Legislatures: Republicans Aim for Gains in Ohio, Indiana and North Carolina

posted by Josh Goodman

In 2008, Indiana, North Carolina and Ohio had a great run as some of the most politically interesting states in the country. They wisely scheduled their presidential primaries after Super Tuesday and, as a result, each played an out-sized role in the epic campaign for the Democratic nomination. They each were swing states for the general election and, as it turned out, were three of the seven states that voted for President Bush in 2000 and 2004, but then flipped to President Obama (Virginia, Florida, Nevada and Colorado were the others).

As a result, no tears will be shed for these three states just because their primaries tomorrow are rather dull (especially compared to some of the states that are coming later). Besides, these three will be battlegrounds for state legislative control in November -- and what could be more exciting than that?

Arizona Moves to Adopt Strange Lieutenant Governor Selection Rules

posted by Josh Goodman

Say what you will about Arizona's new immigration law, but it's not nearly as mystifying as the decision the state's legislature made while forwarding a constitutional amendment to the voters to create a lieutenant governor's office (by renaming the secretary of state). From Capitol Media Services:

But the plan going to the ballot for voter ratification has a twist: Whoever won each party's nomination for lieutenant governor at the primary would then run as a ticket with the party's gubernatorial hopeful.

That "twist" would give Arizona the same system as Illinois -- the one that compounded the Scott Lee Cohen debacle and the one the Illinois Senate just voted unanimously to eliminate.

If there's something to be said for this system, it's that it would make a great reality show: Take two politicians who hate each other and who disagree on everything, then force them to spend every day for months trying to persuade voters that they'll work in tandem to fix all the state's problems. If they win, their prize is four more years together.

Will Arizona's Immigration Law Fizzle Like Georgia's?

posted by Josh Goodman

Arizona's new immigration law has become a huge source of controversy, but will its provisions actually do much of  anything? That might seem like a strange question, until you consider the history of state immigration policy.

In 2005, Georgia approved what, at the time, many in the media called the nation's toughest immigration law. Earlier this year, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution looked at the limited impact of the law:

Nearly four years after it was passed, a state law cracking down on the hiring of illegal immigrants has had little effect: Two county prosecutors say they can’t bring charges under the law because it provides no penalties. And the state hasn’t audited a single employer because the Legislature hasn’t set aside money to do so.

As you can tell from the description, the reasons that the Georgia law hasn't done much are fairly specific and might not apply to Arizona. If Georgia had just put in some money for some audits of employers, maybe their results would have been quite different.

In Tennessee, Remembering a Time When Redistricting Didn't Exist

posted by Josh Goodman

In the process of redistricting next year, state lawmakers undoubtedly will draw some legislative and congressional maps that serve the interests of one political party, that unnecessarily divide communities and that make competitive election rare. In a few states, they'll probably come up with maps that look as though they were drawn by a blindfolded left-handed chimpanzee using his right hand. But, it's safe to say that nothing lawmakers come up with this time will be as bad as Tennessee's state legislative districts in 1962.

The Rose Institute of State and Local Government has a great new guide explaining the nuances of how legislative and congressional redistricting works in each state. Who knew that if the Oregon legislature can't come up with a legislative redistricting plan, the secretary of state simply gets to draw the lines?

But, the most remarkable thing to me in the report is the history. It wasn't that long ago that legislative redistricting in Tennessee didn't exist:

In 1962, however, the Supreme Court ruled in Baker v. Carr that the redistricting process is subject to judicial review. Baker challenged state legislative districts in Tennessee, which had not been redrawn in sixty years. Due to population shifts, some districts had eight times more residents than others. In Baker, the Court rejected the argument that redistricting is a non-justiciable “political question,” and ruled that “malapportioned” districts are subject to judicial invalidation under the Fourteenth Amendment. In subsequent cases, such as Wesberry v. Sanders (1964) and Reynolds v. Sims (1965), the Court established the requirement that legislative districts (including congressional, state, local districts) must be drawn on an equal population basis, and may be redrawn by the courts to protect the principle of “one person, one vote.”

I guess I shouldn't be shocked that, at a time when people were routinely denied the right to vote based on the color of their skin, basic democratic principles such as "legislative districts should have roughly the same number of people" were ignored. Still, no matter how politically contentious redistricting becomes this cycle or how unfair some of the maps might seem, I'll be thankful for redistricting.

In Arizona's Conservatism, Signs of What's to Come

posted by Josh Goodman

One of the big themes I've been talking about for a long time is how the 2010 elections could move state government away from the political center. Some Democratic governors in Republican states are likely to be replaced by Republicans. Some Republican governors in Democratic states are likely to be replaced by Democrats. Moderate governors who have checked the impulses of either conservative or liberal legislators will be gone.

In Arizona, you already can see what this process will look like.

In Alaska, a Vote on a Larger Legislature

posted by Josh Goodman

Remember how rural Alaska legislators were worried that redistricting would make their absurdly large legislative districts even larger and were pushing to expand the size of the Alaska legislature to maintain somewhat smaller districts?

The rural legislators won an initial victory. From the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner:

JUNEAU - The state Legislature has voted to expand both chambers by 10 percent, by adding another two and four Senate and House seats, respectively. The vote comes as the state sees increasing signs of a population shift from rural areas to bigger cities. It also precedes a coming shift in legislative district boundaries to match population estimates from the latest federal census, which is ongoing.

The tougher test, though, will be the state's voters. Rural legislators have a pretty good case to make in favor their proposal. Their districts are so large that it's almost impossible to see many of their constituents on a regular or even occasional basis. Still, most voters may instinctively think that the fewer politicians, the better.

New York Redistricting: The Big Apple's Small But Notable Growth

posted by Josh Goodman

When I was working on a story a couple of months ago about the role of local governments in the Census, I talked with a person who has a supremely interesting job. Joseph Salvo is the head of New York City's population division, meaning it's his responsibility to figure out how many people are living in the Big Apple at any given time.

That's obviously a difficult task, but Salvo is (so far as I can tell) quite good at it. In the run up to this year's decennial count, Salvo's office identified around 127,000 addresses that the Census Bureau was missing from its list. Those addresses probably have around 300,000 people, almost enough for the city to grab a full State Senate seat from the rest of the state in redistricting.

Democrats currently control the Senate by the thinnest 32-30 margin. New York City Senate seats are much more likely to elect Democrats than those located in the rest of the state. It's easy to imagine a scenario where this extra seat is what provides Democrats with their majority after the 2012 election -- all because of a career local government official who, for all I know, could be a Republican.

Salvo told me that he expects that, with his additions, the Census Bureau address list is large enough to support his current estimate for New York City's population: 8.4 million people, up from 8 million in 2000. Compared to lots of places in Texas or California, that's quite a slow pace of growth. But, it's fast enough that New York City is New York's fastest growing region. To continue my series on intrastate population trends, let's look at the rest of the numbers from New York.

In Texas, Somewhat-Less-Conservative Republicans Win

posted by Josh Goodman

While they might cringe if you called them moderates, the less conservative candidates won two key Republican primaries in Texas yesterday for Supreme Court and State Board of Education.

On the other hand, Tea Party supporters did well in some lower-profile races. The defeat of Rep. Delwin Jones is especially noteworthy, especially because it gives me an opportunity to link to the delightfully named Lubbock Avalanche-Journal:

AUSTIN — The long legislative career of Lubbock’s state Rep. Delwin Jones is over. And for accountant Charles Perry a new day has dawned.

The 86-year old lawmaker, who has served in the Texas Legislature for nearly 30 years – from 1965 to 1973 as a Democrat and from 1989 to the present as a Republican – lost decisively to Perry in Tuesday’s Republican primary runoff in Texas House District 83.

At the risk of getting dangerously off topic, here's what I learned from Wikipedia:

The Lubbock Avalanche was founded by attorney John James Dillard with his business partner Thad Tubbs, who provided the money for the equipment to publish a newspaper in 1900. According to Dillard, the origin of the newspaper's Avalanche name came from his desire that the newspaper surprise the citizens of Lubbock.

I had assumed that it started as a trade publication on avalanches.

In Florida, Fighting Ballot Measures with Ballot Measures?

posted by Josh Goodman

The Palm Beach Post has an interesting development in the debate over redistricting reform in Florida:

Senate Reapportionment Chairman Mike Haridopolos directed staff to begin drafting yet another proposed amendment for the ballot that would change the way Florida handles its once-a-decade redistricting process.

The move by Haridopolos, R-Melbourne, and other Republican leaders comes in response to the FairDistrictsFlorida group having collected enough signatures and gotten the Supreme Court's OK to put two questions on the November ballot that would ask voters to specify that redistricting can't be done to favor or disfavor any party or any incumbent. The group has two amendments because one is for congressional redistricting and the other for legislative redistricting.

Senate Republicans want to put another amendment before voters to either clarify FairDistricts', or to gut it, depending on whom you believe.

Florida's legislators certainly wouldn't be the first ones to attempt to rein in direct democracy through the ballot measure process itself. Their strategy reminds me of what I was writing about in California in 2008 (as part of a feature on elected officials trying to gain control over the initiative process):

Then there is the tactic of elected officials using one initiative to fight off another. Case in point: In California last year, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, a group that agitates for smaller government, entered into negotiations with the California League of Cities and the California Redevelopment Association to try to reach agreement on new eminent-domain restrictions. The talks broke down, and the Jarvis people went forward with an initiative that included far-reaching eminent-domain restrictions, as well as a ban on rent-control laws.

The government groups didn't just oppose that measure. They fired back with their own initiative, with more modest eminent-domain limits and no mention of rent control. The initiative also included a "poison pill" provision: If both measures passed, only the government-sponsored one would go into effect, provided that it received more votes. The poison pill turned out to be unnecessary. The stronger Jarvis measure was defeated by the voters, leaving the government-sponsored initiative as the only one left standing.

Will Redistricting Muddle Virginia's 2011 Legislative Elections?

posted by Josh Goodman

Virginia is one of only a few states that holds regular state legislative elections in odd-numbered years. When it comes to redistricting, that's a problem.

Other states will have all of 2011 to draw their new lines. But, Virginia has to draw the districts in time for candidates to run for office the very same year. Well, at least in theory that's what Virginia has to do. Ben Tribbett (better known as Not Larry Sabato) lays out an alternative scenario in Washingtonian:

In 1981, a judge ruled that the new redistricting plan violated the Voting Rights Act and ordered the General Assembly to draw single-member districts across Virginia. Because of the late timing, delegates were allowed to stand for reelection in their old seats in 1981 for one-year terms. After returning to Richmond and passing new legislative lines, the delegates would stand for another one-year term in 1982 before seeking a full two-year term in 1983. Senators elected to a four-year term in 1979 were unaffected and ran for another four-year term in 1983.

Fast-forward to today, and this same scenario seems probable—except this time state senators and delegates are both scheduled to be on the ballot in 2011. Without a quick agreement on new lines, a judge will have to decide what to do with the 2011 elections. The most likely decision will be to follow the 1981 precedent, with legislators on the ballot in 2011 for one-year terms in the Senate and House. This would put all 140 seats in the General Assembly back on the ballot in 2012 as President Obama is seeking reelection.

For young whippersnappers such as myself, it's tough to grasp the chaos that redistricting can cause. We'll know all about it soon enough.

Cutzilla Attacks New York

posted by Josh Goodman

Which would win in a fight, a demon sheep or Cutzilla? That's all I can think about after watching this ad from New York's hospital industry.

(Hat tip: Liz Benjamin)

If I may intrude with a non-hilarious point, one thing most national observers probably don't realize is the extent to which the budget situation contributed to New York Gov. David Paterson's unpopularity.

In North Dakota, a Vote for Speed Readers

posted by Josh Goodman

First it was gubernatorial question time in Arizona. Now, another fad federal reform idea is coming to the states. The Associated Press has the news from North Dakota:

BISMARCK — A proposed ballot measure says North Dakota legislators must read bills and post them on the Internet before any final votes are taken.

...

The measure also says the Legislature must post bills on the Internet for at least four days before a floor vote is taken in the House or Senate.

Unlike with regard to Congress, this idea doesn't seem completely and totally implausible in North Dakota. According to Statenet, 1,128 bills were introduced in North Dakota in 2009 and 630 were enacted. North Dakota's legislative sessions are only 80 days long, although lawmakers get around that requirement by regularly recessing in the middle of sessions. So, at the very least, legislators would be looking at reading a few bills a day. Since North Dakota legislation generally is shorter than federal legislation (I think), they probably could do it.

Of course, just because requiring the reading every bill is doable, that doesn't necessarily mean that it would produce better legislative outcomes. That being said, if this measure led to the Micro Machine Man being elected to the North Dakota legislature, that would have to be considered a victory for democracy.

Virginia House: A Small Test for McDonnell

posted by Josh Goodman

If you're hungry for an election outside of Texas today, look no further than the race between Democrat Eileen Filler-Corn and Republican Kerry Bolognese in Virginia's 41st House District.

The special election became necessary after the occupant of the 41st, Democrat Dave Marsden, won a hotly contested special election for the Virginia Senate in January. Bolognese ran for this seat in November, losing to Marsden 50%-49%. Filler-Corn also has campaigned for this seat previously.

The two candidates seem to have stuck to the conventional themes of their two parties. Filler-Corn is defending education funding, Bolognese is emphasizing his opposition to tax increases. Both candidates are lobbyists, but, since this is Northern Virginia, no one minds.

New York Senate: Helen Sears Is Out

posted by Josh Goodman

Helen Sears, the Democrat who Republicans wanted to nominate for the special election in New York's 13th Senate District, has dropped her bid. Republicans could still find a replacement candidate, but it appears very unlikely they'll have a chance to win in this Democratic district.

But, we still should enjoy a good election. Hiram Monserrate, the Democratic senator who the Senate kicked out of office, filed enough signatures to give himself a good chance to make the ballot as an independent -- or, more precisely, on a new ballot line called, "Yes We Can."

Monserrate will face Assemblyman Jose Peralta, the Democratic nominee. Can someone who was booted from office for domestic violence and who lacks the support of any party really mount a serious challenge? The Capitol reported a few weeks ago that some Democrats are worried that Monserrate will retains a reservoir of support in his Queens district.

Besides not coming with all the baggage of Monserrate, Peralta also would be a more loyal supporter of Democratic priorities in the Senate. For example, he, unlike Monserrate, supports gay marriage.

Question Time in Arizona?

posted by Josh Goodman

The idea seems to have fizzled on the federal level, but leave it to the states to be laboratories of British-style democracy. Arizona is looking at "question time" for its governor, as the Arizona Capitol Times reports:

A Senate panel has approved legislation to adopt a British tradition of having the head of government take questions from lawmakers on a regular basis.

Under SCR1012, Arizona’s governor would be required to answer questions by lawmakers for 30 minutes to an hour every two weeks during the regular legislative session. The “question time,” as it’s called in the United Kingdom, would be open to the public.

“I don’t think that there is really the dynamic conversation that we should be having taking place, in which the executive interacts with the Legislature,” said Sen. Jonathan Paton, the measure’s sponsor.

A Ballot-Order Gambit from West Virginia Democrats

posted by Josh Goodman

Ballot Access News has a fun little story out of West Virginia:

West Virginia lists parties on the ballot in order of how well they did for President in the last presidential election. Republicans have carried West Virginia in each of the last three presidential elections, so Republicans in recent years have had the top spot on the ballot. Ten Democratic Representatives have recently introduced HB 4137, which says parties should be on the ballot in order of how many registered voters they have. Registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans almost 2:1 in West Virginia.

Perhaps legislators in West Virginia spoke with Creigh Deeds about the significance of ballot placement.

New York's Strange Senate Race

posted by Josh Goodman

Following up on my post from Friday: It's looks as though New York will have a strange election for state senate next month, one with large, but amorphous, political consequences.

Helen Sears, a former Democratic member of the City Council in New York City, has won the Republican nomination for the 13th District New York Senate special election.

There are two big questions, neither of which come with an easy answer: Does Sears have a chance and, if she wins, what does it mean?

A Race to Control the New York Senate Next Month?

posted by Josh Goodman

Liz Benjamin of the New York Daily News has some interesting news:

A fascinating wrinkle has developed in the fight for Hiram Monserrate's Queens Senate seat, which, assuming Judge William Pauley's ruling today stands, is on track to be decided in a March 16 special election.

A GOP source confirms Helen Sears, a Democrat who lost her Council seat to Danny Dromm in a primary last fall, is in discussions with local Republicans, Conservatives and Independence Party leaders to run on their respective lines for Monserrate's seat.

According to this source, the deal calls for Sears to remain a registered Democrat but to conference with the Republicans if she wins.

The significance here is that Democrats currently hold only a 31-30 edge in the Senate with this one vacancy. The Republicans could pull into a tie if they add one member to their caucus.

Still, that's very unlikely to happen. Republicans haven't even had a candidate in this district since 2002. Sears is almost certainly only the third most likely candidate to win. The race will also feature Assemblyman Jose Peralta as the Democratic nominee and Monserrate himself, running as an independent despite his conviction on domestic assault charges and his expulsion from the Senate.

Perhaps there's a way that Sears sneaks into office with something like 35% of the vote, deadlocking the Democratic majority. Then again, with members like Monserrate, there's a pretty good case that Senate Democrats never had a majority to begin with.

Legislatures: Republican Wins in Alabama and New Hampshire

posted by Josh Goodman

Republicans shouldn't be enthused about winning legislative special elections in Alabama and New Hampshire yesterday. They should be enthused about how they won.

In New Hampshire, Republicans retained Senate District 16. They did so in impressive fashion. Despite Democrat Jeff Goley's strong fundraising, Republican David Boutin won every jurisdiction in the district in his 17-point win.

Democrats don't need to win District 16 to win the state. They hold a 14-10 majority without it. George W. Bush won the district handily in 2004, even as John Kerry won New Hampshire (Barack Obama won it narrowly in 2008). Still, 17 points is a thumping -- one that's consistent with the Democratic majorities in both houses of the New Hampshire legislature being in danger this fall.

The Republican win in Alabama was, if anything, even more impressive. Republican K.L. Brown scored a 14-point win in a seat that previously had been held by a Democrat.

Alabama House: Republicans Hope to Gain

posted by Josh Goodman

As they look to win a majority in the Alabama House this fall, Republicans have a good pickup opportunity today in a special election in the 40th District. The seat opened up when the Democratic incumbent died.

A writer in the Anniston Star profiled the candidates:

Early on, Democrats bandied about several names, with Ricky Whaley, a political activist for years, quickly seizing the fast track. Whaley has a combination of his involvement in other campaigns, his elected position on the State Teachers Retirement Board, strong support from the Alabama Education Association (including financial assistance), legions of parents and students who worked with him in the Jacksonville City Schools and, of course, the longstanding thought that he would one day run for office.

...

The Republicans fielded more candidates, but the respected local funeral director, K.L. Brown, quickly staked his claim. He fought through his opposition to an impressive lead in the party’s primary, leading by such a substantial margin that the second-place finisher conceded the race.

A successful business person, Brown’s kind and thoughtful treatment of many bereaved families over the years, his participation in Calhoun County Chamber of Commerce affairs, and his various leadership roles in his church are the kinds of things that can be weaved together to develop a solid campaign background. A photogenic family helps, too, but each family is blessed in that regard.

Whaley is better funded. However, the district takes in most of Calhoun County, where John McCain won 66% of the vote. Democrats currently hold a 60-44 edge in the Alabama House (with this seat vacant), but that majority is regarded as precarious.

New Hampshire Senate: Democrats Look to Solidify Majority

posted by Josh Goodman

New Hampshire Democrats are showing a bit of friskiness as they compete today for the state senate seat that Republican Ted Gatsas gave up when he was elected mayor of Manchester.

John DiStaso of the Union Leader gives the essentials of the district:

On paper, the key factors favor the Republicans. They lead in voter registration, 14,121 to 12,494, with 12,540 undeclared, according to the latest figures available from the Secretary of State’s office.

The district, which consists of Manchester wards 1, 2 and 12 and the towns of Bow, Candia, Dunbarton and Hooksett, has traditionally been Republican territory.

...

Given the registration edge and the perception that voter sentiment these days is not in the Democrats’ favor, it’s surprising to some that they are playing so hard in this district. But they are.

Surprising or not, you can see why Democrats would like a win here. This seat (like the entire New Hampshire Senate) will be up again in November, but the race nonetheless has real significance. Democrats currently hold a 14-10 edge in the Senate. If Democrats could add to their majority in a Republican-leaning seat, the result would have to be at least somewhat deflating for the G.O.P.

The Nevada Senate's Alluring Simplicity

posted by Josh Goodman

In the spirit of Valentine's Day (and with apologies to my wife), I must confess my love for the Nevada Senate.

I don't love the Nevada Senate for the great statesmen that walk its halls (although I imagine it's had some) or the brilliant legislation that it produces (although doubtlessly it produces some). No, what I love is the simplicity of its elections.

The Nevada Senate only has 21 members. These 21 members are elected on two different cycles. In 2008, the state had 10 Senate elections. This year, it has 11. When it comes to easy-to-follow campaigns for control of a legislative chamber, the Nevada Senate sets the gold standard, along with the Alaska Senate (20 members elected on two cycles) and the Delaware Senate (21 members elected on two cycles).

Going into the 2008 elections, Republicans had an 11-10 edge in the Senate. Going into election day, everybody knew that two Republican-held seats were competitive and that none of the Democratic-held seats were competitive. Democrats won both of those races and established a 12-9 edge.

With this small of a playing field, not a whole lot of thought has to go into the which races to target. Democrats hold five of the eleven seats up this year. Republicans need to pick up two out of five and not lose any seats to take back control.

Introducing America's Largest State Legislative District

posted by Josh Goodman

A debate over expanding the Alaska legislature has brought to my attention the state's incredible Senate District C, America's largest state legislative district.

Rural legislators are pushing to add four seats to the Alaska Senate and eight seats to the Alaska House as a way to prevent their seats from becoming even more unwieldy. Anchorage and the nearby Matanuska-Susitna Borough (Sarah Palin's old stomping ground) have gained population. The Bush -- the parts of the state that lack interconnected roads -- has seen its population declines accelerate, driven by high heating costs.

As a result, after redistricting more of the state's districts will be in the urban (or comparatively urban) areas. The rural seats that remain will have to get larger.

The case that rural legislators are making is that the state's rural seats already are too large and too difficult to traverse. If the legislature had more seats, they'd at least be able to keep the rural districts roughly the size that they are now. To make that case, lawmakers have turned to the obvious example: District C.

NY-Assembly: For Republicans, Promising Gains in Westchester County

posted by Josh Goodman

Republicans appear to have won three of the four special elections for the New York State Assembly yesterday, picking up two suburban seats previously held by Democrats -- one on Long Island (though there's a small chance absentee ballots could alter the outcome) and one in wealthy Westchester County.

I'm especially interested in the Republican gains in Westchester County because the jurisdiction of close to a million people has had a striking ability to support the winning candidate in state races in New York.

New York: Four Legislative Specials

posted by Josh Goodman

Today, we have four special elections for the New York Assembly.

Democrats and the Weprin family are trying to hold a seat in Queens, as NY1 reports:

David Weprin is trying to keep the streak alive. For almost 40 years, the state Assembly seat in Queens' 24th Assembly District has been held by a family member -- first, his father, Saul Weprin then his brother, Mark Weprin. Now, David Weprin, is hoping to uphold the family tradition and win the seat in a special election Tuesday.

...

Standing in his way is civic activist Bob Friedrich, longtime president of the Glen Oaks Village co-op, who says voters are ready for change.

Republicans and Democrats both are defending seats on Long Island, as the Long Island Press notes:

Kentucky House: A Democrat's Surprise Win

posted by Josh Goodman

You'd think that after the Scott Brown experience, I (and everyone else) would learn not to take election results for granted. But, I'm a slow learner. I had assumed that Republicans would hold a Kentucky House of Representatives seat on Tuesday.

Not so, as Somerset, Kentucky's Commonwealth Journal notes:

Somerset — A Lebanon Democrat with a big vote majority in his home county of Marion will fill the unexpired term of Jimmy Higdon, a Republican, in the state House of Representatives from the 24th Legislative District.

Terry Mills, a retired Social Security Administration employee, won a special election over state employee Leo Johnson, a Republican from Liberty, by 3001 to 2518. Mills carried Marion County by 2,611 to 333, a sufficient margin to overcome deficits in Casey and Pulaski counties. The vacancy in the House of Representatives was created when Higdon was elected to the state Senate in December to succeed Dan Kelly who was appointed to a judgeship by Gov. Steve Beshear. Higdon had represented the 24th House District for the past seven years.

Johnson carried Casey County 1,772 to 344 and won the five northern Pulaski County precincts 413 to 46.

The reason I assumed that Johnson would win was the party registration figures for the district. The 24th District has 12,903 Democrats and 12,441 Republicans.

Ok, so now I really have some explaining to do. The 24th District has more Democrats than Republicans. Yet I still assumed the Republican would win.

Sanity on Sexting?

posted by Josh Goodman

Here's a bill that caught my attention. A Pennsylvania state legislature has proposed a law to make sending sexually explicit text messages a misdemeanor, not a felony. From the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

But while the practice, usually done by teenagers, seems foolish or risky at best, it shouldn't scar youths for years by saddling them with an arrest for a felony, as it does now, said Rep. Tom Caltagirone, D-Berks, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. His committee will start the process to change that this week.

"A lot of these kids are teenagers and they do dumb things," he said. "All of us have done dumb things when we were kids. We want to stop this from being a felony. It could carry through the rest of their lives. They'll have to list a felony arrest on job applications."

As it turns out, this is a small trend. An Ohio lawmaker is offering a similar bill. Utah and Vermont both approved legislation along these lines last year. I'd guess that other states are studying the issue this year too.

Minnesota Senate: A Republican Hold

posted by Josh Goodman

In a special election in Minnesota's 26th Senate District yesterday, a Republican blowout would have suggested that the G.O.P. is in line to make major gains in November in this bluish state. On the other hand, a Democratic win would have suggested that the party's prospects are better than commonly acknowledged and perhaps that the party is newly enlivened.

So what did we get? A narrow (but comfortable) Republican victory. Republican Mike Parry won with 43% of the vote, to 37% for Democrat Jason Engbrecht and 20% for the Independence Party's Roy Srp.

In this Republican-leaning district, Parry's margin of victory is about the same as Norm Coleman's margin of victory in his 2008 U.S. Senate bid. His performance was a little bit better than John McCain's in 2008, but a little worse than President Bush's in 2004 and considerably worse than the performances of the Republican state senator who previously held the 26th.

What do we learn from all that? Only that, despite my love for legislative special elections, I probably shouldn't make too big of a deal out of irregular January elections that occur right after a blizzard, that have unusually strong third-party candidates, and that takes place in one sixty-seventh of the state of Minnesota.

Minnesota Senate: An Interesting Special Election?

posted by Josh Goodman

While Oregon's tax vote today is the big prize, there's also a not uninteresting state Senate special election in Minnesota's 26th District.

"Not uninteresting," is, of course, a silly phrase that people use for things that are stuck teetering on the border between interesting and not interesting. This race isn't quite interesting for several reasons.

First of all, the practical significance of the vote is limited. Democrats hold a lopsided advantage in the Minnesota State Senate. The seat will be up again in November. Today's election won't appreciably change the balance of power for now or for the long-term, except to the extent that incumbency provides today's winner with a starting advantage for the November race.

What's more, going by the numbers, the chances of a party switch don't look all that high. The 26th, which is located South of the Twin Cities, opened up when the G.O.P. incumbent resigned. The district regularly votes more Republican than the state as a whole. John McCain won here, even as President Obama won the state by double digits. Especially in the current political climate, Republicans should be favored to hold this sort of seat.

But, I promised you a not uninteresting race and I plan to deliver. There are a few unusual dynamics which might make the race competitive.

Politically Perilous Budget Cuts in Arizona (and Elsewhere?)

posted by Josh Goodman

This is going to a horrible year for state budgets, with stimulus money drying up and tax revenue remaining depressed. Even if some states raise taxes, they'll still be making exceedingly painful budget cuts.

At least that's what experts keep saying. So, I've been wondering on what standard to judge whether a budget cut is painful -- and how to judge whether cuts are significant enough that they come with serious political ramifications.

MA-Senate: An Unusual Referendum on Health Care Reform

posted by Josh Goodman

The entire political world wants to talk about the Massachusetts Senate race and who am I to resist?

I don't think that enough people have commented on what an atypical place Massachusetts is for a referendum on health care reform. Massachusetts, of course, has had a near-universal health care program including an individual mandate and a health exchange for several years now. It more or less already has the sort of health care system envisioned in the federal health care legislation.

On the national level, the individual mandate is despised by both the left and the right. In Massachusetts, though, the individual mandate has generally been popular and, in fact, surprisingly uncontroversial.

So, in some sense, it would be completely shocking if Massachusetts elected Republican Scott Brown to the Senate as a way to thwart national health care reform. Massachusetts isn't just a liberal, Democratic state. It's the state that knows these reform strategies best and, at least until now, seemed to like them.

In Virginia, Big Consequences for Small Electoral Victories

posted by Josh Goodman

One thing that pretty much everyone does is over-interpret close election results. So, when Democrat Dave Marsden wins Virginia's 37th State Senate District by 327 votes, Democrats celebrate it as a sign that they're recovering. People like me come up all sorts of reasons why this might have happened. And, no one usually acknowledges that had just a measly 164 voters switched sides, our analysis would be completely different.

The truth is that, as a reflection of political support, there's no magical difference between 49% and 51% -- the difference is no bigger than between 39% and 41% or 59% and 61%. On the other hand, I think we can be forgiven for making such a big deal out of the difference between 49% and 51%. The reason why is pretty obvious: Narrow electoral victories still come with sizable political consequences.

That's all just a lead-in for me to point out that the 37th Senate District in Virginia is a great case study in the large consequences of close elections.

Marijuana: A Sleeper Political Issue?

posted by Josh Goodman

New Jersey has just legalized medical marijuana. A California House Committee has approved marijuana for recreational use. New polling in Washington state shows a solid majority of voters in favor of legalization.

That voters would be sympathetic to permitting pot -- or at least legalizing it for medicinal purposes -- isn't anything new. Most of the 14 states that have legalized medical marijuana did so via ballot measure.

What's new is that legislators seem more openly sympathetic to pot. It's taken a while for lawmakers to take the message from the ballot measures: Pot is politically safe, at least in most states. The Obama administration's decision to let states create their own policies on medical marijuana also is creating momentum in this direction.

As a result, I'm wondering whether pot can really be a political winner -- whether candidates can win votes by campaigning for more permissive marijuana rules. Sure, medicinal marijuana is reasonably popular, but is it really an issue that will determine which candidate a voter supports? Given the shift going on in state legislatures, we'll probably have an answer to that question soon.

Virginia Senate Special: a Democrat's Counterintuitive Win

posted by Josh Goodman

I've been saying for months that Democrats are motivated and Republicans are complacent, so it comes as no surprise that Democrat Dave Marsden yesterday won a key Virginia State Senate special election in a Fairfax County swing district.

Wait a minute, that's not what I've been saying. In fact, I've been saying the exact opposite thing for months. So how do we explain Marsden's surprise 327-vote victory?

Virginia Senate Special: A Repeat of Deeds and McDonnell?

posted by Josh Goodman

See if this election taking place tomorrow in Virginia sounds familiar. The Democratic candidate is running as a centrist and facing criticism for where he lives. The Republican is a conservative whose past statements on social issues have been a source of controversy.

In other words, it's just like Creigh Deeds and Bob McDonnell all over again.

This is the special election in the 37th State Senate District to replace newly elected Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, a Republican. As I've mentioned before, this race is key for political control of Virginia. Republicans control the Virginia House of Delegates and the governorship. A G.O.P. win in Fairfax County's 37th District would leave the Democrats with only a fragile 21-19 edge in the Senate ahead of redistricting.

The Origins of the Vermont Yankee Controversy, Continued

posted by Josh Goodman

David O'Brien, commissioner of the Vermont Department of Public Service, was kind enough to respond to my post on the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in a comment:

Just to clarify the record on this issue. The decades old law regarding storage of nuclear waste does not require the Vermont General Assembly to vote on continued operation of Vermont Yankee past 2012. The Legislature gave themselves that responsibility in 2005 when they granted Entergy the right to store waste in dry casks on the Vernon site.

One could certainly read from the original language that the intention was that the current nuclear facility could store the waste. This language was added at that time to make it clear that any new sites that would store waste would need legislative approval. This was because there was interest by the federal government to find places to store spent fuel from multiple reactors and VT's granite quarries were considered as possible sites. Unfortunately, as you point out, the grandfather language was limited to the original owner, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp.

We argued at the time that the intent was clear and that without the ability to store waste in dry casks the plant would be forced to cease operating prior to 2012, and therefore VT ratepayers would have lost millions because their utilities would have to buy more expensive power on the market from 2007 and beyond.

The Legislature decided to utilize the leverage they had at the time to bargain for payments to the Clean Energy Development Fund and to add language requiring a legislative vote on continued operation past 2012.

Vermont: How One Word Created Years of Political Controversy

posted by Josh Goodman

For years, the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant has been one of the top topics of debate in Vermont politics. This year, Vermont's lone nuclear plant probably is the top issue in the state, as lawmakers weigh whether to extend operations of the plant beyond 2012, when its license expires.

Vermont Yankee is a big deal in the governor's race, with each of the Democratic candidates arguing that the life of the plant, which supplies a third of the state's power, shouldn't be extended. In contrast, Lieutenant Governor Brian Dubie, the likely Republican nominee, appears sympathetic to Vermont Yankee's continued operations (just like Republican Gov. Jim Douglas, who is retiring)

Why is Vermont Yankee such a perennial big issue in state politics? There are obvious answers to that question. The fiscal and environmental wisdom of nuclear power is always debated, especially outside of the Southeast (where it has broad acceptance). Lawmakers want to know whether the plant will be safe and whether it represents the smartest way for Vermont to acquire the energy it needs.

There's another less obvious answer, however. Legislators are debating the future of Vermont Yankee because of the unintended consequence (at least I think it's unintended) of the particular way that a 1970s state law was written.

Seven Elections to Watch in Early 2010

posted by Josh Goodman

I know you're sick of end of the year and end of the decade lists (which invariably bog down in the question of whether it really is the end of the decade), so I have something completely different: A beginning of the year list!

Lucky us, we don't have to wait until November for some good elections. Here's my list of the seven more interesting state and local elections (I'm not including congressional races) that will occur in the first three months of 2010. Feel free to add your own suggestions of ones I've overlooked.

Arizona: No Deal on Sales Tax

posted by Josh Goodman

That didn't last long. Following up on my post from yesterday, it's clear that the Arizona legislature isn't going to vote to place a sales tax increase on the ballot anytime soon. From the Arizona Republic:

Once again, Gov. Jan Brewer's hopes for a legislative vote to put a sales-tax question before voters have been dashed.

A day after the governor issued a call for a special session on a temporary sales-tax hike, legislative leaders Wednesday said that they've run out of time. More importantly, there didn't appear to be the votes, although accounts vary depending on who is talking. That means today's special session will focus only on enacting $200 million in cuts to the budget, with its $1.6 billion deficit.

In Arizona, Searching for a Sales Tax Deal

posted by Josh Goodman

We'll have some suspense tomorrow in Arizona, as Governor Jan Brewer continues to push for legislative approval of a ballot measure to increase the state sales tax. From the Yuma Sun:

PHOENIX — Gov. Jan Brewer ordered lawmakers back to the Capitol on Thursday to deal with the budget deficit even though she doesn't have the votes for her plan.

Brewer said Tuesday she has been told by House and Senate leadership that they have corralled the necessary support from Democrats to push through legislation putting a temporary sales tax hike on the ballot this spring. Those Democratic votes are necessary because some Republicans will not vote for the plan.

Only thing is, Democratic legislative leaders said those votes are not there — at least not yet and maybe not ever.

The sales tax issue issue has dominated (and perhaps destroyed) Brewer's year-old governorship. I understand why Republican legislators have been reluctant to support the tax vote. They're conservatives. Many of them have pledged to oppose all tax increases. The only reason they're even willing to entertain the idea is that the Arizona budget situation is atrocious.

What I don't quite understand is why Brewer has been unable for so many months to strike a deal with Democrats. The Democrats in the legislature, after all, are intent on preserving key government services. They're ideologically sympathetic to the tax. Shouldn't they want to make a deal?

Will Immigration Turn Gwinnett County Blue?

posted by Josh Goodman

Governing's December cover story is about how immigration is changing Gwinnett County, Georgia, a suburb of Atlanta. Here are the basics:

In 1990, Gwinnett was 91 percent white. Now, it is a different place altogether. “Gwinnett as a whole,” says Bannister, “is becoming a majority-minority group of people.” In fact, it already is one. In the U.S. Census Bureau’s most recent American Community Survey, released this fall, the white population was down to 49.9 percent. Marina Peed, an affordable housing developer who works county-wide, says that “there’s no lily white anymore anywhere in the county. I doubt if there’s a single all-white subdivision in the whole county.”

Today, Gwinnett has large populations of blacks, Hispanics and (perhaps most surprisingly) Asians. The county has substantial populations from Indian and Vietnam, as well as people of Asian (especially Korean) descent who are from elsewhere in the United States.

When I read this story, I thought the same thing I think whenever I read anything: What are the political implications?

Kentucky Senate: Key Win for the G.O.P.

posted by Josh Goodman

Jimmy Higdon preserved the G.O.P.'s narrow edge in the Kentucky State Senate yesterday by winning a surprisingly comfortable 56%-44% victory in a key special election. Higdon's victory in the 14th District was half a reflection of the national mood and half a hyper-local triumph.

You already know this, so I want belabor the point: Especially in a conservative district in a conservative state, it's a good time to be a Republican candidate. Voters seem inclined to use state elections to send messages to national politicians, which is benefiting the G.O.P. If you need more evidence, Republicans also won a state House of Representatives special election in Kentucky yesterday, for a seat that a Democrat had previously held.

Kentucky Senate: State and National Politics Collide

posted by Josh Goodman

Today, the political world receives a pre-Christmas, pre-Hanukkah gift in the form of a splendid special election for state senate in Kentucky. The race comes with major consequences for Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear and his top legislative priority, expanded gambling at racetracks. The election will test the relative significance of a national political environment that favors Republicans and a state political environment that's boosting Democrats.

The race in the 14th District is to replace Dan Kelly, the Republican Senate Majority Leader whom Beshear appointed to a judgeship. It's pretty much universally acknowledged that the reason Beshear appointed Kelly was to open up a competitive state Senate district, thereby giving his party the chance to gain ground.

There's a good reason Beshear cares so much about one Senate seat. A win today for Democrats would whittle Republicans' Senate lead to 19-18, with one independent who caucuses with the G.O.P.

That would put Democrats squarely in striking range to win the Senate in November. It also would increase the pressure on Republicans to approve Beshear's gambling proposal, which he has pushed ever since taking office.

Will Tim Pawlenty Support a State-Level Stimulus?

posted by Josh Goodman

On the federal economic stimulus, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty was able to finesse his two roles as a state executive and as an aspiring Republican presidential candidate. But, the governor has a brand new challenge that seems likely to force him to walk an even narrower tightrope: a stimulus plan coming out of the Minnesota legislature.

Pawlenty took an interesting approach to the federal stimulus. He, like most Republicans, criticized the concept. Unlike other G.O.P. governors, though, he didn't go through the show of pretending to reject the money.

You might call Pawlenty's position on the stimulus pragmatic. The case he made is that Minnesotans already pay the federal government more in taxes than they receive in benefits. Even if his state had rejected the stimulus money, Minnesotans still would be as responsible for paying off the additional national debt as anyone else. So, he reasoned, rather than become even more of a "donor state," Minnesota might as well take the money and try to use it as effectively as possible.

In this way, Pawlenty was able to avoid the controversy back home that would have come from rejecting the money, but didn't diverge too seriously from the conservative base of his party. Most of the governors who blustered about rejecting stimulus money, such as Sarah Palin in Alaska, ended up taking most of it anyway. Pawlenty maintained a consistent position.

Now, though, the Minnesota legislature is threatening that consistency. Here's the plan, as reported by the Pioneer Press:

How Democrats and Republicans Differ: Taxes

posted by Josh Goodman

Remember the innocent days of 2000 when, during the uninspiring Bush v. Gore presidential campaign, people actually argued that there weren't major differences between the Democratic and Republican parties? Once in a while someone will still make this argument (and on certain subjects there's a measure of truth to it), but far more people today would say that Democrats and Republicans disagree on everything than disagree on nothing.

While the parties don't disagree on everything, they do disagree on taxes. The National Association of State Budget Officers released a report (large PDF) recently documenting tax rate changes for Fiscal Year 2010. A dozen states raised personal income tax rates: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin.

What do those states have in common? In every single one, both houses of the legislature are controlled by Democrats.

By the way, if you wanted to be really cynical you might say that there aren't major differences between the Democratic and Republican parties and that they disagree on everything.

Glenn Richardson: The Latest Speaker in Trouble

posted by Josh Goodman

Glenn Richardson, the speaker of the Georgia House of Representatives, seems likely to resign at any moment. Richardson's tragic tale involves a suicide attempt last month after a bout with depression. The proximate cause of his political downfall, though, is his ex-wife's allegations that he had an extramarital affair with a lobbyist while sponsoring legislation to benefit the utility for which she worked.

Richardson's troubles culminate quite a bad year for speakers. In Florida, Ray Sansom lost his job as speaker in a community college scandal. He remains under investigation.

Sal DiMasi, the former speaker of the Massachusetts House of Representatives, faces federal corruption charges. He resigned in January.

And, Pennsylvania officials recently charged one-time speaker John Perzel with theft, conspiracy and obstruction of justice. In all he faces 82 counts.

What's the grand significance of these high-profile speakers getting in trouble? Probably nothing, other than a simple reminder that some politicians will always succumb to the temptations of power.

Kidd and Kelsey Win Special Victories

posted by Josh Goodman

Both of the legislative special elections I mentioned yesterday turned out to be snoozers. Independent Rusty Kidd won easily in Georgia, while Republican Brian Kelsey held a Senate seat in Tennessee for the G.O.P.

Legislative Specials in Tennessee and Georgia

posted by Josh Goodman

The big contest today is for mayor of Atlanta, but we also have a couple of legislative special elections I'm watching.

First, in Tennessee, voters are picking a replacement for Sen. Paul Stanley, a Republican who left office after a sex scandal earlier this year. This seat looks like a pretty easy hold for Republican Brian Kelsey, who resigned from the state House of Representatives to run.

Will Republicans Raise Taxes?

posted by Josh Goodman

Here's a striking quote from Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer in the Arizona Republic:

"We could cut every government service in the state of Arizona, except that which is mandated by the federal government, and we still wouldn't balance the budget."

Brewer's point is the one that she has been making for months. Arizona can't balance its budget unless it raises more revenue. It's hard to raise revenue without raising taxes. That's why Brewer, a conservative Republican, has been advocating for a sales tax increase for months.

But, Brewer has gotten pretty much nowhere. Many Republicans in Arizona -- as elsewhere -- have pledged never to vote for a tax increase. Even if they hadn't made that pledge, many would view such a vote as politically perilous when the nation is just starting to meekly recover from a prolonged, deep recession. I doubt Democrats are especially eager to raise taxes either.

The question, though, is what's the alternative. Unless Brewer is exaggerating the severity of the problem, the money must come from somewhere.

The difference between Arizona and other states is just a matter of degree. Arizona's shortfall is worse than most, but, with various pots of stimulus money starting to run out next fiscal year, virtually every state is in budget trouble. As a result, taxes will be an issue that legislators -- even conservative Republican legislators -- struggle to avoid.

Are Unicameral Legislature Proposals Coming into Style?

posted by Josh Goodman

As you may have read by now, not only are there reports that Rudy Giuliani isn't running for governor next year, there are also reports that he is running for U.S. Senate next year and running for president in 2012. These reports don't make a lot of sense (if he wants to run for president, why is he running for Senate?), but we'll see.

In the process of reading articles about Giuliani's plans, though, I stumbled across something interesting in the Wall Street Journal:

So far, former Rep Rick Lazio is the only declared GOP gubernatorial candidate. Lazio, who lost to Hillary Clinton in the 2000 Senate race, is pushing an overhaul of the state legislature — widely considered dysfunctional – by collapsing the Senate and Assembly into a single legislative body.

Along with angst about government, I could easily see term limits and proposals for part-time legislatures coming back into vogue. I wonder whether Lazio is on to something -- and suggestions for unicameral legislatures will be part of that conversation too.