June 2018

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its ruling in Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Mansky, re-confirming that state laws banning certain political apparel in the polling place are permissible but finding that Minnesota’s law sweeps too broadly and thus violates the Constitution. It was nonetheless a net positive for the field given the Court’s endorsement of polling place apparel restrictions, though fights remain over changes to the state’s law – and efforts to narrow those restrictions even further.

Sometimes the trickiest election issues are the simplest and smallest – like how to handle the situation when two Congressional candidates in the same contest, one an incumbent, have the same name. That’s the case in Kansas, where two candidates named Ron Estes are generating controversy and forcing state election officials to go the extra mile to distinguish them.

Yesterday, Maine voters once again told Maine policymakers that they want to use ranked-choice voting, overriding a legislative move to repeal a previous vote to adopt RCV. The story likely isn’t over yet, but the result is a testament to the persistence of RCV supporters and an indication of how seriously Mainers take voters’ authority to make law in the Pine Tree State.

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in the highly-anticipated case of Husted v Philip Randolph Institute involving Ohio’s voter list maintenance procedures – and the result was what I expected: a narrow majority siding with the state on the issue of whether voters’ failure to vote may be taken into account when updating the rolls. The case clarifies one key issue but raises several new questions about the impact of the opinion in states across the country.

Last week, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) released the last of its Deep Dive series on 2016 election data – this time looking at provisional ballots.The EAC’s Deep Dive series has been a tremendous asset to the field and is a fantastic vehicle both for highlighting the depth and breadth of the EAVS data but also for encouraging practitioners and researchers alike to mine the information for insights into the conduct of elections across the United States. It’s also the farewell for my friend and longtime colleague, EAC research director Sean Greene, who’s leaving the EAC (but not elections)! for a fantastic family opportunity in Italy.

Matt Masterson of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has a guest post in this week’s electionlineWeekly on the current state of election cybersecurity and what DHS can do (and is) to help election offices nationwide. It’s fortunate that Matt was able to transition seamlessly from the EAC to DHS where his work to coordinate and assist states and localities with developing resilient election systems continues – and this post demonstrates everything he’s been up to since the switch (it’s a lot).

Oregon Secretary of State Dennis Richardson announced yesterday that he has been diagnosed with brain cancer, but plans to stay in office as he undergoes treatment.

A new settlement in Arizona is making changes to the state’s proof of citizenship rules that will eliminate the state’s two-track voter registration system and streamline the process for voters. It’s a big development in one of the only states to still require proof of citizenship for voter registration – and raises the question if the proffered solution could work elsewhere.

It’s primary Election Day in several states today – and the Washington Post’s Cybersecurity 202 blog has a state-by-state pre-election look by Derek Hawkins at cybersecurity issues in those states. Rundowns like this aren’t unusual – but usually they cover things like voter ID, registration deadlines, early voting and vote-by-mail. Don’t be surprised, however, if this kind of piece becomes familiar if not de rigeur going forward.

In a surprise vote, delegates at this weekend’s Massachusetts Democratic convention endorsed Boston city councillor Josh Zakim over longtime incumbent Bill Galvin, setting up a race for the nomination in the Commonwealth’s September primary. The Bay State results reflect some growing generational differences nationally in the support for candidates for the top state election job.