1 Dexter A. Johnson LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL 900 COURT ST NE S101 SALEM, OREGON (503) FAX: (503) STATE OF OREGON LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL COMMITTEE Senate Majority Leader 900 Court Street NE S223 Salem OR Re: Whether National Popular Vote Interstate Compact may be referred to voters Dear Senator Burdick: Article II, section 1, of the United States Constitution, vests in each state s [l]egislature the power to direct the manner of choosing presidential electors. You asked whether the Legislative Assembly may exercise that power by referring the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVC) to voters for their approval or rejection at an election. We believe that the answer is yes. A legislative referral of the NPVC, however, would likely face scrutiny under Article II, section 1. Specifically, the referral would likely be challenged on the basis that the term legislature under Article II, section 1, is limited to the representative lawmaking body of a state i.e., the Legislative Assembly of Oregon. The United States Supreme Court has not yet interpreted the term legislature under Article II, section 1. Nevertheless, the Court s case law interpreting that term under other provisions of the Constitution indicates that, when legislature is used to refer to the lawmaking function of a state, that term encompasses a state s entire legislative process. If a court were to follow that precedent in interpreting the term legislature under Article II, section 1, a legislative referral of the NPVC would likely be held constitutional. The meaning of the term legislature has sparked considerable disagreement among judges and legal scholars, however, and it therefore remains far from certain how a court would interpret that term under Article II, section 1. Background The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVC) is an interstate compact, originally designed and promoted by some of the nation s leading constitutional law professors, that would guarantee the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The NPVC has been enacted into law by 11 jurisdictions that collectively possess 165 electoral college votes. 1 By its terms, the NPVC will take effect only once it has been enacted into law by jurisdictions that cumulatively possess 270 or more electoral college votes. 2 1 Status of National Popular Vote Bill in Each State, (visited May 8, 2017). 2 Article IV of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
2 Page 2 All of the jurisdictions that have so far enacted the NPVC have done so through an act of that jurisdiction s lawmaking body. 3 No jurisdiction has yet enacted the NPVC by means of direct legislation i.e., by initiative, referendum or legislative referral. If a jurisdiction were to enact the NPVC via direct legislation, the enactment would likely be challenged under Article II, section 1. Relevant Case Law Article II, section 1, provides, in part: Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the [l]egislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress[.] Whether Oregon has the authority, under Article II, section 1, to refer the NPVC to the voters for approval depends on the meaning of the term legislature. Interpreted narrowly, legislature may refer only to a state s representative lawmaking body. Interpreted more broadly, however, legislature may refer to a state s entire legislative process, including when authorized by a state s constitution the power of the people to legislate via initiative, referendum or legislative referral. The United States Supreme Court has discussed Article II, section 1, in depth in three cases, none of which involved an interpretation of the term legislature. 4 To determine how the Court would interpret the term legislature under Article II, section 1, we therefore examine how the Court has interpreted that term under other provisions of the Constitution. The Court has taken a functional approach, distinguishing when the term legislature refers to the exercise of a state s traditional lawmaking function from when the term refers to the exercise of a nonlawmaking function. The Court has held, for example, that a state legislature s role of ratifying a proposed constitutional amendment under Article V of the United States Constitution is a nonlegislative function that may be performed only by a state s representative legislative body. In contrast, the Court has held that a state legislature s role of setting the rules for holding congressional elections under Article I, section 4, of the United States Constitution, is a legislative function that may be performed in accordance with the state s prescriptions for lawmaking, which may include an initiative or referendum. In Hawke v. Smith, 5 the Ohio legislature had ratified the Eighteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and the issue on appeal was whether Ohio could submit that ratification to the people by referendum. The Court held that it could not. Under Article V, amendments to the United States Constitution must be ratified by the [l]egislatures of three fourths of the several States. The Court concluded that the term legislature, as used in Article V, did not include the people s power to legislate by referendum. The Court reasoned that 3 See Status of National Popular Vote Bill in Each State, (visited May 8, 2017) (NPVC enacted into law by District of Columbia Council and by state legislatures of California, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington). 4 See McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1 (1892) (state legislatures have plenary power under Article II, section 1, to prescribe the method of choosing presidential electors); Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board, 531 U.S. 70 (2000) (declining to address issue whether decision of Florida Supreme Court, by effectively changing manner in which Florida s presidential electors were to be selected, had violated Article II, section 1); Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000) (under Article II, section 1, individual state citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for presidential electors, unless state legislature chooses statewide election as means to implement legislature s power to appoint members of electoral college). 5 Hawke v. Smith, 253 U.S. 221 (1920).
3 Page 3 ratification by a State of a constitutional amendment is not an act of legislation within the proper sense of the word and that the ratifying function may be exercised only by a state s representative body. 6 The Court took the opposite view in its line of cases involving Article I, section 4. In Ohio ex rel. Davis v. Hildebrant, 7 the Ohio legislature had passed a redistricting Act for congressional elections, but voters had rejected the Act in a referendum. The Court upheld the validity of the referendum under Article I, section 4, of the United States Constitution, which provides that [t]he Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the [l]egislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators. The Court held that the referendum, which was permitted under the Ohio Constitution, was part of the legislative power of Ohio and that that power had been legitimately exercised by the people to disapprove the redistricting Act. 8 In Smiley v. Holm, 9 the issue was whether a Minnesota Act redistricting the state for congressional elections was subject to the Governor s veto. The Court concluded that redistricting involves lawmaking in its essential features and most important aspect, and that lawmaking must be in accordance with the method which the State has prescribed for legislative enactments. 10 Thus, similar to its holding in Hildebrant, the Court held that, for purposes of redistricting, the term legislature under Article I, section 4, referred to Minnesota s entire legislative process i.e., not just the two houses of the legislature, but also the gubernatorial veto. The Court noted that [w]herever the term legislature is used in the Constitution it is necessary to consider the nature of the particular action in view. 11 The Court then contrasted the legislative function exercised by the legislature under Article I, section 4, from other, nonlegislative functions exercised under other provisions of the Constitution. 12 Most recently, in Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, 13 the Court upheld a voter initiative that amended the Arizona Constitution to remove congressional redistricting authority from the state legislature and vest that authority, instead, in an independent redistricting commission. In a 5-4 decision by Justice Ginsburg, the Court held that Article I, section 4, allowed the people of Arizona to regulate congressional elections by initiative. 14 The Court noted that dictionaries in use at the time of the Constitution s framing defined the word legislature broadly as [t]he power that makes laws. 15 The Court further noted that the Arizona Constitution defines the state s lawmaking power to include the initiative and referendum processes. Thus, under the Arizona Constitution, the people are a coordinate source of legislation on equal footing with the representative legislative body. 16 In addition, the Court noted that the meaning of the word legislature throughout the Constitution 6 Id. at Ohio ex rel. Davis v. Hildebrant, 241 U.S. 565 (1916). 8 Id. at Smiley v. Holm, 285 U.S. 355 (1932). 10 Id. at 366, Id. at See id. at (contrasting legislative function from electoral function in choosing U.S. Senators under Article I, section 3, before Seventeenth Amendment was adopted; ratifying function for proposed constitutional amendments under Article V; and consenting function in acquisition of federal lands under Article I, section 8, paragraph 17). 13 Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, 135 S. Ct (2015). 14 Id. at Id. at 2671 (quoting Samuel Johnson, 2 A Dictionary of the English Language (1st ed. 1755)). 16 Id. at 2660 (internal quotation marks omitted).
4 Page 4 differs according to the connection in which it is employed, depend[ent] upon the character of the function which that body in each instance is called upon to exercise. 17 With regard to redistricting, the Court had previously held in Hildebrant and Smiley that setting congressional districts is a legislative function, to be performed in accordance with the State s prescriptions for lawmaking, which may include the referendum and the Governor s veto. 18 The Court then went on to hold that the legislative function of redistricting could also be performed by initiative. The Court concluded that the dominant purpose of Article I, section 4, was to empower Congress to override state election rules, not to restrict the ways in which states enact legislation. 19 The Court noted, moreover, that states in our federal system generally retain autonomy to establish their own governmental processes. 20 To respect that autonomy, the Court concluded that Article I, section 4, should not be read to single out federal elections as the one area in which States may not use citizen initiatives as an alternative legislative process. 21 The Court further concluded that, although the initiative process had been invented after the framing of the Constitution, that process was in full harmony with the Constitution s conception of the people as the font of governmental power. 22 Thus, relying on principles of both popular and state sovereignty, the Court upheld Arizona s use of the initiative as a valid means of regulating congressional elections under Article I, section Writing for the four dissenting justices, Chief Justice Roberts concluded that the unambiguous meaning of the Legislature under Article I, section 4, was the representative body of a state. 24 He noted that the word legislature was understood during the Founding Era to mean an institutional body of representatives, not the people at large. In addition, he noted that the Constitution contains 17 provisions referring to a state s legislature. In his view, [e]very one of those references is consistent with the understanding of a legislature as a representative body, and many of those references are flatly incompatible with an interpretation that would include the people as a whole. 25 Chief Justice Roberts, therefore, would give the term legislature a consistent meaning throughout the Constitution as a representative lawmaking body. He disagreed with the majority s approach of giving that term different meanings depending on the function being exercised, accusing the majority of leap[ing] from the premise that the Legislature performs different functions under different provisions to the conclusion that the Legislature assumes different identities under different provisions. 26 Analysis Although the Court s most recent pronouncement on the meaning of the term legislature was decided by a closely divided Court, the Court has nevertheless applied a consistent framework for interpreting the term legislature under various provisions of the Constitution. When that term refers to a lawmaking function, such as redistricting under Article I, 17 Id. at 2668 (quoting Atlantic Cleaners & Dyers, Inc. v. United States, 286 U.S. 427, 434 (1932)). 18 Id. at Id. at Id. at Id. 22 Id. at The Court also held, in the alternative, that a federal statute, 2 U.S.C. 2a(c), allows Arizona to vest redistricting authority in an independent redistricting commission. 135 S. Ct. at Because that statutory holding does not bear on the constitutional issues presented in this opinion, we do not discuss it further S. Ct. at 2680 (Roberts, C.J., dissenting). 25 Id. at Id. at 2682 (emphasis in original).
5 Page 5 section 4, the Court has interpreted the term broadly to encompass a state s entire legislative process. When, on the other hand, the term legislature refers to some other function, such as ratifying proposed constitutional amendments under Article V, the Court has construed the term narrowly to mean only the representative legislative body. Applying that functional approach, we believe that a court would likely interpret the term legislature under Article II, section 1, to include a state s entire legislative process. The function exercised by the legislature under Article II, section 1, is a legislative one. Specifically, Article II, section 1, allows states to legislate the rules for choosing presidential electors. That function resembles the role that the legislature plays under Article I, section 4, of legislating the rules for holding congressional elections. Indeed, the legislature s role under Article II, section 1, seems far more analogous to the legislature s role under Article I, section 4, than it does to the legislature s ratifying role under Article V. Interpreting the term legislature under Article II, section 1, to mean a state s entire legislative process, therefore, would likely fit most comfortably within the Supreme Court s case law interpreting that term under Article I, section 4, and Article V. It is perhaps worth noting that even the dissenting justices in Arizona State Legislature indicated a willingness to interpret legislature to include forms of direct legislation, such as a referendum, in which the state s legislative body still plays a role. Chief Justice Roberts, in his dissent, agreed with the majority that Hildebrant and Smiley stood for the proposition that a state could supplement the legislature s role in the legislative process by means of a referendum or gubernatorial veto. He disagreed, however, that those cases meant that the state could supplant the legislature altogether by means of an initiative. 27 In his view, [n]othing in Hildebrant, Smiley, or any other precedent supports the majority s conclusion that imposing some constraints on the legislature justifies deposing it entirely. 28 It appears, therefore, that at least some of the justices perceive a distinction between an initiative, on the one hand, and a referendum or legislative referral, on the other. If a court were to recognize that distinction in interpreting the term legislature under Article II, section 1, a referendum or a legislative referral would have a stronger chance of withstanding scrutiny than would an initiative. Conclusion The United States Supreme Court has consistently applied a functional approach to interpreting the meaning of the term legislature under various provisions of the United States Constitution. Applying that approach to Article II, section 1, we conclude that a court would likely interpret legislature to include not only a state s representative lawmaking body, but also any method of direct legislation prescribed by the state s constitution. Thus, if Oregon were to enact the NPVC by means of a legislative referral a method of legislation that is sanctioned by the Oregon Constitution 29 we believe that the referral would likely withstand challenge under Article II, section 1. Although we conclude that the approach used by the Supreme Court indicates that a court would uphold the constitutionality of a legislative referral of the NPVC, that outcome cannot be predicted with certainty. Several of the Supreme Court s current justices disagree with the functional approach that the Court has adopted. Those justices believe that the plain 27 Id. at Id. 29 See Article IV, section 1, Oregon Constitution (defining legislative power of Oregon to include initiative, referendum and referral).
6 Page 6 meaning of the term legislature in each of the 17 provisions of the Constitution in which that term appears is a representative legislative body. Given the level of disagreement that the interpretation of legislature has produced under other constitutional provisions, and the fact that any challenge to the NPVC would occur in a highly political environment, the resolution of this issue is difficult to predict. The opinions written by the Legislative Counsel and the staff of the Legislative Counsel s office are prepared solely for the purpose of assisting members of the Legislative Assembly in the development and consideration of legislative matters. In performing their duties, the Legislative Counsel and the members of the staff of the Legislative Counsel s office have no authority to provide legal advice to any other person, group or entity. For this reason, this opinion should not be considered or used as legal advice by any person other than legislators in the conduct of legislative business. Public bodies and their officers and employees should seek and rely upon the advice and opinion of the Attorney General, district attorney, county counsel, city attorney or other retained counsel. Constituents and other private persons and entities should seek and rely upon the advice and opinion of private counsel. Very truly yours, DEXTER A. JOHNSON Legislative Counsel By Rachel Hungerford Staff Attorney
MEMORANDUM STATE OF ALASKA Department of Law To: The Honorable Loren Leman Date: October 20, 2003 Lieutenant Governor File No.: 663-04-0024 Tel. No.: (907) 465-3600 From: James L. Baldwin Subject: Precertification
When Is a Legislature Not a Legislature? When Voters Regulate Elections by Initiative NATHANIEL PERSILY, SAMUEL BYKER, WILLIAM EVANS & ALON SACHAR TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION... 689 II. BACKGROUND
CONGRESSIONAL AND PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORAL REFORM AFTER ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE V. ARIZONA INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMISSION I. FACTS AND HOLDING... 157 A. FACTS... 159 B. HOLDING... 160 II. BACKGROUND...
MEMORANDUM STATE OF ALASKA Department ojlaw To: The Honorable Loren Leman Date: October 20, 2003 Lieutenant Governor File No.: 663-04-0024 '---7"~Z~. Tel. No.: (907) 465-3600 From: mes L. Baldwin Subject:
Should Politicians Choose Their Voters? 1 Politicians are drawing their own voting maps to manipulate elections and keep themselves and their party in power. 2 3 -The U.S. Constitution requires that the
Redistricting in New York State Citizens Union/League of Women Voters of New York State Background Information on Redistricting What is redistricting? Redistricting determines the lines of state legislative
LWVUS National Popular Vote Compact Study, Supporting Arguments by Gail Dryden(CA), Barbara Klein (AZ), Sue Lederman (NJ), Carol Mellor (NY), and Jack Sullivan ( CA) The National Popular Vote (NPV) Compact
Order Code RS20273 Updated September 8, 2003 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web The Electoral College: How It Works in Contemporary Presidential Elections Thomas H. Neale Government and
CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Order Code RS20273 Updated January 17, 2001 The Electoral College: How it Works in Contemporary Presidential Elections Thomas H. Neale Analyst, American
VNP Policy Overview Davia Downey, Ph.D Grand Valley State University 1 State Advisory Backup Politician Independent Redistricting in the US Source: http://redistricting.lls.edu/who.php Legislatures: In
Testimony of Amanda Rolat Legal Fellow, Democracy Program Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law Before the Committee on Government Operations and the Environment of the Council of the District
Free Speech & Election Law Part II: Can States Require Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration?: Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona By Anthony T. Caso* Note from the Editor: This article discusses
Free Speech & Election Law Can States Require Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona By Anthony T. Caso* Introduction This term the Court will hear a case
Case 1:18-cv-00443-CCC-KAJ-JBS Document 79 Filed 03/02/18 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JACOB CORMAN, et al., : : Plaintiffs, : : v. : : ROBERT
Dr. Martha Sloan of the Copper Country League of Women Voters Redistricting in Michigan Should Politicians Choose their Voters? Politicians are drawing their own voting maps to manipulate elections and
January 2010 Of the People, By the People, For the People A 2010 Report Card on Statewide Voter Initiative Rights Executive Summary For over a century, the initiative and referendum process has given voters
2008 Electoral Vote Preliminary Preview ʺIn Clinton, the superdelegates have a candidate who fits their recent mold and the last two elections have been very close. This year is a bad year for Republicans.
Testimony on Senate Bill 125 by Daniel Diorio, Senior Policy Specialist, Elections and Redistricting Program National Conference of State Legislatures March 7, 2016 Good afternoon Mister Chairman and members
Congressional Redistricting Decisions, 0 tate Jurisdiction Process Who is now in the Congressional delegation Anticipated number of Congressional districts (net gain from 000) Census Alabama... Alaska...
Presidential Primaries, Caucuses, and s Chronologically http://www.thegreenpapers.com/p08/events.phtml?s=c 1 of 9 5/29/2007 2:23 PM Presidential Primaries, Caucuses, and s Chronologically Disclaimer: These
Mathematics of the Electoral College Robbie Robinson Professor of Mathematics The George Washington University Overview Is the US President elected directly? No. The president is elected by electors who
State Constitutional Developments in 2016 By John Dinan STATE CONSTITUTIONS Several state constitutional amendments on the ballot in 2016 attracted significant attention. Voters approved citizen-initiated
Initiative and Referendum Direct Democracy for State Residents August 2009 Initiative and Referendum Direct Democracy for State Residents A Publication of the Research Division of NACo s County Services
Judicial S in the States Appellate and General Jurisdiction Courts Initial S, Retention, and Term Length INITIAL Alabama Supreme Court X 6 Re- (6 year term) Court of Civil App. X 6 Re- (6 year term) Court
(Slip Opinion) Cite as: 531 U. S. (2000) 1 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the
Chronology of Successful and Unsuccessful Merit Selection Ballot Measures (NOTE: Unsuccessful efforts are in italics. Chronology does not include constitutional amendments authorizing merit selection for
Moose Government Relations CHAIRMAN S GUIDE First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
Citizens Research Council of Michigan 625 SHELBY STREET, SUITE 1B, DETROIT, Ml 48226,3220 (313) 961-5377 FAX (313) 9614)648 1502 MICHIGAN NATIONAL TOWER, LANSING, Ml 48933-1738 (517) 485-9444 FAX (547)
American Government Workbook WALCH PUBLISHING Table of Contents To the Student............................. vii Unit 1: What Is Government? Activity 1 Monarchs of Europe...................... 1 Activity
Delegates: Understanding the numbers and the rules About 4,051 pledged About 712 unpledged 2472 delegates Images from: https://ballotpedia.org/presidential_election,_2016 On the news I hear about super
Dexter A. Johnson LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL 900 COURT ST NE S101 SALEM, OREGON 97301-4065 (503) 986-1243 FAX: (503) 373-1043 www.oregonlegislature.gov/lc STATE OF OREGON LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL COMMITTEE Senator
THE RULES OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AS ADOPTED BY THE 2012 REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION TAMPA, FLORIDA AUGUST 27, 2012 **AMENDED BY THE REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON APRIL 12, 2013 & JANUARY 24, 2014**
1 The United States In this part of this lesson, we explore the different meanings of the phrases, United States and United States of America used in the Organic Laws of the United States of America. Article
Appellate Case: 14-3062 Document: 01019274718 Date Filed: 07/07/2014 Page: 1 Nos. 14-3062, 14-3072 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT KRIS W. KOBACH, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,
ills and ill Processing 3-17 Referral of ills The first major step in the legislative process is to introduce a bill; the second is to have it heard by a committee. ut how does legislation get from one
The United States Presidential Election Process: Undemocratic? The Bill of Rights Institute Chicago, IL October 2, 2008 Artemus Ward Department of Political Science Northern Illinois University firstname.lastname@example.org
the rules of the republican party As Adopted by the 2008 Republican National Convention September 1, 2008 *Amended by the Republican National Committee on August 6, 2010 the rules of the republican party
132nd General Assembly Regular Session H. B. No. 25 2017-2018 Representatives Ramos, Leland Cosponsors: Representatives Johnson, G., Smith, K., Kent, Cera, Ashford, Boyd A B I L L To amend sections 3505.39
A Public Forum Pros and Cons of the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact Thursday, February 12, 2009 7:00 pm 8:30 pm Memorial Presbyterian Church 601 24th Ave. SW in Norman, OK Panelists Keith Gaddie,
State Constitutional Developments in 2014 By John Dinan STATE CONSTITUTIONS Although constitutional amendment activity was lower in 2014 than in recent even-numbered years, several of the 72 approved amendments
STATUS OF 2002 REED ACT DISTRIBUTION BY STATE Revised January 2003 State State Reed Act Reed Act Funds Appropriated* (as of November 2002) Comments on State s Reed Act Activity Alabama $110,623,477 $16,650,000
What is a congressional standing committee? Both houses of Congress have permanent committees that essentially act as subject matter experts on legislation. Both the Senate and House have similar committees.
12B,C: Voting Power and Apportionment Group Activities 12C Apportionment 1. A college offers tutoring in Math, English, Chemistry, and Biology. The number of students enrolled in each subject is listed
Elections How we choose the people who govern us Electing the President Questions 1. What is an example of popular sovereignty? 2. Who are you really voting for when you vote in a presidential election?
Race to the White House Drive to the 2016 Republican Nomination Ron Nehring California Chairman, Ted Cruz for President July 18 21, 2016 2016 Republican National Convention Cleveland, Ohio J ul y 18 21,
March 4, 1977 ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION NO. 77-73 The Honorable Patrick J. Hurley Majority Leader of the House House of Representatives 3rd Floor - State Capitol Building Topeka, Kansas 66612 Re: Constitution--Amendments--Referendum
III. Activities Election of 1860 Name Worksheet #1 Candidates and Parties The election of 1860 demonstrated the divisions within the United States. The political parties of the decades before 1860 no longer
Parties and Elections Selections from Chapters 11 & 12 Party Eras in American History Party Eras Historical periods in which a majority of voters cling to the party in power Critical Election An electoral
BLW YouGov spec This study is being conducted by John Carey, Gretchen Helmke, Brendan Nyhan, and Susan Stokes, who are professors at Dartmouth College (Carey and Nyhan), the University of Rochester (Helmke),
POLIDATA Political Data Analysis DATABASE DEVELOPMENT, ANALYSIS AND PUBLICATION; POLITICAL AND CENSUS DATA; REDISTRICTING SUPPORT CLARK BENSEN POLIDATA 3112 Cave Court, Suite B Lake Ridge, VA 22192-1167
Authority to Formulate and Approve State Education Standards (Working Document) January 26, 2011 It is a primary role of every legislature to write state statutes through legislation. Ultimately, the legislature
PERMISSIBILITY OF ELECTRONIC VOTING IN THE UNITED STATES State Member Conference Call Vote Member Electronic Vote/ Email Board of Directors Conference Call Vote Board of Directors Electronic Vote/ Email
820 First Street NE, Suite 510 Washington, DC 20002 Tel: 202-408-1080 Fax: 202-408-1056 email@example.com www.cbpp.org Revised December 10, 2007 PRESIDENT S VETOES COULD CAUSE HALF A MILLION LOW-INCOME PREGNANT
Chapter 3: The Constitution Section 2 Objectives 1. Identify the four different ways by which the Constitution may be formally changed. 2. Explain how the formal amendment process illustrates the principles
Official Voter Information for General Election Statute Titles Alabama 17-6-46. Voting instruction posters. Alaska Sec. 15.15.070. Public notice of election required Sec. 15.58.010. Election pamphlet Sec.
NO. 13-1314 In the Supreme Court of the United States ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE, v. Appellant, ARIZONA INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMISSION, ET AL., Appellees. On Appeal from the United States District
Automatic Voter Registration Whereas our present law lets eligible voters register to vote when they apply or renew their driver s licenses only if they opt-in by checking a box; Whereas eligible voters
No. 13-1314 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States ARIZONA STATE LEGISLATURE, Appellant, v. ARIZONA INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMISSION, et al., Appellees. On Writ of Certiorari to the United States
FACT SHEET CIRCLE The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement Youth Voter Increases in 2006 By Mark Hugo Lopez, Karlo Barrios Marcelo, and Emily Hoban Kirby 1 June 2007 For the
ALABAMA NAME 105 XX STATE LEGISLATURE Process State legislature draws the lines Contiguity for Senate districts For Senate, follow county boundaries when practicable No multimember Senate districts Population
THE COUNCIL OF STATE GOVERNMENTS ARTICLES OF ORGANIZATION ADOPTED DECEMBER 3, 2012 REVISED DECEMBER 11, 2016 Table of Contents Please choose an article below. ARTICLE I ARTICLE II ARTICLE III ARTICLE IV
Reading Between the Lines their Reform in Iowa, Arizona and California and Ideas for Change in New Jersey Reading Between the Lines Purposes of the Study 1. Prepared for the Eagleton Institute of Politics
Amendments to the Constitution CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES ARTICLES IN ADDITION TO, AND AMENDMENT OF, THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PROPOSED BY CONGRESS, AND RATIFIED BY THE LEGISLATURES
THE RULES OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY THE RULES OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY As adopted by the 2012 Republican National Convention August 28, 2012 *Amended by the Republican National Committee on April 12, 2013
The Governor of this State shall execute a Compact on behalf of this State with any 1 or more of the States of Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Maryland,
14. REFORMING THE PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES: SMALL STATES FIRST; LARGE STATES LAST; WITH A SPORTS PLAYOFF SYSTEM The calendar of presidential primary elections currently in use in the United States is a most
Regulating Elections: Districts 17.251/252 Fall 2012 Throat Clearing Preferences The Black Box of Rules Outcomes Major ways that congressional elections are regulated The Constitution Basic stuff (age,
Southern Tier East Census Monograph Series Report 11-1 January 2011 2010 CENSUS POPULATION REAPPORTIONMENT DATA The United States Constitution, Article 1, Section 2, requires a decennial census for the
Case 2:17-cv-04392-MMB Document 211 Filed 01/10/18 Page 1 of 73 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA LOUIS AGRE, et al. v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 17-4392 THOMAS W. WOLF,
No. 16-1161 In The Supreme Court of the United States Beverly R. Gill, et al., v. William Whitford, et al., Appellants, Appellees. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District
TEXAS SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY THURGOOD MARSHALL SCHOOL OF LAW LIBRARY LOCATION GUIDE July 2018 ITEMS LOCATION ITEMS LOCATION Administrative Decisions Under Immigration and 116 Board of Tax Appeal Reports 115
PREVIEW 08 PRO-EQUALITY AND ANTI-LGBTQ STATE AND LOCAL LEGISLATION Emboldened by the politics of hate and fear spewed by the Trump-Pence administration, state legislators across the nation have threatened
No. 10-821 In the Supreme Court of the United States PAT QUINN, GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, PETITIONER, GERALD A. JUDGE, DAVID KINDLER, AND ROLAND W. BURRIS, U.S. SENATOR, RESPONDENTS. On Petition
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION No. STATE OF NEW JERSEY th LEGISLATURE INTRODUCED APRIL, 0 Sponsored by: Senator JENNIFER BECK District (Monmouth) SYNOPSIS Proposes constitutional amendment to provide for
Arizona Standards for Social Studies, History (Grades 9-12) STANDARD 2: CIVICS/GOVERNMENT Students understand the ideals, rights, and responsibilities of citizenship, and the content, sources, and history
HIST-CE SOL CE 6 Unit Test Exam not valid for Paper Pencil Test Sessions [Exam ID:4W9T4A 1 In America, who makes the laws? A People elected to serve in the legislature B Cabinet members C People elected
BYLAWS OF SYLVAN LEARNING CENTER FRANCHISE OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. (Revised and Approved May 23, 2018) Created on 12/11/2007; Revised 05/23/2018 BYLAWS OF SYLVAN LEARNING CENTER FRANCHISE OWNERS ASSOCIATION,
ELECTION UPDATE Tom Davis Polarization The Ideological sorting of the parties 1. Redistricting Residential Sorting Voting Rights Act Gerrymandering 2. Media Business Models Cable News Talk Radio Internet
2008 Voter Turnout Brief Prepared by George Pillsbury Nonprofit Voter Engagement Network, www.nonprofitvote.org Voter Turnout Nears Most Recent High in 1960 Primary Source: United States Election Project