The Utah legislature’s Districting Committee settled on boundaries for a 4th seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, on November 29. The Utah Districting Committee is composed of 5 State Senators and 7 Representatives. It exists solely for the task of dividing up the state from 3 U.S. House districts, to 4 districts.

The Utah legislature is in special session, and is expected to pass the new plan early in December. This work anticipates that Congress will pass HR 5388, also in December. HR 5388 would temporarily expand the size of the U.S. House from 435 seats to 437, with the two extra voting seats going to the District of Columbia and Utah. Utah was chosen because the expectation is that the new member from D.C. would be a Democrat, and the new member from Utah would be a Republican, so neither major party would be disadvantaged. The other basis for choosing Utah is that it came closest to “deserving” another seat, when the 2000 census results were translated into seats for each state.

The new Utah congressional district is centered on southwest Utah.

The post made earlier on November 30 discusses U.S. Supreme Court involvement with ballot access cases, or with cases that have ballot access implications. But there are several other interesting election law cases pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Initiative & Referendum Institute is hoping to persuade the U.S. Supreme Court to hear its case against a Utah law that says ordinary initiatives only need 50% to pass, except that if the initiative deals with hunting, it needs 66.67% to pass. The case is Initiative & Referendum Institute v Herbert, no. 06-534. The state’s response was due November 20 but does not seem to have been received yet.

Congressman Robert Wexler, a Florida Democrat, is hoping to persuade the U.S. Supreme Court to hear his case that alleges the U.S. Constitution is offended when some counties in Florida use touch-screen vote-counting machines with no paper trail, whereas other counties do have a paper trail. The case is Wexler v Anderson, no. 06-401. Florida elections officials had received permission from the Court to file a late response, due November 20, but then they decided not to file any response.

During August and September 2006, five ballot-access-related cases were decided by US Courts of Appeals, and one was decided by a State Supreme Court. Since the losing side is permitted to ask for U.S. Supreme Court review, three months after the lower court decision, now is the time when the three months is running out. And, most of these cases are being appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The state of Washington asked for U.S. Supreme Court review in State of Washington v Washington State Republican Party, on November 20, and it is now docketed as 06-730. The Washington Grange filed its own cert petition, no. 06-713.

The state of New York asked for U.S. Supreme Court review on November 29, in New York State Board of Elections v Lopez Torres. It doesn’t have a docket number yet.

As already noted, on November 20, Ralph Nader asked for U.S. Supreme Court review in Nader v Seroty, no. 06-696.

No one knows yet if the state of Ohio will ask for U.S. Supreme Court review in Libertarian Party of Ohio v Blackwell. The state’s petition would be due on December 6.

The state of Illinois says it will appeal Lee v State Board of Elections to the U.S. Supreme Court, if the 7th circuit won’t give it a rehearing, but that state request for a rehearing is still pending.

The Green, Libertarian and Constitution Parties of Pennsylvania say they will appeal Rogers v Corbett to the U.S. Supreme Court if the 3rd circuit won’t give them a rehearing, but that rehearing request is still pending.

The U.S. Supreme Court hasn’t had an election law case (other than on redistricting or campaign finance) since 2005, when it ruled that Oklahoma did not violate the U.S. Constitution by refusing to let the Libertarian Party invite all registered voters to vote in its primary, in Clingman v Beaver.

Only in the last year has Kentucky been keeping a tally of how many voters are registered as members of minor parties. Furthermore, when Kentucky started tallying this information, it excluded the voters who had always been registered in minor parties, and only started counting people who had registered in them after the policy started. Therefore, the numbers have been very small.

Nevertheless, they have risen this year. In May 2006, the numbers were: Libertarian 187, Green 102, Constitution 28, Reform 12, Socialist Workers 0.

Now they are: Libertarian 341, Green 173, Constitution 49, Reform 25, Socialist Workers 15.

Kentucky does this tally for any party that has been on the ballot in the last twenty years and is still in existence.

On December 14, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court will hold a hearing at 1:30 pm. The issue is whether Green Party candidate Carl Romanelli (who had tried to get on the ballot for U.S. Senate) should be required to pay almost $90,000 in court costs. In Pennsylvania, uniquely among the 50 states, when a candidate’s petition is challenged, only state court judges can determine whether the petition has enough valid signatures. The constitutionality of this concept is not being considered by the Commonwealth Court. However, Ralph Nader has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that the whole idea violates the U.S. Constitution.

On November 27, Canada held a special election to fill a vacant seat in Parliament. For the first time, a Green Party nominee placed second, outpolling two parties that regularly elect members to the Canadian Parliament. The election was in London-North-Centre, Ontario Province. The district has a large student population. The University of Western Ontario is in this district.

Seven candidates appeared on the ballot. The results were: Liberal 34.9%; Green 25.9%; Conservative 24.4%; New Democratic 14.1%. The other seven-tenths of 1% was split among the Progressive Canadian Party, the Canadian Action Party, and an independent candidate.

Ballot access in Canada, as well as in Great Britain, is equal for all candidates. A petition of 100 signatures plus a filing fee is required for everyone.

On November 28, elections officials in Pennsylvania finished two recounts for State House of Representatives. The results show that Democrats have the narrowest possible margin in the House. There will be 102 Democrats and 101 Republicans when the new State House convenes. This result is somewhat surprising, since the tallies on election night showed Republicans were more likely to control the house. The final result turned on the outcome in the 156th district, which Democrats won by 23 votes.

Representative Paul Clymer, a Republican, will no longer be chair of the House committee that handles ballot access. No one knows whom the new chair will be. Representative Clymer has been obstructing ballot access reform in Pennsylvania for the past several years, and he won’t be missed.

On September 26, 2006, a New York Supreme Court Justice dismissed a defamation lawsuit that a large corporation had filed against Workers World Party and its newspaper, Workers World. Renco Group v Workers World Party, Manhatten, 102875-06. The party’s newspaper had written that the owners of WCI Steel were underfunding the workers’ pension funds. The decision said that the newspaper had “employed colorful rhetoric that is the hallmark of hyperbole”, and that its article was opinion, and therefore immune from any lawsuit alleging defamation or libel.

The only nationally-organized minor party that elected any state legislators this month was the Constitution Party, in Montana. Greens and Libertarians had expected to elect some also.

Greens already had one state representative in Maine, John Eder of Portland. He was defeated for re-election in a 2-person race with 48.4% of the vote, in the 118th House district.

In Maine’s 119th House district, Green Matthew Reading polled 41.8% in a 3-party race, easily defeating his Republican opponent but losing to his Democratic opponent by about 150 votes.

In Maine’s 120th House district, Green Ben Meiklejohn, a member of the Portland School Board, polled 43.1% in a two-person race, losing to an incumbent Democrat.

Easing the sting for Maine Greens was the fact that they elected their first members to the Portland City Council. City council elections are non-partisan. Kevin Donaghue, 27, won his 3-person race with 47.4% of the vote. David Marshall, 28, won his 3-way race with 45.4% of the vote. No Portland Green member had ever before been elected to the Portland city council, which has nine members.

Portland’s School Committee continues to have four Greens, from a total membership of nine. One incumbent Green was defeated for re-election, but in another district, Greens gained a member.

Libertarians hoped for some legislative victories in Vermont, since five Libertarians had won the Republican primary, as well as the Libertarian convention nomination. However, all five were defeated in the general election. The closest showing was in the Rutland 5-1 House district, where Jeff Manney lost a two-person race with 43.6% of the vote. The second closest showing was in the Grand Isle-Chitten House district, where Hardy Machia lost a two-person race with 37.2% of the vote. The others polled 24.0%, 30.2%, and 28.9%.

The presidential nominee of a new party, or an independent candidate, will need approximately 690,000 valid signatures to get on the ballot of all 50 states and D.C. in 2008. This assumes the candidate is pragmatic and uses the easier method to get on the ballot in each state. In some states the independent method is easier; in others the new party procedure is easier. “Easier” is defined as the procedure used more often in the past. Thus, in California, where the independent procedure has been used more often than the new party procedure during the last 35 years, the independent petition is in the tally, not the new party method.

In 2004, the requirement was 634,727. The states in which the requirements went up most sharply are Arizona and Michigan, because they had much higher turnout in 2006 than in 2002. Also West Virginia is much higher, because turnout in 2004 was much higher than in 2000.

The 2008 requirement is the highest number since 1992, when it was 695,208.

The full party petition procedures for New Hampshire and Oklahoma are not in the tally. Interestingly, both of them are somewhat easier in 2008 than they were in 2004, because of lower voter turnout in those two states in 2006 than in 2002. In New Hampshire, the full party petition in 2004 was 13,260, but for 2008 it will be 12,106. And in Oklahoma, it was 51,781 in 2004 but will be 46,324 in 2008, although that number may rise slightly before the official tally is complete.