Election Law Society

Legislative Appointment of South Carolina’s Judiciary: Somethin’ Could be Finer

Election Law Society · January 8, 2014 ·

By Austin Graham

Among the states, a relative variety exists in the methods employed for selecting state court judges, including partisan elections, nonpartisan elections, gubernatorial appointment, merit-selection systems, and legislative appointment. Out of these, merit-selection systems are the most popular, with over twenty-five states adhering to this process. Judicial elections are the second most common scheme with at least twenty-one states utilizing either partisan or nonpartisan elections to choose their state court judges. The least common system is legislative appointment; only Virginia and South Carolina delegate appointment of the judiciary to state legislators.

Educating Voters on a Law in Limbo: An Update on the Pennsylvania Voter ID Law

Election Law Society · January 6, 2014 ·

By Joshua Bohn

Due to a preliminary injunction on Pennsylvania’s Voter ID Law arising from Applewhite et al. v. Commonwealth, the 2013 Pennsylvania off-year general election occurred without being subject to the requirements of the law. As of this date, the judge responsible for issuing this preliminary injunction is still in the process of deliberating. This does not mean, however, that questions about Pennsylvania’s new Voter ID Law have dropped out of the public eye. On the contrary, the government of Pennsylvania and its agencies have spent a significant amount of money advertising the Voter ID Law. Pennsylvania’s Department of State brought back a new variant of its “show it” TV commercials from the 2012 election for this off-year general election. Critics opposed the ad campaign for being a costly use of state funds, and for having a potential to confuse would-be voters—especially if the court refuses to lift the injunction. Governor Tom Corbett and his administration defended the ad campaign; a spokesman argued that the commercials contain useful information in the event that the Voter ID Law is upheld.

In Arkansas, Face Off Over New Voter ID Law

Election Law Society · December 9, 2013 ·

by Euticha B. Hawkins, Contributor

Controversy surrounding voter identification laws has now reached the Natural State. On April 1, 2013, the Arkansas state legislature completed a bicameral majority vote overriding Gov. Mike Beebe’s (D) veto of a law requiring voters to show photo ID. The law, which is scheduled to go into effect on January 1, 2014, provides for the state to issue a free photo ID to voters who lack one. The law also allows a voter without photo identification to cast a provisional ballot on election day. The provisional ballot will be counted if the voter reports to the county clerk or county board of election commissioners by noon of the Monday following the election, with proof of identity or an affidavit showing the voter is either indigent or has a religious objection to being photographed. [Read more…] about In Arkansas, Face Off Over New Voter ID Law

The High Cost of Recounts in Michigan: Will Candidates Take the Risk?

Election Law Society · December 6, 2013 ·

by Jillian, Contributor

A new state bill may make it more difficult for Michigan candidates to pursue recounts after elections. On September 19, 2013, the Michigan House of Representatives passed House Bill 4833 (HB 4833). The bill received bi-partisan support and had a high passage rate of 95-9. The Michigan Senate is now considering the bill. [Read more…] about The High Cost of Recounts in Michigan: Will Candidates Take the Risk?

Oregon: A Laboratory With Some Great Inventions

Election Law Society · December 4, 2013 ·

by Michael Althouse, Contributor

In election law, states can get a bad rap. States are supposed to be the laboratories for democracy, but when it comes to elections, it can seem like they’re more like the inept, maybe-racist, drunk uncle of democracy. It’s not all so bad out there, though, and Oregon is a good example of how states can innovate in a successful way. In 1998, just two years before Florida would grind the nation to a halt while it counted hanging chads, the people of Oregon overwhelmingly passed State Measure 60, requiring all votes to be cast through the mail. Two of the primary motivations behind the measure were that it would save money and it would increase voter participation. It’s hard to say with certainty whether voting by mail had an effect on voter participation, but in 1996 Oregon’s voter turnout was around 57%, and in 2000, two years after State Measure 60, it was around 80%. Any number of things can result in an increased voter turnout, such as passion around a relevant issue, a particularly divisive election, or natural disasters. Regardless of potential causes, since 1998, Oregon has consistently had one of the highest rates of voter turnout in the country. [Read more…] about Oregon: A Laboratory With Some Great Inventions