[EL] Write in ballot laws

Fri Jan 22 12:16:28 PST 2016

Hi Ciara,

I don't have an answer to your question, but I did generate some data that
would shed some light on this issue.

I've attached an Excel sheet that summarizes writein activity for the 2011
to 2014 state legislative elections.  Lack of reported activity below might
very well merely be a sign that a state doesn't report write-ins in their
returns, but the presence of write-ins tell you something about the law.
Variable definitions in that file follow my signature.

The variable signifwriteins7 below is what I'm about to talk about, which
essentially says what percent of state legislative elections have a
write-in candidate who received more than 1% of the vote.
The greatest write-in activity in state legislative elections was (from
first place to latter)
NM 1.65%
MD 1.46%
WI .87%
AZ .83%
NC .59%
MA .50%
ID .48%
NH .40%
MI .39%
FL .34%
TX .29%
MO .28%
ME .27%
Then it drops down to 0%.

I can recompute these statistics for the 1968 to 2010 period as well if
you'd like, but most early years are far more subject to inconsistencies in
reporting returns.

Carl

The columns track the following

writeins7; write-in candidates as a % of seats to be won in elections in
the state in the 2011 to 2014 period.  (Essentially, it is the % of
elections with a write-in, except for free-for-all multimember district
elections.)  A write-in candidate is defined here as a line in election
returns that reports a specific individual by name as a candidate, and
identifies them as a write-in.

scatterings7; reported scattering in an election as a % of seats to be
won.... etc.  This refers to votes ascribed to write-ins that were not
mentioned by name in election returns.  This isn't very informative for
your purposes, as states vary in their propensity to report scattering in
election returns.

signifwriteins7; same as writeins7, except it doesn't consider write-ins
who receive less than 1% of total vote.  This attempts to deal with the
fact that some states are more likely to report write-ins than other
states.

signifscatterings7; same as scatterings7, except it doesn't consider
scattering when less than 1% of the vote was ascribed to scattering.

pervoteswritein7; average % of the total vote received by specific
individuals running as write-ins in a state from 2011 through 2014.  This
percentage is never more than one-tenth of one percent for a state.

pervotesscattering7; same as above except for scattering not attributed to
a specific individual.  This is never more than 1% for a state, but again,
this has more to do with how states report this than the law.

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Richard Winger <richardwinger at yahoo.com>
wrote:

> Do you mean in primaries, or general elections?
>
> Richard Winger 415-922-9779 PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Ciara C Torres-Spelliscy <ctorress at law.stetson.edu>
> *To:* Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu>
> *Cc:* "law-election at UCI.edu" <law-election at uci.edu>
> *Sent:* Friday, January 22, 2016 9:18 AM
> *Subject:* [EL] Write in ballot laws
>
> Has anyone published  a 50 state survey of write in ballot laws recently?
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 21, 2016, at 11:42 PM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> wrote:
>
> “As Jeb Bush Struggles, Some Allies Blame His ‘Super PAC’”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79203>
> Posted on  January 21, 2016 8:36 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79203>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
> NYT reports.
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/22/us/politics/jeb-bush-right-to-rise-super-pac.html?ref=politics&_r=0>
> <share_save_171_16.png>
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D79203&title=%26%238220%3BAs%20Jeb%20Bush%20Struggles%2C%20Some%20Allies%20Blame%20His%20%E2%80%98Super%20PAC%E2%80%99%26%238221%3B&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, campaigns
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
> “Appeals Court Panel Overturns Van Hollen v. FEC, Reopening Massive
> Disclosure Loophole for 2016 Cycle “ <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79199>
> Posted on  January 21, 2016 8:26 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79199>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
> CLC:
> <http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/news/press-releases/appeals-court-panel-overturns-van-hollen-v-fec-reopening-massive-disclosure>
>
> Today in *Van Hollen v. FEC*, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit once
> again upheld
> <http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/sites/default/files/2016-01-21%20Opinion.pdf>
>  an FEC rule that severely limits federal disclosure requirements
> connected to “electioneering communications.” The appellate panel
> overturned a district court decision holding the rule “arbitrary,
> capricious, and contrary to law” for improperly narrowing the scope of the
> McCain-Feingold law’s disclosure requirements and allowing nonprofit
> 501(c)(4) advocacy groups, 501(c)(6) business associations, and others to
> spend millions on “electioneering communications” without disclosing their
> donors.
>
> The opinion is pretty hostile to reform (a terrible panel draw at the DC
> Circuit). The opinion concludes:
>
> As our discussion of the FEC’s rule has shown, the Supreme Court’s
> campaign finance jurisprudence subsists, for now, on a fragile arrangement
> that treats speech, a constitutional right, and transparency, an
> extra-constitutional value, as equivalents. But “the centre cannot hold.”
> William Butler Yeats, *The Second Coming *(1919). Until then, however,
> the FEC’s purpose requirement survives, and the judgment of the district
> court is therefore reversed.
>
> I think van Hollen should try to go en banc on this one.
> <share_save_171_16.png>
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D79199&title=%26%238220%3BAppeals%20Court%20Panel%20Overturns%20Van%20Hollen%20v.%20FEC%2C%20Reopening%20Massive%20Disclosure%20Loophole%20for%202016%20Cycle%20%26%238220%3B&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
> “On Citizens United anniversary, Harry Reid picks a 6-year-old scab with
> John McCain” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79197>
> Posted on  January 21, 2016 8:24 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79197>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
> The Fix reports
> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/01/21/why-is-harry-reid-going-after-john-mccain-on-the-senate-floor/>
> .
> <share_save_171_16.png>
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D79197&title=%26%238220%3BOn%20Citizens%20United%20anniversary%2C%20Harry%20Reid%20picks%20a%206-year-old%20scab%20with%20John%20McCain%26%238221%3B&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
> Posted on  January 21, 2016 8:22 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79195>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
> Kate Berry blogs
> <http://www.brennancenter.org/blog/juries-death-and-judicial-elections> at
> the Brennan Center.
> <share_save_171_16.png>
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D79195&title=%26%238220%3BOn%20Citizens%20United%20anniversary%2C%20Harry%20Reid%20picks%20a%206-year-old%20scab%20with%20John%20McCain%26%238221%3B&description=>
> Posted in judicial elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>
> “How to End Super PACs, Once and for All: This proposal for Super PAC
> ‘insurance’ could work by deterring third-party spending.”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79193>
> Posted on  January 21, 2016 8:19 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79193>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
> Read this Nick Warshaw blog post
> <http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/republic3-0/2016/01/how_to_end_super_pacs_once_and059351.php>,
> and if you want more info, check out the law review article
> <http://www.uclalawreview.org/forget-congress-reforming-campaign-finance-mutually-assured-destruction/>
> .
> <share_save_171_16.png>
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D79193&title=%26%238220%3BHow%20to%20End%20Super%20PACs%2C%20Once%20and%20for%20All%3A%20This%20proposal%20for%20Super%20PAC%20%26%238216%3Binsurance%26%238217%3B%20could%20work%20by%20deterring%20third-party%20spending.%26%238221%3B&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, campaigns
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
> “CLC Blog Update: Trevor Potter’s Remarks at The Brookings Institution
> Campaign Finance Solutions Summit” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79191>
> Posted on  January 21, 2016 8:18 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79191>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
> Read the comments here.
> <http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/news/blog/trevor-potters-remarks-brookings-institution-campaign-finance-solutions-summit>
> <share_save_171_16.png>
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D79191&title=%26%238220%3BCLC%20Blog%20Update%3A%20Trevor%20Potter%26%238217%3Bs%20Remarks%20at%20The%20Brookings%20Institution%20Campaign%20Finance%20Solutions%20Summit%26%238221%3B&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
> “Is ‘dark money’ boosting Bernie Sanders?”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79189>
> Posted on  January 21, 2016 8:04 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79189>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
> CPI reports.
> <http://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/01/21/19167/dark-money-boosting-bernie-sanders>
> <share_save_171_16.png>
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D79189&title=%26%238220%3BIs%20%26%238216%3Bdark%20money%26%238217%3B%20boosting%20Bernie%20Sanders%3F%26%238221%3B&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
> “A Reform Agenda to Counter Big Money in American Politics”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79187>
> Posted on  January 21, 2016 8:03 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79187>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
> The third Fred Wertheimer post
> <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/fred-wertheimer/a-reform-agenda-to-counte_b_9040154.html>
>  on the sixth anniversary of Citizens United.
> <share_save_171_16.png>
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D79187&title=%26%238220%3BA%20Reform%20Agenda%20to%20Counter%20Big%20Money%20in%20American%20Politics%26%238221%3B&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme
> Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
> “Legislative Vacancies: A Patchwork of Laws for Patching Holes in State
> Legislatures” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79185>
> Posted on  January 21, 2016 8:01 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79185>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
> That’s the lead story in the latest issue of NCSL’s The Canvass
> <http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/the-canvass-january-2016.aspx>
> .
> <share_save_171_16.png>
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D79185&title=%26%238220%3BLegislative%20Vacancies%3A%20A%20Patchwork%20of%20Laws%20for%20Patching%20Holes%20in%20State%20Legislatures%26%238221%3B&description=>
> Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
> “Congressional Handcuffs Should Not Block SEC From Dark Money Work”
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79183>
> Posted on  January 21, 2016 7:52 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=79183>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
> Ciara Torres-Spelliscy blogs.
> <https://www.brennancenter.org/blog/congressional-handcuffs-should-not-block-sec-dark-money-work>
> <share_save_171_16.png>
> <https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D79183&title=%26%238220%3BCongressional%20Handcuffs%20Should%20Not%20Block%20SEC%20From%20Dark%20Money%20Work%26%238221%3B&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
>
> --
> Rick Hasen
> Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
> UC Irvine School of Law
> 401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
> Irvine, CA 92697-8000949.824.3072 - office949.824.0495 - faxrhasen at law.uci.eduhttp://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/http://electionlawblog.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>

-- 

Dr. Carl Klarner

Academic / Political Consultant

Klarnerpolitics.com

Former Associate Professor of Political Science

Carl.Klarner at gmail.com

Cell: 812-514-9060
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160122/2b5608e8/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 002WriteinsByState2011to2015_20160122.xlsx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet
Size: 13350 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160122/2b5608e8/attachment.xlsx>