor-close primary election for state controller, a first step in what could become an expensive and lengthy effort to salvage his campaign for one of California’s top financial posts. Pérez, a Los Angeles Democrat, trails Betty Yee, a Democratic member of the Board of Equalization from the Bay Area, by just 481 votes — or one hundredth of one percent of the more than 4 million ballots cast. “It is therefore of the utmost importance that an additional, carefully conducted review of the ballots be undertaken to ensure that every vote is counted, as intended,” Pérez said in a statement. The two controller candidates have been battling for second place in the primary in order to advance to the general election. Ashley Swearengin, the Republican mayor of Fresno, has already secured her spot on the November ballot by finishing in first place in the primary. Under California law, any registered voter can ask for a recount, but the person making the request has to foot the bill.

Montana: Republican leaders: Closing primaries will wait | The Missoulian

A conservative Republican who sponsored a successful resolution to close primary elections to nonparty members during last week’s convention wants a federal lawsuit filed immediately to get the process underway. But party leaders said this week they have no timeline and haven’t decided how they’ll proceed. That isn’t sitting well with resolution sponsor and House District 69 candidate Matthew Monforton. He said moderate party leaders are stalling because closed primaries threaten their chances for election. “The GOP leadership has no intention of following through,” Monforton said. “They’ve chosen their own interests over the call of their party.”

Editorials: California’s jungle primary: Tried it. Dump it. | Harold Myerson/Los Angeles Times

Though county registrars are still tallying the votes in several close contests, the memory of California’s June primary has already begun to fade from the state’s collective consciousness — assuming, that is, that it ever made an imprint there at all. Before it vanishes altogether, though, Californians should take away one lesson from June’s balloting: The state’s new method for conducting primary elections is an asinine idea that can lead to perverse and anti-majoritarian consequences. The most obvious effect the jungle system has had is to convey a clear advantage to the party that runs fewer candidates for an office. Under the so-called jungle primary system, which came into being through a 2010 ballot measure that voters narrowly ratified, primary voters can cast their ballot for any candidate in the June election, and the top two finishers, regardless of party, advance to the November runoff. Both the 2012 and the 2014 primaries were conducted under these rules, so we can now look at the effects this new process has had on California politics.

New Mexico: Democrats Flirt With Changing Closed Primary System | Santa Fe Reporter

Long opposed to changing New Mexico’s closed primary system, top Democrats are starting to flirt with the idea of allowing independents to vote in partisan primaries. “I’ve originally been in the position that I was not in favor of opening primaries, but I’m reconsidering,” says Sam Bregman, chairman of the Democratic Party of New Mexico. New Mexico is one of 11 states that does not allow registered independents, most of whom are known here as “declined to state voters,” to cast ballots in either Democratic or Republican party primary elections. But just 20 percent of the state’s eligible voters showed up to the polls to vote in the primary last week, which critics cite as a reason the current system isn’t working. Statewide, voters who decline to affiliate with a party make up 19 percent of the electorate, or about 238,500 people, according to Secretary of State figures as of Dec. 31, 2013. In Santa Fe County, that proportion is even greater at 20 percent of registered voters, or 20,589 people.

California: 1,000+ Sacramento vote-by-mail ballots arrive too late | KCRA

About 1,200 Sacramento County vote-by-mail ballots arrived too late to be counted in this week’s primary election, according to elections officials. Jill LaVine, the county’s registrar of voters, shook her head as she leafed through five trays of pink envelopes and examined the postmarks. “Once again, I see June 3 on these, so they were postmarked June 3,” said LaVine. Even though many of the ballots were mailed before the polls closed Tuesday, they were not received at the registrar’s office until afterwards. Under California law, that means the ballots will never be opened, counted and included in the official results. “So much work went into this and we can’t count them. So it’s sad. It’s really sad,” said LaVine.

South Dakota: Voters Face Polling Confusion | KDLT

Polling centers have been replaced by precincts for this Primary Election. And that’s caused a lot of confusion throughout the day. Long lines have turned into mix-ups. In April’s city election, voters could go anywhere; Tuesday however, that wasn’t the case. Minnehaha County Auditor Bob Litz said, “We had our usual flurry of calls at 7 o’clock this morning from people wondering where they were supposed to go.”

California: San Jose pot clubs to offer voters free weed on California primary day | Reuters

California voters can expect to receive free weed from some pot clubs in the Bay Area city of San Jose for casting ballots in state primary elections next Tuesday that include local races and battles for governor and secretary of state. The city’s cannabis collectives, which have also offered up a voter guide to the races, are offering free marijuana and discounts when members show a ballot stub or an “I Voted” sticker on June 3. “Primary elections tend to have much lower turnout because people don’t even know there’s a vote that day,” said Dave Hodges, a cannabis club owner and member of the Silicon Valley Cannabis Coalition. “We want to help people know when to vote and who to vote for.”

New Mexico: Independent voters plan lawsuit over closed primary elections | KOB

For decades independent voters have been complaining about being left out of New Mexico’s closed primary elections – now somebody is doing something about it. Lawyers plan to slap election officials with a lawsuit in Bernalillo County District Court next Tuesday, June 3: Election Day. It won’t stop the primary election, but they hope it will let more New Mexicans vote next time around. You know how this thing works:  Republicans get to vote in the Republican primary, Democrats vote in the Democratic primary. Independents and minor party members don’t get to vote in the primaries, even though their tax dollars will help to pick up the $3 million for next week’s election. David Crum is an independent voter who moved to New Mexico about 20 years ago.

New York: Push for combined primaries hits partisan roadblock | Brooklyn Daily Eagle

It’s hard enough attracting voters to primaries, except in “big” votes like presidential elections. And when there’s two primaries in the same year, forget about it, not to mention the increased costs to the state! That’s the situation New York state is in. Primaries for federal offices take place in June, but primaries for local offices and state offices take place in September. It’s been this way since 2010, when a court decided that under the terms of a new federal law, the September primary didn’t give enough time for military absentee ballots to be processed. Now, state Assembly and Senate Democrats, backed by good-government groups, have instituted a bill for a joint primary in June. However, the bill is being stalled at the state Senate level by the Republican majority, which prefers a combined August primary.

District of Columbia: Minority parties see power grab for D.C. vote | Washington Times

The District’s Republican Party says it will sue any sitting Democrat on the D.C. Council who opts to run as an independent for one of two at-large seats reserved for minority political parties, promising the latest spirited defense of the set-aside positions that have long been a source of discord among city politicians. “The law was set up for third-party candidates, for nonmajority candidates. It wasn’t set up so Democrats could play games with their identification,” said D.C. GOP Chairman Ron Phillips, pointing to the Republican and Statehood Party candidates who have held the seats in the past. The threat was made after two Democrats — council members Tommy Wells and Yvette M. Alexander — last week openly discussed switching to independent status to pursue the at-large seat being vacated by Republican turned independent David A. Catania in his bid for mayor. Another five independent candidates, all of whom were previously registered as Democrats, also have expressed interest in the seat.

District of Columbia: It’s Disenfranchisement When Independents Can’t Vote in Primaries | The Daily Beast

District of Columbia voters went to the polls Tuesday, a few of them anyway, to vote in mayoral and city council primary elections. Unfortunately, although I am a Washington resident, I was not one of them. My non-participation wasn’t due to a lack of interest but because I am an Independent voter. The DC Board of Elections officially lists my party affiliation as “No Party.” It’s a non-affiliation I claim proudly but it comes with a price. Like many millions of other unaffiliated voters around the country I am prevented from exercising the right to vote in partisan primary elections. The outcome of Tuesday’s election will have a significant impact on the future direction of the city and I would have liked to weigh in. Current Mayor Vincent Gray is facing probable indictment on corruption charges—five people who were connected with his 2010 campaign have already pleaded guilty to felonies related to that campaign.

California: Ballot irregularities discovered ahead of Long Beach city election | Los Angeles Times

With just over a week left before election day, the Long Beach city clerk has discovered ballot irregularities that could affect more than half of the city’s voting precincts in one of the most closely watched local elections in years. Ballot tabulators failed to count votes marked on the second page of some ballots, said City Clerk Larry Herrera. The mistake affects precincts that have two-page ballots — about 169 of the city’s 295 polling places. Herrera said his office discovered the problem Friday afternoon while running a routine “logic and accuracy” test on the ballots ahead of next Tuesday’s election. The city has not printed two-page ballots since 2007, according to Herrera, and since then some of the tabulation processes have changed but were not readjusted for the two-page ballots. The primary election, scheduled for April 8, is expected to narrow large fields of candidates vying for wide-open races for mayor and five of the nine City Council seats.

Missouri: Primaries could be moved to March | The Lake News

Bills in the Missouri Legislature could change the dates of two primary elections and the logistics of running those primaries. The Missouri House of Representatives passed legislation, HB 1902, on March 13 that would set the state’s 2016 presidential primary for March 15. That bill, which passed on a 97-48 vote, has been sent to the Senate. Missouri previously held its party primary in February but faced losing some delegates to the 2016 Republican convention because of new party rules. The Republicans only want four states — Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina — to hold contests in February. States that hold primaries before March 15 must also award delegates proportionally, not on a winner-take-all basis.

Massachusetts: Dispute over convention vote roils state GOP | The Boston Globe

Charlie Baker’s bid to become the Republican nominee for governor hit another snag Thursday night when the chair of the rules committee for last Saturday’s convention said his party did not appear to follow its own rules. Steve Zykofsky, a longtime state committee member and chairman of the rules committee that developed the regulations for the GOP convention, said blank ballots should not have been counted in the final tally of votes that delegates cast to decide which candidates can run for governor. If those blank votes had been excluded, he said, Tea Party challenger Mark R. Fisher apparently would have qualified for the ballot, triggering a primary with Baker.  “I support Charlie Baker for governor 100 percent — 110 percent perhaps,” said Zykofsky. “But the fact of the matter is, as rules committee chairman and a member of the state committee, I have to be fair.”

Montana: Court blocks ‘top-two’ primary referendum from appearing on 2014 ballot | Billings Gazette

The Montana Supreme Court on Tuesday blocked the state from placing on the November ballot a legislative referendum to change how the state’s primary elections work. The Republican majorities in the House and Senate in 2013 put Legislative Referendum 127 on the ballot. Some unions and another group went directly to the Supreme Court to ask that it be stripped from the ballot on legal grounds. In a 6-1 decision, the court majority ruled that the title of the referendum “does not comply with the plain meaning of the Legislature’s 100-word limit” in state law.

Editorials: New York’s two primary system is indeed costly | Times Union

What would New York City and the state’s 57 counties do with their share of $50 million? Provide housing assistance to victims of domestic violence? Develop after-school or summer youth programs? Provide low-interest loans to businesses to help them expand and create jobs? Help senior citizens with transportation? Or how about reduce property taxes or support community hospitals? These are just some of the options that might be available to New York City and county officials if the state Senate and Assembly consolidated New York state’s two primary elections to one. But the Legislature has not resolved the issue and congressional candidates are now circulating nominating petitions. So, later this year New Yorkers will once again have two primary elections, one in June for the congressional races and another in September for state and local races. The cost to New York City and counties is enormous, as much as $50 million. The roots of the problem go back to 2011, when a federal judge determined that New York was not in compliance with the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act.

Iowa: Primary dispute risks voting rights for thousands | Associated Press

A primary skirmish between two Des Moines politicians running for a state Senate seat could have a sweeping impact on voter eligibility in Iowa. In a Capitol meeting room Friday, the battle lines were drawn between Democrats Tony Bisignano and Ned Chiodo, both vying for the seat that Jack Hatch is vacating to run for governor. Chiodo says that Bisignano should be disqualified from the race because of a drunken driving conviction in January.

Kansas: New voting laws adding to confusion, Douglas County election official says | Lawrence Journal World

Douglas County’s chief election official, County Clerk Jamie Shew, says he wishes legislators who keep passing new voting laws would be around to deal with angry voters who are tripped up by the changes. “We’ll get yelled at,” over the newest proposal, Shew predicted. The bill says no one who is registered as a Republican, Democrat or Libertarian will be able to switch party affiliation between June 1, which is the deadline for candidates to file for office for the Aug. 5 Republican and Democratic primaries, and the end of August. Current law says voters registered with a party can switch to another party up until two weeks before the primary. Republicans, who are the majority party in Kansas, see this proposed restriction as a way to stop Democrats from switching parties to influence GOP primaries, whether to try to set up the weakest Republican candidate for the general election or to elect the Republican candidate most aligned with their interests when there is little or no Democratic opposition in the November general election.

New Jersey: Group sues the state to open primary elections to all voters | NJ.com

New Jersey primaries could one day include all voters, not just those affiliated with a political party if a California-based non-profit has its way. The Committee for a Unified Independent Party and The Independent Voter Project, which together form Endpartisanship.org, have joined a group of seven registered voters in filing the suit against Secretary of State Kim Guadagno seeking to have the current primary system declared unconstitutional because it bars nearly 50 percent of all state voters from the process. “Defendant barred nearly half of New Jersey’s registered voters from participating in New Jersey’s 2013 primary election because they exercised their right not to associate with either the Democrat or Republican Party,” the brief, filed in District Court earlier this month, states. “This action seeks to protect the fundamental right to vote under the New Jersey Constitution and U.S. Constitution from the condition required by the New Jersey Primary Election Law that a voter forfeit his or her First Amendment Right not to associate with a political party.” The suit goes on to claim that the state, which foots the bill for the annual primary election, is violating the New Jersey constitution by allocating money for the primaries, which are held on behalf of private political parties.

Utah: Parties to hold final caucuses under current system | The Salt Lake Tribune

For perhaps one last time, political party caucuses this week will figure into a long-running debate about whether small extremist groups can use them to control Utah’s ballot, or if big attendance there instead can ensure mainstream choices. Examples of when small groups ruled — such as the tea party dumping former GOP Sen. Bob Bennett four years ago, even though polls showed he likely easily would have won a primary — led to a change in the system that takes effect Jan. 1. Gov. Gary Herbert this month signed into law SB54 as a compromise between parties and the Count My Vote drive. It will allow Utah’s current caucus-and-convention system to continue with reforms, but also allows candidates to bypass it and gain direct access to a primary election if they gather enough signatures. But for one last time under the old system — unless courts overturn SB54 — Democrats hold their caucuses on Tuesday at 7 p.m. Republicans hold theirs on Thursday at 7 p.m. Locations may be found online at utdem.org and utgop.org.

Kansas: Senate passes bill limiting pre-primary party switches | Wichita Eagle

A bill that would prevent voters from switching political parties after the filing deadline for candidates is on its way to the governor. The Senate voted 27-12 on Wednesday to approve the bill; the House approved it last year. House Bill 2210 would prevent voters who have a party affiliation from switching after the June 1 filing deadline until after primary results are certified in August. It would allow unaffiliated voters to change registration. Current law allows voters to change parties up to two weeks before the primary election. During the primary, voters affiliated with a party select one candidate from the party in each race to advance to the general election.

Editorials: Another legislative ‘fix’ could endanger Kansas voting rights | The Winfield Daily Courier

A bill that would create new limits on when Kansas voters could change their party affiliations is another example of state legislators trying to correct a problem that probably doesn’t exist or at least not to an extent that justifies legislative action. In this case, that “fix” also could limit Kansas voters’ ability to cast their ballots for their preferred candidates. The bill that has passed the Senate Ethics and Election Committee last week would bar Kansas voters from changing their party affiliation from June 1 (the filing deadline for candidates) to Sept. 1 (about a month after the August primary elections). The goal of the bill, according to Kansas Republican Party officials, is to prevent voters from switching parties in order to skew the opposing party’s primary.

Utah: Lawmakers seek earliest presidential primary, with online voting | Reuters

Utah could jump to the front of the U.S. presidential primary lineup in 2016 and hold its own online election a week before any other state, under a proposal advanced by state lawmakers this week to win more sway for the conservative state. For decades, the Iowa caucus has been the first event in which presidential hopefuls can secure convention delegates, followed closely by a vote in New Hampshire, which has held the nation’s first full primary election since 1920. “Utah is roughly the same size as Iowa and roughly twice the size of New Hampshire, and yet our influence in the presidential primaries process is minimal if it all,” bill sponsor Representative Jon Cox, a Republican, said during a House debate of the bill on Monday. “It’s time to change that. We’ve created a system that is blatantly discriminatory, that creates second-class states,” he said.

Editorials: Bill that limits party-switching in Kansas could limit voters’ right to support their chosen candidates | Lawrence Journal World

A bill that would create new limits on when Kansas voters could change their party affiliations is another example of state legislators trying to correct a problem that probably doesn’t exist or at least not to an extent that justifies legislative action. In this case, that “fix” also could limit Kansas voters’ ability to cast their ballots for their preferred candidates. The bill that has passed the Senate Ethics and Election Committee last week would bar Kansas voters from changing their party affiliation from June 1 (the filing deadline for candidates) to Sept. 1 (about a month after the August primary elections).

Maryland: Baltimore legislator wants to invite third parties to the political process | Baltimore City Paper

Baltimore City state Sen. Bill Ferguson (D-46th District) is worried about the state of democracy in Baltimore, across Maryland, and countrywide. “Voting is the fundamental building block of any democracy,” he says, “and the numbers of those voting is a smaller percentage than it should or could be, particularly if you look at age cohorts of young and middle-aged voters.” This creates a “looming” problem for democracy, he concludes, so lawmakers need to find “new ways to reach citizens no matter their political persuasion,” so that society has “an informed populace that engages in the process” of electing its leaders. The dismal state of voting affairs in Baltimore City were made manifest, to much public hand-wringing, in the 2011 mayoral election. In the Democratic primary—the tally that, by default, determines the winner in this nearly one-party burg—victor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake got 38,829 votes, 8 percent of Baltimore’s voting-age population. Less than 10 percent of some districts’ electorates backed the winners in the City Council races.

Kansas: GOP pushes for legislation aimed at reducing party switching | Lawrence Journal-World

The Kansas Republican Party on Wednesday pushed for passage of a bill aimed at reducing the number of voters who switch parties before the primary to hurt the GOP. The bill would essentially prevent registered voters from changing their party affiliation from June 1 through Sept. 1. Currently, voters registered as Republicans, Democrats or Libertarian can change their party affiliation up to 21 days before the August primaries. Unaffiliated voters can declare a party affiliation at any time. Clay Barker, executive director of the state Republican Party, said the primary election belongs to the political party, not the general public, and is the party’s mechanism to select its candidates. Barker said he believed third-party groups were urging voters to switch parties to advance an inferior candidate who would then face the opposition party’s candidate in the general election. But neither Barker, nor state Rep. Keith Esau, R-Olathe, the main supporters of House Bill 2210, could provide examples of party-switching occurring as part of political gamesmanship.

Utah: New Hampshire to Utah: The first-in-the-nation primary is ours, back off | The Salt Lake Tribune

New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner is urging Utah lawmakers to reject a bill that would try to put the Beehive State ahead of Iowa or New Hampshire in the presidential primary race, arguing that New Hampshire’s 100-year-old contest is the best test of candidates. A House committee this week advanced HB410, providing that if Utah wanted to fund an early presidential primary, it must do so a week before any similar balloting. It’s a clear shot at New Hampshire and Iowa, both of which grab the attention of the national news media and major candidates for months. Rep. Jon Cox, R-Ephraim, says it’s unfair for those two states to always get the spotlight and Utah could actually play a role in electing the next president. But Gardner, who by law must place the New Hampshire primary a week before any similar contest, says his state’s contest allows all candidates to compete on the same level, working town markets and holding house parties instead of campaigning through major television ads and fly-in-fly-out stump speeches.