State of Elections

William & Mary Law School | Election Law Society

California

Who Draws the Lines? California Experiment Intact, For Now

· ·

by Nathan Yu and Chelsea Bobo

When American legislators sit down to redraw district lines it is difficult to disentangle this redistricting process from the evils of gerrymandering and other forms of partisan abuse. Perhaps the party members we elect should not be closely involved in determining what our electoral districts look like. This is the conclusion a slim majority of California voters reached four years ago with the approval of Proposition 11. Also known as the Voters FIRST Act, Proposition 11 set up the California Citizens Redistricting Commission (CCRC), an independent redistricting commission. [Read more…] about Who Draws the Lines? California Experiment Intact, For Now

Making Moves toward the Middle? The effects of California’s efforts to create a less partisan primary in 2012 elections

· ·

By Erica L. Clark

In 2010 California passed Proposition 14 (Top Two Primaries Act), an initiative expected to increase Independent Party participation by changing the structure of primary elections to discourage partisanship and deadlocks. Though other states, like Louisiana, have relied on a similar system, as Sam Robinson notes, the system is not without controversy. The new “open primary” system allows candidates to omit their party affiliation from the ballots and selects the top two candidates with the highest number of votes, irrespective of their affiliation, to participate in the general elections. While opponents of Proposition 14 believed this would restrict voters’ choice, proponents were hopeful that the measure represented a major step toward creating a more moderate state government less stifled by strictly partisan deadlocks. The question is: Since the act took effect in the 2012 primaries, will it produce a more moderate result for California state offices in the general election? [Read more…] about Making Moves toward the Middle? The effects of California’s efforts to create a less partisan primary in 2012 elections

News Brief: Another California redistricting victim

· ·

by Brett Piersma

In September, this blog reported on the impact of a California initiative to create a citizen-panel to draw the new electoral districts. The commission’s efforts resulted in more competitive districts, with additional unintended consequences likely to follow such as more expensive campaigns relying on wealthy donors. On the other hand, more competitive districts are likely to draw more moderate candidates into the race, at least so goes the theory.

The Los Angeles Times reported in January that Elton Gallegly, the subject of our September piece, had chosen not to run for reelection. For some, this came as no surprise. A long-time representative earning reelection with big margins, Gallegly would certainly have carried his pre-redrawn district. But the commission’s actions placed Gallegly’s home in the same district as another popular Republican, Howard “Buck” McKeon. It does not require a top-dollar campaign advisor to calculate his chances of election in this new district, or in the new districts surrounding.

How his retirement will affect both California’s and the Republican Party’s clout in the House is uncertain, but not difficult to imagine. Gallegly not only chaired the Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement and vice-chaired the Committee on Foreign Affairs, but OpenSecrets.org reported in January on his significant connections with pharmaceuticals, finance, and real estate corporations.

Gallegly joins a long string of representatives retiring at the end of this term, many of whom are stepping down at least in part due to redistricting in their states.

Brett Piersma is a third-year law student at William and Mary.

permalink: http://stateofelections.pages.wm.edu/2012/02/16/news-brief-ca-redistricting-victim/

 

In 1943, in open court, an american lawyer described charlie chaplin asa little runt of a svengali, a lecherous hound who lied like a college paper writing service cheap cockney cad?

Privately funded incumbent beats out nine publicly-funded opponents in San Francisco mayoral race

· ·

by Reid Schweitzer

Over the last fifteen years, a growing movement in the US has called for the diminution of corporate and special interest money in elections by providing public funds for campaigns. In that time, sixteen states and a number of municipalities have enacted various schemes that provide public financing for candidates for public office, usually with requirements that the candidates abide by spending caps and raise a certain amount of money on their own through small donations.

This past election tested San Francisco’s version of public finance in its mayoral election. The City by the Bay provides $50,000 to any mayoral candidate who can raise at least $25,000 from donations of $100 or less. After that, donations to the candidate are matched at a rate of 4:1, decreasing to 1:1 by the time that candidate reaches the $1,375,000 spending cap imposed on those candidates receiving public financing. In a single election, a candidate may receive as much as $850,000 from the city, unless, as in this election a privately financed campaign exceeds the cap. Thereafter, the cap rises in $100,000 increments as privately financed campaigns continue to spend.

In this election, however, a publicly financed campaign did not take the prize. Interim Mayor Ed Lee won the election on November 8 after funding his campaign through private contributions. Ultimately a total of $2.6 million was spent in support of Lee’s campaign, including nearly one million dollars spent by independent groups. This amount, however, is dwarfed by recent campaigns in San Francisco where, for example, in the 2003 election, former Mayor Gavin Newsom spent $5.1 million. [Read more…] about Privately funded incumbent beats out nine publicly-funded opponents in San Francisco mayoral race

All states (IRV): The courts got it right: recognizing that instant runoff voting makes every vote count

· ·

by: Guest Contributor Elise Helgesen


This November, Instant Runoff Voting (IRV), also called ranked choice voting, will be used for fiercely contested elections for mayor in San Francisco (CA), Portland (ME), and Telluride (CO) as well as for city council elections in St. Paul (MN) and Takoma Park (MD). IRV is also used abroad: Ireland will elect its president with IRV this month, and London will use IRV for mayoral elections in 2012. As recommended by Robert’s Rules of Order, more than 50 American colleges and universities now elect their student leaders with IRV.

With IRV, voters get one vote and one ballot, but get to rank candidates in order of preference. If no candidate wins with a first-choice majority, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and their supporters’ second choices are added to the totals of the remaining candidates in an “instant runoff.” The process of elimination and redistribution continues until one candidate has a majority. [Read more…] about All states (IRV): The courts got it right: recognizing that instant runoff voting makes every vote count