State of Elections

William & Mary Law School | Election Law Society

in-depth article

NRS 304

· ·

A way to quickly replace Congressmen in the event of a terrorist attack or give Democrats a Nevada Republican stronghold?

by Kaitan Gupta

In the world of battleground elections, Nevada’s 2nd Congressional District never received much attention nor should it have.  Since its creation after the 1980 census, it has always been represented by a Republican.  1992 was the only time the Republican candidate did not receive more than 50% of the vote and yet that year Republican Congressman Vucanovich still won the election by more than 12,000 votes/4 points.  The Democrats thought they were closing the gap in the District in 2008 when Senator McCain only won the District by 88 votes, but popular Congressman Dean Heller proved too popular in this conservative District where he widened his “narrow” 12,575 vote/5 point win in 2006 to a 44,000 vote/10 point win in 2008 and a 82,000/30 point win in 2010.  But Democrats attempt at winning this District (which in the past was seen as futile) would get new life thanks to a Republican’s sex scandal, the Nevada Secretary of State Ross Miller, and a Navy war hero.

In May 2011, Senator John Ensign announced his resignation due to an ethics investigation surrounding his extramarital affair with the wife of one of his aids.  Governor Sandoval promptly appointed Dean Heller to fill the rest of Senator Ensign’s term and ordered a special election to be held on September 13, 2011 to elect a new representative for Nevada’s 2nd Congressional District.  But it was Secretary of State Ross Miller’s announcement of how this special election would be run that gave Democrats a chance of winning this Republican stronghold.  One week prior to Governor Sandoval’s announcement, Secretary Miller issued his interpretation of NRS 304.200, the law governing special elections.  He announced that major party candidates could self-nominate and place themselves on the ballot as a major political party candidate whether or not the major political party approved.  Secretary Miller based this interpretation on NRS 304’s language that “no primary election may be held.”   This meant the election would be a free for all and more than 30 candidates were expected to be on the ballot.  Democrats expected many Republicans would file as compared to only a few Democrats making it much easier to elect a Democrat. [Read more…] about NRS 304

A State Divided

· ·

Virginia’s split precinct problem

by Brooks Braun

The 2012 election will soon be upon Virginia. If past elections and the current political climate are reliable guides, the level of participation will once again place enormous pressure on the election administrative apparatus. Will Virginia be prepared? One ominous reason to be skeptical is the recent explosion of split precincts following from the2011 redistricting process.

Split precincts are a normal outcome of every redistricting process. The precinct itself is usually the smallest unit of administration in an election district. However, when the General Assembly draws new district lines that do not follow old precinct lines, a split precinct is created.  In such a precinct, voters don’t all vote for the same offices. For example, some voters in the precinct might vote for a representative to fill state senate seat A, while other voters, in the same precinct, vote for a representative to fill state senate seat B. Precincts can also be split more than once (once by a concessional district line and once more by a state senate line, for instance). It’s like having multiple precincts in one. [Read more…] about A State Divided

Dodging Disclosure

· ·

How the fight over Minnesota campaign finance disclosure requirements may shape the fate of the state’s marriage amendment 

by Stephanie Bitto

The Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board’s October clarification of Minnesota campaign finance laws may have quite an impact on a hot topic at issue in the 2012 election.

In 2012, Minnesota voters will be asked to approve an amendment to the Minnesota constitution that declares marriage as solely the union of one man and one woman. The Minnesota House and Senate passed a bill in May 2011 proposing the amendment. Governor Dayton issued a symbolic veto of the bill on May 25, 2011, but as constitutional amendment legislation cannot be vetoed, it will be up to the voters to determine the amendment’s fate. [Read more…] about Dodging Disclosure

Voters? We don’t need no stinkin’ voters

· ·

Why recent changes to Texas election laws may unintentionally undermine voter turnout

by Daniel Carrico

The Texas Secretary of State is fighting to uphold Texas’s new voter photo identification law against federal scrutiny. The press has reported extensively on the battle brewing between the states and the United States Department of Justice over the impact that voter ID laws will have on voter turnout. Many groups believe that voter ID laws—which require persons to show photo ID before casting their votes—unfairly target minority voters, making it more difficult for them to participate in the democratic process. While the photo ID requirement is the most widely reported change to the Texas election process, it is not the only new roadblock likely to affect voter turnout in the Lone Star State’s upcoming elections.

New Burdens for Voluntary Deputy Voter Registrars

Earlier this year, the Texas legislature bolstered the requirements for persons wishing to serve as deputy voter registrars by passing House Bill 2194 and House Bill 1570.

In Texas, the voter registrar in each county may appoint one or more deputy registrars. Deputy registrars are volunteers who assist in the registration of voters. They distribute applications, help people fill out applications, and generally promote voter registration. [Read more…] about Voters? We don’t need no stinkin’ voters

A community of interest speaks

· ·

by Colleen Nichols

Sussex County, Delaware may have just passed its redistricting plan, but not all members of the Sussex County community were pleased with the proposed districts.  On October 25, 2011, Jo Klinge, member of the League of Women Voters of Sussex County Redistricting Committee and editor of the LWVSC Voter newsletter, testified at the Sussex County Council hearing that the League still had very strong concerns with Sussex County’s proposed redistricting plan. She agreed to speak with me about these concerns.

The League of Women Voters of Sussex County Officers: Left to right: Valerie Driscoll, Cathy Ward, Sheila Zanine, Anne Riley, Jo Klinge (Missing: Esther Shelton) (from http://www.sussexlwv.org/about.html)

Q.  What community of interest does the League of Women Voters of Sussex County represent?

A.  The League does not represent a community of interest as we define the term. Many of our members live in the Cape Region, but we were not speaking for that community.

Q.  What are the goals of the League’s community of interest? [Read more…] about A community of interest speaks