Fourteen Pennsylvania Legislators Introduce a Bill to Further Restrict Voting Rights
February 15th, 2007On January 30, fourteen Pennsylvania Representatives introduced HB 48, which says that write-in votes are void if they are cast for a candidate who was removed from the ballot because his or her petition was insufficient. The sponsors include 8 Democrats and 6 Republicans. The Democrats include Babette Josephs, chair of the committee that will hear the bill (the Committee on State Government).
The bill seems to contradict a 1905 decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Oughton v Black, 61 A 346. On page 348, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court said that the state constitutional provision that elections be “equal” would be violated if voters were not permitted to write-in anyone they please. The Court said, if write-ins were restricted, “the election (as to the voter who cast a write-in vote) would not be equal, for he would not be able to express his own individual will in his own way.”
February 15th, 2007 at 5:20 pm
Good God. Third parties haven’t been punished enough in Pennsylvania?
February 15th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
I don’t think this is directly in response to third-party write-in candidacies. Last year, one faction of the Philadelphia Democratic machine got another faction’s candidate for state representative (for an open seat) knocked off the primary ballot; the latter candidate then ran a write-in campaign and almost won. So this is probably the former faction’s bill.
February 15th, 2007 at 7:07 pm
Hopefully someone will challenge it on the basis of the PA Supreme Court’s decision. If it goes to court again I can’t see how they could overturn their past decision. (Without looking bad)
February 15th, 2007 at 8:16 pm
Babette Josephs, long considered one of the most progressive lawmakers in the Pennsylvania legislature, should be ashamed of herself. The next thing you know they’ll be making it a felony for a voter to attempt to cast a write-in vote for someone who was arbitrarily knocked off the ballot.
February 16th, 2007 at 4:08 am
Pennsylvania state courts don’t seem to worry about looking bad. They’ve already announced that federal constitutional precedent doesn’t apply to them.