State of Elections

William & Mary Law School | Election Law Society

Category: Tennessee (page 1 of 2)

Abortion and the Constitution – Voter Rights in Tennessee

By: Caroline Drinnon

In November 2014, Tennesseans voted, through a referendum, on a proposed Constitutional amendment known as Amendment 1. The campaign was one of the most publicized and most expensive in the state’s history. The amendment passed with 53% of the vote. It reads “[n]othing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion,” effectively giving state legislators unchecked power to ban abortion as far as the U.S. Supreme Court allows. Since its enactment, the Tennessee legislature has passed bills that ban abortion after 20-weeks of pregnancy and require a 48-hour waiting period before an abortion can be performed.

Continue reading

Tennessee Looks to Encourage Voter Turnout With Some Help from the Digital Age

By: Caroline Drinnon

As of September 2017, Tennessee joined the ranks of another 35 states, plus the District of Colombia, in enacting an online voter registration system. Following a 2016 law that mandated an online voter registration system be in place by July (later extended to September) of 2017, the Tennessee Secretary of State’s office officially opened the website on September 1. Proponents of the system believe that it will streamline the registration system, reduce clerical errors, and lower taxpayer costs of the process. The registration process can be found here and requires a Tennessee driver’s license or Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland Security ID to be completed.

Continue reading

The Voter ID Law that No One is Talking About: Why Voting Rights Activists Should Take Notice of Tennessee

By Staff Writer

With the Supreme Court recently issuing a flurry of orders and stays on the implementation of certain states’ voter ID laws—allowing some to be in effect for the 2014 midterms, but blocking another—there has been no shortage of attention on voting rights developments. While states, such as Texas and North Carolina, are often criticized for having some of the strictest voter ID laws in the country, little scrutiny has been placed on another state’s voter ID requirement that is arguably just as burdensome and theoretically more primed for a constitutional challenge: Tennessee. Continue reading

Tennessee Takes a Third Option

by Christopher L. Rollins, Contributor

In the face of the recent government shutdown, neither of the established major political parties is maintaining a positive image with the average voter. Fortunately for some dissatisfied Tennessee voters, minority parties have slowly increased ballot access over the last few years. Continue reading

Election plans fail

by Timothy Huffstutter

At least one plan for selecting judges in Tennessee is now totally off the table. For my previous posts on the debate in the Tennessee General Assembly see here and here. Last week, the House Judiciary Committee voted 7-7 on Representative Glen Casada’s (R-Franklin) plan to elect judges and justices in contested elections. As a result of the tie vote, one vote shy of the majority needed to advance the bill, legislators now have only two proposals in front of them.

Casada was clearly displeased with the rejection of his proposal: “I’m disappointed to say the least.”  He went on to contend that “[t]he constitution governs how we do business and do public policy in the state. To be out of compliance is wrong. If you can’t comply with the most basic, how can you trust us to comply with other parts of the law as well?” Executive Director of the Tennessee Bar Association Allan Ramsaur was not convinced: “Let’s get away from this myth that what we have is not an elected system. We do elect judges, we just don’t have contests which lead to partisanship and big money influence.”

Now, Tennessee legislators are considering the two remaining plans in the rush before the legislative session ends at the end of April. Lieutenant Governor Ron Ramsey (R-Blountville) hopes that legislators will approve both plans and then come back in the next session to make a final decision. The first proposal amends the state constitution to explicitly provide for the current system—the so-called Tennessee Plan. The second proposal would mirror the federal judicial selection system (nomination by the executive with confirmation from the upper house of the legislature).

Legislators have to make a decision before the end of this legislative session. Should the Tennessee Senate approve both plans, then the new General Assembly, which will convene in January 2013, could pick up the stalemate. If the General Assembly fails to make any decision, then the debate will rage on into the next session.

For further coverage see the Knoxville News Sentinel and the Missouri News Horizon.

Timothy Huffstutter is a third-year student at William and Mary Law.

Permalink: http://electls.blogs.wm.edu/?p=4346

He was declared the father of barrys child http://www.pro-academic-writers.com and ordered to pay maintenance?

Weekly Wrap Up

“I want to be your second (or third) choice!”: Jean Quan, Oakland’s mayor-elect, won under the city’s new ranked-choice system by concentrating on being voters’ second and third choice, if they were voting for someone else. The campaign manager for Don Pereta, the heavy favorite in the race, said Quan was “gaming the system” by asking people who supported other candidates to rank her second or third.

Too poor to vote: The ACLU is challenging a Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals 2-1 decision that Tennessee could bar three released felons who were behind on child support or restitution from regaining their voting rights. The ACLU is asking for the court to rehear the case en banc, arguing that the decision creates an unconstitutional poll tax.

Sound it out: In the Alaska Senate race, the Division of Elections has only accepted a few of Joe Miller’s challenges to the spelling of his opponent, Lisa Murkowski’s, name on the write-in ballots.  The Director of the Division of Elections said that she was accepting minor spelling mistakes as long as she could “pronounce the name by the way it’s spelled.”

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain: The spending from outside groups in this campaign season has reached record highs, climbing almost to the $300 million mark.  Now, a new study has shown that nearly half of that money comes from groups which won’t reveal the money’s source.  A few notable candidates who used a huge amount of their personal fortunes are Meg Whitman in California and Linda McMahon in Connecticut.  They spent $140 million and $46 million respectively.

Weekly Wrap Up

Every week, State of Elections brings you the latest news in state election law.

– Soon, even a candidate’s tweets will be governed by a legion of rules and regulations.  The Maryland Board of Elections is attempting to devise rules for the use of social media by candidates.

– The Tennessee Senate has passed a bill that would require potential voters to show proof of citizenship before registering.  The state Attorney General believes that the law could potentially violate the federal Motor Voter Act.

– Congressman Michael Capuano has written an editorial for the Boston Herald about Citizens United and the proposed Shareholder Protection Act.  For more about shareholder protection and Citizens United, see this post by William and Mary law professor William Van Alstyne.

– The recent British election and the swift transfer of power from Gordon Brown to David Cameron has some wondering how the U.S. could reduce the time between elections and inaugurations.  See this article from Slate for a proposal for how such a reduction could be accomplished without a constitutional amendment.

Pedro A. Cortés, Pennsylvania’s Secretary of the Commonwealth and the top election official in that state, has resigned. Cortés will be pursuing opportunities in the private sector, as vice president of a voting technology company.

Treves then www.pro-essay-writer.com cut into the abscess and the pus was discharged

Citizens United and the States

Last Updated: May 21, 2010 (new links for NY, CO)

LINKS BY STATE:

Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Iowa, Kansas, MarylandMassachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming

General Links
Judicial Election Links

OVERVIEW OF IMPACT OF CITIZENS UNITED ON THE STATES:

State of Elections tracks new, important, and interesting topics in the world of state election law. We focus on voting at the local level, as determined by state and local level election laws and practices. The Supreme Court’s decision in the Citizens United v. FEC has obvious implications at the federal level, but it also has dramatic impact on the states. Many state laws already in place will soon be challenged by lawsuits or altered by the legislatures. At the time of the ruling, 24 states have bans or restrictions on corporate campaign expenditures, most of which have major positions up for election this fall. Each will certainly be seeing some action, either by challenge or repeal, prior to November. Regarding this decision, two main areas of concern are its effect on state corporate disclosure laws and state judicial elections.

Disclosure

While Congress certainly will make plans to outline the level of transparency designed for federal elections, many of those 24 states affected will, if they have not already, enact or alter legislation requiring a certain level disclosure for state and other local elections. These new laws may take many forms including perhaps specifications on when and how to make the contribution disclosures public. State legislatures also have the ability to alter corporate governance rules within the State and may require entities to acquire shareholder permission before engaging in political contribution activity. Other disclosure regulations may aim at creating a mechanism for ensuring that corporations are not working in tandem with the candidates. Essentially, states have some control over the effectiveness of the CU decision by controlling laws involving corporate entities. State legislatures will move quickly to secure proper regulation is in place before this fall’s elections.

Judicial Elections

Not to be lost in this decision is the effect that it will have on Judiciaries across the states. While some states had already allowed it, now corporations nationwide are permitted to spend unlimited amounts of money advocating judicial elections and retention elections. Recently, the policy of electing judges has taken the spotlight Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co. and leads some to question what sort of impact CU will have. Some believe elected judges will simply have to keep close watch over themselves and which cases they must recuse due to impartiality. Others believe CU will have an accelerating effect on the merit-selection movement by bringing to public attention the effect of campaign contributions on elected judges (perhaps leading to their abolition, or for more states to enact legislation for publicly-funded elections.) Still others believe this decision will have little or no measurable impact on elections.

Below are some links to reports and articles on the decision’s effect on states broadly and individually. We welcome contributions here at State of Elections. If you come across any useful articles or information regarding the Citizens United decision and how it affects your state we will gladly include it in our discussion.

Back to top

BY STATE:

ALASKA

AK – Alaska Senate passe campaign finance bill which would require notice of who or what is funding political ads in television or newspaper. “Keep in mind that this bill…changes only these new communications brought by corporations and unions,” said Sen. Hollis French.

http://www.adn.com/2010/04/01/1208444/senate-passes-campaign-finance.html

April 1, 2010

AK – Alaska Attorney General Dan Sullivan released an opinion on 2/19 regarding CU’s impact on AK declaring the state’s corporate spending prohibition laws unconstitutional, but may still not donate directly to candidates. It is also clear that they cannot spend anonymously, but unclear where the line is drawn. The state democrats in the legislature are moving forward with legislation which would require the top 5 contributors to an advertisement as well as filing a complete report with the Alaska Public Offices Commission.

http://www.adn.com/2010/02/22/1152069/campaign-finance-bill-tailored.html

February 22, 2010

AK – Suggestions by John Havelock on making corporations ‘more democratic’ and speaks of some necessary and likely reforms such as disclosure commitments to shareholders as well as transparency with the people.

http://www.adn.com/opinion/comment/havelock/story/1137288.html

February 12, 2010

AK – With less than 70 days left in the session, the AK State legislature is scrambling to get a bill through before they adjourn. State Senate Judiciary Committee has asked legislative lawyers to draft a bill requiring disclosures, disclaimers and reporting by corporations and labor unions as a first step.

http://www.adn.com/news/government/legislature/story/1135449.html

February 12, 2010

AK – Legislative Panel to Discuss CU. Alaska has laws for disclosure for non-profits and individuals but had a ban on corporate spending of this type before CU. The panel will make it a priority to determine what sort of limitations, if any, are possible, before the election this fall.

http://www.newsminer.com/view/full_story/5765498/article-Alaska-lawmaker–Panel-to–contain–campaign-court-decision-?instance=home_news_window_left_bullets

February 3, 2010

Back to Top

ARIZONA

AZ – Disclosure bill was signed by Gov. Jan Brewer on April 1st. This requires corporations and labor unions to file campaign finance reports with SOS office within one day of spending $5000 on statewide race, $2500 on legislative race, and $1000 in county or local race. Also, all campaign ads must ‘state clearly’ who paid for them. Interesting to note the bill passed unanimously in both the House and Senate.

http://azcapitoltimes.com/blog/2010/04/01/brewer-signs-campaign-finance-law/

April 1, 2010

AZ – Commentary by Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett on the need for enacting legislation to require disclosure. Senate Bill 1444 and House Bill 2788 will bring AZ into compliance with CU while specifically requiring:

-Corporations, unions or LLCs to file reports within 24 hours of making campaign expenditure over certain amounts ($5k for statewide, $2.5k forlegislative, or $1k for local)

-Additional reports to be filed for each subsequent expense beyond those amounts

All will be reported to a web-based system to provide voters with nearly real time. The legislation has bipartisan support.

http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/151770

March 12, 2010

AZ – Focusing on Arizona’s law development, this article outlines some different methods state legislatures have attempted to comply with CU. Arizona intends to enact new legislation for disclosure and reporting that go beyond current requirements for independent committees (which is described in the article as the ‘middle of the road’ approach.) Thanks to electionlawblog.org for the link.

http://azcapitoltimes.com/blog/2010/03/05/states-rush-to-catch-up-with-campaign-finance-ruling/

March 5, 2010

AZ – Arizona Secretary of State, Ken Bennett, backs overhaul of informed electorate in light of CU. Two bills have cleared committees and are awaiting debate on each chamber’s floors. The article ends on a thought provoking quote by AZ House Rep. Bill Konopnicki, “I’m concerned that we don’t have the time to fully vet these components.”

http://azcapitoltimes.com/blog/2010/02/25/bennett-backs-campaign-reporting-requirements-stiff-

February 25, 2010

Back to Top

CALIFORNIA

CA – LA Times and LA Weekly differ on how they believe this will impact Los Angeles, perhaps affecting developers and billboards. It will be easier for corporations to donate than in years past where they first had to form a PAC or contribute to an advocacy group.

http://laist.com/2010/02/18/how_will_the_supreme_courts_decisio.php

February 18, 2010

CA – Details about CU impact, while briefly looking into California’s history of limitless corporate spending over the last decade.

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/01/22/2480902/high-court-lifts-limits-on-corporate.html

January 22, 2010

Back to top

COLORADO

CO – A new bill was introduced which would require any corporate entity to register an independent committee if donating $1,000 or more. Also included is a illustrative fact sheet which serves as somewhat of a guide to the background behind the bill proposal.

http://www.lawweekonline.com/2010/04/colo-lawmakers-respond-to-citizens-united-with-campaign-disclosure-measure/

April 26, 2010

CO – A bill will be introduced this year into the state legislature which would attempt to limit the impact of CU by adding disclosure requirements. CO Republicans are still thinking about suing the state to overturn parts of the state’s current campaign-finance law.

http://durangoherald.com/sections/News/2010/03/24/Campaignfinance_ruling_gets_response/

March 24, 2010

CO – Governor Bill Ritter, has been granted his request of review current campaign finance laws. Lawmakers and other interested parties brief’s on the constitutional determination of their laws are due March 5th.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/politics/22542389/detail.html

February 12, 2010

CO – Legislature to ask Supreme Court for Clarification on how CU Affects State laws.

http://www.lawweekonline.com/2010/02/ritter-and-legislature-to-ask-supreme-court-for-guidance-on-citizens-united/

February 3, 2010

CO – GOP initiates lawsuit in response to CU. A 2002, Colorado voters approved a ballot measure that banned direct corporate or union expenditures in state race is sought to be overturned. Candidates believe this will affect the campaigns this fall.

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_14243394

January 22, 2010

Back to top

CONNECTICUT

CT – Act proposed “To provide that independent expenditures made by an entity are properly disclosed and ensure that such expenditures are properly attributed to the entity making the expenditure.”

http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillstatus/cgabillstatus.asp?selBillType=Bill&bill_num=5471&which_year=2010

March 12, 2010

CT – Memo for State General Assembly summarizing Citizens United and its impact on CT:

-Two statutes that prohibit corporations and unions from contributing, also noting that there are no disclosure or attribution requirements, which the state is likely to adjust after removal

-Also discusses public financing and has created a compelling state interest in becoming more active in matching grants and enabling candidate participation.

Also included is a table of state responses which is current as of publication.

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2010/rpt/2010-R-0124.htm

March 2, 2010

Back to top

HAWAII

HI – Hawaii state leaders can do a few things in reaction to CU:

-Limit and disclose corporate political spending

-Uphold our “pay to play” reform laws

-Ensure (timely) campaign reporting for special elections

-Disclose lobbyists’ campaign donations

http://www.starbulletin.com/editorials/20100223_Choose_democracy_over_dollars.html

February 23, 2010

Back to top

IOWA

IA – Iowa Governor Chet Culver signed into law today the finance provisions outlined below, which aims to regulate the consequences of the Supreme Court decision in order to ensure proper disclosure of campaign spending.

http://www.governor.iowa.gov/index.php/press_releases/single/469/

April 8, 2010

IA – The Senate passed a bill 49-1 to require corporations and unions to publicly disclose when they spend more than $750 on independent campaigns. Any commercials would also have to identify the company or union who paid for the ad. This is an edited down version of the originally proposed bill which had included a shareholder approval requirement and the ability for shareholders to withhold their own funds from the donation.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20100302/NEWS09/3020376/1001/

March 2, 2010

IA – The Iowa legislature is moving to pass Senate Study Bill 3210. Some highlighted provisions:

-Requiring disclaimers on advertisements paid for by corporations.

-Requiring board, CEO or stockholder approval before a corporation can use funds for independent expenditures.

-Prohibiting foreign-controlled companies from playing any role in Iowa elections.

http://www.senate.iowa.gov/democrats/legislature-moves-to-protect-iowa-elections

February 11, 2010

Back to top

KANSAS

KS – While no law in Kansas has been directly affected by the CU decision, it appears an indirect effect has been to encourage some change. A new bill, which is being stalled at the moment, would change a requirement in companies who donate more than $150 to a campaign. The bill would change the confusing requirement of listing the industry that the donating corporation is in to listing the actual name of the corporation.

http://cjonline.com/news/legislature/2010-03-15/campaign_finance_bill_likely_stalled

March 15, 2010

Back to top

MARYLAND

MD – Article discusses generally about the options of states and specifically about a MD  ‘package of bills to limit the worst aspects of the decision’ which propose to:

-Require a majority shareholder or union member vote to approve specific expenditure

-Banning “pay to play” which would prevent state funded organizations from campaign expenditures

-Compelling public disclosure of all political disbursements by corporations and unions

This article includes more quotes than a similar one listed below.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/12/AR2010031203149.html

March 13, 2010

MD – Testimony of Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, Counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice, before the Judicial Proceedings Committee, Maryland Senate. Section II deals with specific effects of Maryland as to corporate spending, pay to play laws, and the role of the Maryland voter. Torres-Spelliscy outlines the measures she believes need be taken in Maryland to, “Reclaim a Voter-Based Democracy.”

http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/testimony_for_the_maryland_senate_judicial_proceedings_committee/

February 25, 2010

MD – Supporters in MD have already begun a movement for public financing for elections with a bill. The bill would create a voluntary public financing system in MD General Assembly campaigns. Similar legislation has previously passed the house but failed in the senate. Supporters hope the high court’s decision will spur the change.

http://www.herald-mail.com/?cmd=displaystory&story_id=240353&format=html

February 23, 2010

MD – Democratic senators and delegates outline a set of bills to restrict corporate spending in state elections. Those mentioned in article:

-Requiring corporate executives to get two-thirds approval of shareholders for a political expenditure.

-Prohibiting businesses with state contracts worth more than $5,000 from engaging in such efforts.

-Mandating disclosures of corporate expenditures to the state Board of Elections.

http://www.hometownannapolis.com/news/top/2010/01/29-07/Court-decision-spurs-campaign-finance-concerns.html

January 29, 2010

Back to top

MASSACHUSETTS

MA – Statement from Office of Campaign and Political Finance interpreting the decision noting most importantly that direct contributions are still prohibited

http://www.ocpf.net/legaldoc/citizensunitedstatement.pdf

January 2010

Back to top

MICHIGAN

MI – GavelGrap reports a watchdog group, Michigan Campaign Finance Network, is urging the SoS to help enact rigorous financial disclosure rules following CU. $45 million in television campaign advertisements have gone unreported since 2000, including almost a third of that being independent expenditures on state Supreme Court races. The Michigan Chamber of Commerce has also asked the SoS for a declaratory ruling on how CU affects MI state law.

http://www.gavelgrab.org/?p=9031

March 17, 2010

MI – Department of State response to CU. A corporation, union or domestic dependent sovereign must register a political committee under the MCFA after spending $500.00 or more in independent expenditures in support of or opposition to state or local candidates in a calendar year.

http://www.michigan.gov/sos/0,1607,7-127-1633_8723_15274-230880–,00.html

January 2010

Back to top

MINNESOTA

MN – The Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board this week voted unanimously to ask staff to draft a memorandum on CU. Gary Goldsmith, Campaign Finance Board Executive Director believes their current statute will still apply in some way, “We’re just trying to figure out how to make it apply.”

http://politicsinminnesota.com/blog/2010/04/campaign-finance-board-weighs-post-citizens-united-rules/

April 7, 2010

MN – Minnesota’s first test? Minnesota Chamber of Commerce is filing suit to challenge state law that limits their spending in light of CU.

http://www.startribune.com/politics/state/84660767.html

Copy of the complaint:

http://assets.bizjournals.com/cms_media/twincities/pdf/Chamber%20campaign%20spending%20suit.pdf

February 16, 2010

MN – Current MN restrictions on corporate express advocacy and formation of PACS are now unconstitutional. David Schultz reccomends three options:

(1) Take the current state disclosure laws and make them applicable to corporations.

(2) Increased disclosure, perhaps mandate that any corporate expenditure must be disclosed at the time it is made.

(3) Increased disclosure requirements for any corporate PACs (to watch for foreign involvement, or require shareholder approval, etc.)

http://www.minnpost.com/community_voices/2010/01/26/15279

January 26, 2010

Back to top

MISSOURI

MO – Missouri lifted limits on campaign contributions in 2008. New changes to MO campaign finance law are being proposed along with new ethics legislation this session, but it is unlikely to pass with the current similar makeup of represenatives which lifted the limits just two years ago.

http://www.mpnblog.com/2010/02/super-majority-of-americans-oppose.html

February 21, 2010

Back to top

MONTANA

MT – A lawsuit has been filed in Helena in order to attempt to overturn the state’s current ban on corporate spending in elections. The law currently reads, a “corporation may not make a contribution on an expenditure with a candidate.” The owner of the corporation challenging, Champion Painting, has said he wishes to exercise first amendment rights against rising taxation and regulation.

http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/news/article_4ca5b7b2-2b15-11df-8778-001cc4c03286.html

March 9, 2010

MT – Montana has individual limitations on spending already in place, but enacting similar legislation to corporations is now likely unconstitutional. Difficulties are cited with new inability to regulate spending based on the identity of the speaker. Low budget elections in states like Montana may see the biggest impact. The average state senator in Montana’s 2008 election won by spending only $17,000.

http://www.stateline.org/live/details/story?contentId=461354

February 18, 2010

MT – Statement by Attorney General Steve Bullock with a brilliant overview of Montana’s history with corporate spending on elections and looking forward to future legislation in the state.

http://doj.mt.gov/news/releases2010/20100202testimony.pdf

February 2, 2010

MT – Montana’s 1912 voter-passed ban on corporate donations is up for challenge. Removing the ban means that currently there are no limits on corporations spending.

http://www.missoulian.com/news/state-and-regional/article_38bedc7e-0919-11df-baa6-001cc4c03286.html

January 24, 2010
Back to top

NEW HAMPSHIRE

NH– Bill in NH was passed from the House now on to the Senate in New Hampshire which would update their ban on corporate spending by requiring any independent expenditure over $500 to be reported by noon the first business day after spent. Also, businesses and labor unions are required to display a statement of disclosure in at least 12% of the vertical screen throughout the ad with an audio announcement.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2010/HB1367.html

March 11, 2010

Back to top

NEW JERSEY

NJ – Bipartisan commission led by Senator Bill Baroni (R – Mercer, Middlesex) to review NJ’s campaign finance laws, ” to ensure that we do everything we can.”

http://vip.politickernj.com/bschnure/36302/baroni-calls-bi-partisan-commission-campaign-finance-laws

January 21, 2010

Back to top

NEW YORK

NY – An overview article which discusses the CU decision, New York’s current state of law with independent expenditures, and some possible measures for the future in discussion.

http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/Governing/20100517/17/3269

May 2010

NY – NY Lesiglature proposed a bill with specific disclosure requirements for corporate shareholders:
-Majority approval for yearly spending
-Annual report to each shareholder and SoS with specific donations
-Provide a business rationale for each donation
Penalties for not abiding are not specified, but would be left up to the SoS. It is still uncertain whether it would apply to unions, but the bill does apply to not-for-profit corporations. It may be up to the unions to declare themselves that classification

http://www.timesunion.com/ASPStories/Story.asp?StoryID=921791&LinkFrom=RSS

April 15, 2010

NY – New York State Assembly introduced a bill which would require corporate contributions for independent expenditures to have shareholder approval. Although New York has no direct laws affected by CU, this appears to be an indirect result of the ruling.

http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld=%0D%0A&bn=a9948%09%09&Summary=Y&Actions=Y

February 17, 2010

Back to top

NORTH CAROLINA

NC– State legislature has been bouncing around the idea of publicly financed elections for the State’s largest cities. The CU decision is cited as the primary motivation. It is too early to tell at this point whether the Senate will address the pending bill in the short summer session.

http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/legislature-could-tackle-publicly-funded-elections-other-campaign-finance-reform/Content?oid=1330592

March 27, 2010

NC– Gary Bartlett, executive director of the State Board of Elections, said the ruling is likely to result in even more out-of-state money being spent to influence local races. Some think the ruling could result in greater transparency about precisely who is behind a television attack ad, or influence citizens to favor public financing.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/01/22/298024/ruling-likely-to-transform-nc.html?storylink=misearch#ixzz0k0JJ3ln0

January 21, 2010

Back to top

OHIO

OH – Ohio will have to modify currrent ban on campaign contributions. Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner believes a direct impact will be more political TV advertising.

http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/national_world/stories/2010/01/22/copy/ohio_impact.ART_ART_01-22-10_A1_RIGCIFR.html?sid=101

January 22, 2010

Back to top

OKLAHOMA

OK – In a quick fix, Oklahoma State Senate voted 24-21 to alter the definitions in campaign finance to essentially delete the prohobition of corporate expenditures.

http://www.oksenate.gov/legislation/votes/02066.pdf

March 11, 2010

Back to top

PENNSYLVANIA

PA – Pennsylvannia will review it’s statute to determine if the CU “directly controls” it. Reaction comments from both PA US Senators Arlen Specter and Bob Casey as well as some reactions of PA watchdog groups are included.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10022/1030197-84.stm

January 22, 2010

Back to top

SOUTH DAKOTA

SD – Secretary of State Chris Nelson is preparing legislation to conform with the CU ruling. The deadline for state government agencies to introduce new legislation has passed, so Nelson is likely to ask that a minor bill on campaign laws be amended to include the new provisions.

http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/news/article_2ffac8e6-09d2-11df-a7a9-001cc4c03286.html

January 25, 2010

Back to top

TENNESSEE

TN – A debate over definitions of ‘foreign corporations’ and how they may be able to spend in the state took a grip on a question not yet often asked; Can a corporation that is based in another state independently spend money in a different states election? The new bill, proposed by House Democratic Caucus Chairman Mike Turner, would disallow “foreign corporations” from putting money into TN politics and defines foreign as anyone who would not be able to vote for the candidate. While this was an interesting debate, it caused much confusion and was ultimately abandoned for a number of reasons, including potential unconstitutionality.

http://blogs.knoxnews.com/humphrey/2010/03/corporate-donations-bill-trans.html

March 8, 2010

TN – A call for legalizing direct corporate campaign contribution. Good quotes from Ron Ramsey, candidate for state senator, about how he cannot control the messages corporations can now advertise in his support (as long as it isn’t direct).

http://blogs.nashvillescene.com/pitw/2010/02/ramsey_calls_for_legalizing_co.php

February 2, 2010

TN – A bill has been proposed in the house which would revise current TN ban on corporate spending to only ban the spending by corporations that “do not have the authority to transact business within the state.” Thanks to Tennessean.com

http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/billinfo/BillSummaryArchive.aspx?BillNumber=HB3182&ga=106

A co-sponsor of the legislation, Representative Kent Coleman , is quoted below:

http://blogs.tennessean.com/politics/2010/lawmakers-want-corporations-to-disclose-campaign-contributions/

January 29, 2010

Back to top

TEXAS

TX – Texas has historic moment as it witnesses it’s first ad for a candidate placed by a corporation .

http://www.texastribune.org/stories/2010/mar/22/corporate-politics/
Also, Huffington:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/23/campaign-ads-supreme-cour_n_510273.html

March 22, 2010

TX – David Schenck in a Guest Column for The Texas Tribune asks an interesting question: Will CU help to aid the end of judicial elections in Texas and nationwide?

http://www.texastribune.org/stories/2010/feb/02/guest-column-end-judicial-elections/

Feb 2, 2010

Back to top

UTAH

UT– Utah is examining its campaign contributions as ‘free speech.’ Perhaps they were encouraged by either the public’s reaction to it or the decision of Citizens United itself.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700013182/Utah-Legislature-Committee-guts-bill-to-cap-campaign-contributions.html

March 1, 2010

Back to top

VERMONT

VT – The house judiciary committee voted 10-0 to reccomend passage  of large bill which included an alteration of campaign finance law. Under the bill would be a reporting requirement of any spending over $500 on an election message within 30 days of an election. There still remains a possibility that this will be rewritten.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20100314/NEWS03/3140304/Rush-of-bills-pass-from-Vermont-legislative-committees

March 14, 2010

VT – State of Elections interview with former state senator and representative Matt Dunne about how Citizens United will affect VT. The Entergy-owned Vemont Yankee nuclear plant that has recently been found to be leaking tritium is likely to be a major player in the gubernatorial race this fall in light of the high courts decision. Dunne is running to be the democratic candidate in the election.

http://electls.blogs.wm.edu/2010/03/03/vermont-and-citizens-united-an-interview-with-gubernatorial-candidate-matt-dunne

March 3, 2010

VT – Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Sears is pushing (as co-sponsor) for a new campaign finance bill to be passed and go into effect in the 2010 election in response to CU. Governor Jim Douglas is supportive of some ideas, but does not believe the bill should apply to this year’s campaign as he does not wish to “change rules in an election season.”

http://www.vpr.net/news_detail/87290/

February 24, 2010

VT – Citizens United decision may undermine case of Vermont Right to Life’s ability to advertise politically without reporting who is funding them.

http://www.7dvt.com/2010u-s-supreme-court-ruling-may-protect-vermonts-campaign-disclosure-laws

February 10, 2010

Back to top

WEST VIRGINIA

WV – Brennan Center reports on the passing of HR 4647 which will improve disclosure and disclaimer rules regarding corporate spending on independent expenditures over $1,000. Anyone who provides over $250 for that will also be disclosed. The filings will be posted online. Also is an improved “stand by your ad” disclaimer provision requiring clear identification of the persons responsible for it within the ad itself.

http://www.brennancenter.org/blog/archives/west_virginia_moves_on_corporate_campaign_finance_disclosure/

March 19, 2010

WV – The House of Delegates passed two measures this week regarding disclosure of those donating to campaigns, including an attempt require corporations to disclose its donations to its shareholders. While two similar bills have already been defeated, this bill still faces a tough challenge with claims of “loopholes” and “vaugeness.” But the House democrats are hopeful that at least the bill to trigger disclosure reporting and transparency. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Jeff Kessler asks, “Are we going to start seeing the Chik-fil-a West Virginia Secretary of State Bowl, or the Gatorade Gubernatorial Election?”

http://sundaygazettemail.com/ap/ApTopStories/201003020633

March 2, 2010

WY – HB68 will update Wyomings current ban on corporations from contributingg any promotion of election of any candidate to conform with CU. The new law will effectively read that it does not limit corporations “from exercising its first amendment rights to make independent expenditures for speech expressly advocating the election or defeat of a candidate.” However, the bill failed to acquire the necessary 2/3rds vote required during a budget session. A reintroduction attempt is likely.

http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2010/Introduced/HB0068.pdf

February 10, 2010

Back to top

WISCONSIN

WI – The WI Senate passed a bill which would require notice to be filed with election officials that they obtained approval from shareholder majority. The vote would have to be retaken every two years. Interestingly, they also voted against an amendment which would apply the same standard to unions (a republican amendment 18-15 against).

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/90790429.html

April 13, 2010

WI – An opinion article written by Wisconsin’s lieutenant governor, Barbara Lawton, describes a way to ‘blunt’ the Supreme Court’s decision in CU: Public financing for elections. She says the bills are written and waiting for their sponsors to move forward with it. While it would not directly address the issue of independent expenditures, it would level the playing field without specifically adding limits to traditional campaign donations, which she believes is being treated with increased skepticism.

http://www.tomahjournal.com/articles/2010/03/01/opinion/02lawtoncolumn.txt

March 1, 2010

WI – Opinion article from Andrea Kaminski on how CU might affect judicial elections in the state

http://www.wisopinion.com/index.iml?mdl=article.mdl&article=25984

February 2, 2010

WI – Wisconsin, with a wide open race for governor this fall, stands to feel heavy impact from CU. Most likely in the form of 30-60 second negative and/or demoralizing TV ads.

http://wispolitics.com/index.iml?Article=184135

February 2, 2010

WI – VIDEO: Campaign 2010 panel that featured attorney Mike Wittenwyler, Jay Heck of Common Cause of Wisconsin, UW-Madison Associate Professor Howard Schweber, and Jonathan Becker, a division administrator for Wisconsin’s Government Accountability Board, which enforces campaign finance laws, debate what the CU ruling means for Wisconsin

http://www.wiseye.org/wisEye_programming/campaign10/ARCHIVES-CPN10_GOV.html#3102

January 28, 2010

Back to top

WYOMING

WY – HB68 will update Wyomings current ban on corporations from contributing any promotion of election of any candidate to conform with CU. The new law will effectively read that it does not limit corporations “from exercising its first amendment rights to make independent expenditures for speech expressly advocating the election or defeat of a candidate.” However, the bill failed to acquire the necessary 2/3rds vote required during a budget session. A reintroduction attempt is likely.

http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2010/Introduced/HB0068.pdf

February 10, 2010

Back to top

GENERAL:

Over 30 Organizations have signed a letter asking Congress to consider a Shareholder Protection Act in light of CU. Some requested provisions include requiring shareholder approval over certain dollar amounts and requiring institutional investors to inform all persons in their investment funds of their voting history on corporate political expenditures.
Thanks to electionlawblog and Rick Hasen for the link.

http://cdn.publicinterestnetwork.org/assets/16ddacd5ba4800e76d50e94bd23eb60f/congress8a_shareholder_press_release-2.pdf

April 8, 2010

National Center for State Lesiglatures has a comprehensive list of legislation currently being acted on in each state in response to CU (an excellent page). Also lists current bans on corporation and union spending by state.

http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=19607

March 15, 2010

States are scrambling to put together legislation in response to citizens united. At least 8 states are pushing for increased disclosure, and a few others are pushing for shareholder approval requirements. Jeff Patch, spokesman for Center for Competitive Politics says, “If the legislature does not give them a clear picture, it could result in a free-for-all.”

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iCCgkFP10amGr6lqqCkx_DegG8bQD9ED8MU80

March 12, 2010

USA Today provides an overview of the wide variety of changes that states are making to conform with CU. Some states are taking an extremely proactive approach with measures like shareholder approval while others may only be seeking to repeal their current bans.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-02-23-campaign-spending_N.htm?csp=34&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+UsatodaycomNation-TopStories+(News+-+Nation+-+Top+Stories)

February 25, 2010

VIDEO – National Institute on Money in Politics breaks CU down audio-visually with a ‘get to know the basics’ approach. This short video gives a quick overview of how the states in general were affected by citizens united.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBTLabuisFg&feature=youtube_gdata

February 25, 2010

PBS’s Bill Moyer’s list of Affected State Laws

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/02052010/statelaws.html

February 5, 2010

Congress may test allowing states to limit out-of-state corporate spending

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202441941317&Democrats_Push_for_Congressional_Response_to_Citizens_United

February 4, 2010

CU may also have dramatic effect on state ‘Pay-to-Play’ Laws

http://lobbying.nationaljournal.com/2010/01/impact-of-citizens-united-on-s.php

January 25, 2010

NYT Article on Effect on 24 States with Contrary Laws

http://www.ufppc.org/us-a-world-news-mainmenu-35/9353-background-estimating-the-effect-of-citizens-united-v-fcc-nyt.html

January 23, 2010

National Institute on Money In State Politics Report

http://www.followthemoney.org/press/ReportView.phtml?r=414&PHPSESSID=c5b329e487246d3f1e0693029cdba608

January 22, 2010

Back to top

JUDICIAL ELECTIONS GENERAL:

National Journal: nder the Influence’s Eliza Newlin Carney has a response for those who argue the 26 States that already had bans on corporate spending limits. A good summarization of the recent history of influencing events on how people view judicial elections.

http://undertheinfluence.nationaljournal.com/2010/04/judicial-elections-draw-big-mo.php

April 12, 2010

New Republic article by Adam Skaggs from the Brennan Center zeroing in on some specific state judicial races that are sure to be impacted by CU (IL, WA) while generally projecting how it is likely to impact judicial elections. He advocates for public financing in states with judicial elections.

http://www.tnr.com/print/article/politics/judging-dollars

April 3, 2010

USA Today article disects the Brennan Center’s study on money in judicial elections and reflects on a few select states working on new legislation, partly to limit the possible impact of state bans on corporate spending being lifted from CU.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2010-03-30-judges_N.htm

March 31, 2010

Sherrilyn Ifill comments about the impact of CU on judicial elections in states. The article begins with a historical backdrop to the elections and goes on to mention potential issues that are raised including increased loss of public confidence, Ifill argues, which might be solved by public financing. Thanks to ElectionLawBlog.org for the link.

http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/03/my-bad-the-supreme-court%E2%80%99s-assault-on-judicial-elections.html

March 17, 2010

A new study according to the Justice at Stake and Brennan Center reveals money raised in judicial elections has more than doubled since the 1990s. Justice Ginsburg has spoken out against judicial elections as an extreme concern in the American court system. Even without the measurable impact of CU on indirect spending, it is clear judicial elections are changing.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/study-shows-money-flooding-campaigns-state-judgeships/story?id=10120048

March 17, 2010

More quotes from former SCOTUS Justice O’Connor while sitting on panel called by Maryland Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler. Voters have twice shot down similar legislation. The article references both CU and Massey Coal cases in showing possible support this year could lend itself to reform.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/legislature/bal-md.judges04mar04,0,7551927.story

March 4, 2010

Focused on MI, the article, titled Exploring Options for an Independent Judiciary, cites different methods of reforming judicial elections. Seth Anderson, executive director of the American Judicature Society believes, “we will see more nasty campaigns than ever before” because of CU.

http://www.legalnews.com/macomb/1000213/

March 2, 2010

Justice for Sale (VIDEO), PBS’s Bill Moyer’s program on the issue of judicial elections with specific remarks to CU’s impact. Moyer remarks, “There’s now a crooked sign hanging on every courthouse in America reading ‘Justice for Sale.’”

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/02192010/profile2.html

February 19, 2010

CU to Impact Impartiality of Courts?

http://www.gavelgrab.org/?p=7669

February 4, 2010

Reformers Hope CU Kills Judicial Elections

http://www.law.com/jsp/law/LawArticleFriendly.jsp?id=1202439680529

February 1, 2010

O’Connor Addresses ‘Problem’ of CU Ruling

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/oconnor-citizens-united-ruling-problem/story?id=9668044

January 26, 2010

Back to top

Links compiled and maintained by Alex Grout, a student at William & Mary School of Law

Permalink: http://electls.blogs.wm.edu/2010/02/10/citizens-united-and-the-states/

Treves buy essays visited the king daily and then, on the 21st, an improvement was observed.

Weekly Wrap Up

Every week, State of Elections brings you the latest news in state election law.

– Implementation of the Tennessee Voter Confidence Act has been delayed until 2012. The Act, which would require paper ballots in all Tennessee elections, has been highly controversial and strongly opposed by Republicans in the legislature.  Lt. Gov Ron Ramsey even declared that delaying the bill was his No. 1 priority.  Bernie Ellis, a leading proponent of the Act, posted this editorial on State of Elections in December.  For more background, check out this article by Drew Staniewski.

– A federal judge in Arizona appears ready to dramatically change that state’s system of funding elections.  Under Arizona’s Clean Elections system, certain candidates receive government funding for their campaigns.  The system is designed to allow less well-funded candidates to compete with more affluent opponents.  Judge Roslyn Silver, however, has written a draft order that would strike down these matching funds as unconstitutional.

– Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna and Secretary of State Sam Reed have announced that they will appeal the 9th Circuit Court’s decision in Farrakhan v. Gregoire.  The decision restored the voting rights of felons in Washington.  For more of State of Election’s coverage of the debate over felon voting rights, go here and here.

The check out the post here first studios were reconstituted farms and barns where short films were churned out at the rate of one every three days or so.

Op Ed: In Response to Tennessee Voter Confidence Act

Our thanks to Drew Staniewski for this review of where we stand in Tennessee re: free, fair and verifiable elections.

Our group (Gathering To Save OUR Democracy) worked hard to pass the TVCA in time for it to be implemented in 2008, before the last election. There was enough time (and enough remaining HAVA money) to accomplish that. However, as a concession to some, TVCA implementation was delayed until 2010. When Republicans not only won control of our legislature for the first time in 140+ years but also won every open seat in our legislature, they announced that one of their three top legislative priorities was to repeal the TVCA.

It is quite instructive that Tennessee became the ONLY state in 2008 where Republicans won more seats in our legislature, despite Democrats outnumbering Republicans here by a 47-39% margin and despite Democratic voter registration efforts outpacing Republicans by better than 4-to-1 in the months leading up to the 2008 election. Continue reading

Older posts

© 2018 State of Elections

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑