Special Election Research Articles

Municipal Corporations. Powers and Functions. Delegation of Duty of City Clerk to Examine Petition for Special Election

Municipal Corporations. Powers and Functions. Delegation of Duty of City Clerk to Examine Petition for Special Election

The Ames, Iowa, Water Supply

The City of Ames, Iowa, derives its water supply from a thirty foot sand and gravel stratum, lying between the depths of seventyfive and one hundred and five feet below the normal ground surface. The water is organically pure and is satisfactory as a city supply, except that it is somewhat hard about 16 grains and carries a high iron content. At the present time the water is aerated, but adequate storage is not available to give detention period sufficient to settle out the iron. Consequently, this settlement takes place in the mains and results in annoying discoloration whenever any unusual disturbance occurs in the mains. Frequent flushing helps, but the relief is only temporary. No treatment other than the aeration is given the water. It is tested on Tuesday and Thursday of each week and is always found satisfactory. Occasionally the Bacteria aerogenes show up, but the irregularity with which this occurs indicates contamination from some source after the water has left the ground. With the iron removed, the water would be entirely satisfactory as a supply, and its accessibility and abundance make the consideration of any other supply unnecessary. It is not, therefore, the supply itself that is causing the city administration concern, but rather the inadequacy of the wells, storage, and distribution system. The rapid growth of the city in the past few years has necessitated heavy outlay for new mains, hydrants, valves, meters, etc., all of which have been financed from the earnings of the plant, so that the ever increasing discrepancy between the demand and the storage, while not entirely overlooked, was at least neglected. Certain incidents have impressed on those directly in charge of the water supply the absolute and immediate need of strengthening the system, and in April, 1923, a special election was called to vote a $70,000 bond issue to carry out the needed extensions. This election was peculiar in that it carried by an overwhelming

The Missouri Constitutional Convention

Under the provisions of a constitutional amendment adopted in November, 1920, the voters of Missouri, at a special election in August, 1921, approved the plan for a constitutional convention, to consist of two delegates from each of the 34 senatorial districts and 15 delegates elected at large. In order to secure representation from different political parties the amendment restricted each party to the nomination of one candidate for delegate in each senatorial district. The state committees of the two major political parties agreed also to the nomination by each of seven candidates for delegates-at-large, and jointly nominated a candidate for the fifteenth delegate-at-large, so that the convention was bipartisan in its membership. This arrangement prevented the consideration of questions involving party differences, except in one case where agreement was secured upon a compromise plan.The convention met on May 16, 1922 and adjourned sine die on November 6, 1923, after having been in session 267 working days. On account of the session of the legislature a recess was taken from December 15, 1922 to April 16, 1923. The convention continued to meet until September 7, 1923, when another recess was taken to enable the committees on phraseology and arrangement, submission and address, and others to complete their reports. The convention reassembled on October 2, 1923 and completed its work on October 5. In order to provide for any contingency that might arise it was decided to reconvene on November 6, with the understanding that the president and secretary with such delegates as might be present could declare the convention finally adjourned.

Is Limiting Abortion a Pretext for Oligarchy?: Abortion and the Quest to Limit Citizen-Initiated Ballot Rights in Ohio

In the shadow of a ballot issue attempting to enshrine abortion rights in the Ohio Constitution, a of the Ohio legislature devised an intervening constitutional amendment which set a special election, despite having outlawed special elections earlier in the year. The intervening question before voters was whether to raise the threshold for constitutional amendments from fifty percent plus one to sixty percent. While the scheme was viewed by many as the supermajority’s way to stop the abortion rights amendment from becoming a constitutional right, there is an argument that using emotionally charged issues such as abortion is a pretext for schemes that would preserve and perpetuate oligarchic power.

Massachusetts Politics

The period since elections of 2010 has been busy for key political players and parties in Massachusetts. Nothing has occurred that would disturb conclusion of Professor Jerold Duquette in True Blue Mass 2010 that political equilibrium has returned to Bay State after Scott Brown's surprising victory in 2010 special election to fill Edward M. Kennedy's seat in U.S. senate. But there has been some change, a good deal of stasis, and revival of an unfortunate political malady that has long been part of state's political DNA - charges of corruption.That return to equilibrium has imperiled Senator Brown as he seeks re-election to a full term in 2012. Residents watched with more bemused interest than passion as former Governor Mitt Romney secured Republican presidential nomination. Even as typical partisan balance in state has largely remained undisturbed change has come to congressional delegation. Democrats in legislature don't face much challenge from forlorn state GOP, but they are nervous about criminal investigations by state attorney general and U.S. attorney.The big news in most states would be a favorite son capturing nomination of his party for presidency. Not in Massachusetts; here dominant story is battle between Senator Scott Brown and Harvard law professor Elizabeth Warren for the people's seat. For most of 201 1 Democrats were adrift in their hopes of running a competitive race against Brown. The telegenic senator was by far most popular politician in state and enjoyed a huge war chest advantage over any contender. Prominent Democrats ducked race. Then along came a gift from oddest of donors - Republican caucus in U.S. senate. Their obstinate refusal to allow President Barack Obama to appoint Warren as first head of Consumer Financial Protection Board sent professor back to Massachusetts to contemplate her future. It didn't take much prodding from eager Democrats for Professor Warren to decide that her future would be as a candidate for senate seat held by Scott Brown. The Democrats went from no credible candidate to a forceful and accomplished advocate for middle class, and one who had been made a martyr by Republican Party.Where Scott Brown has frequently been described as a rock star, now Democrats had one of their own. Several lesser Democrats remained in field but they quickly scurried away in face of Warren onslaught. Only one, attorney Marisa DeFranco, remained to contest party's endorsement convention but Warren racked up another unusual achievement at gathering: she actually united perpetually feuding party regulars and reformers and dispatched DeFranco from field. Moreover, Warren's draw with liberals nationally enabled her to match and exceed Brown's fundraising prowess.Senator Brown, of course, is not one to sleep through a challenge. He has continued with his own prodigious fund raising efforts, and he remains amazingly popular in state (although some polls have found him no longer most popular politician in state trailing, of all people, Attorney General Martha Coakley). The likeable senator continued to appeal to Independents and Reagan Democrats, including Catholics and even members of union households. Brown touted his independent voice in Washington, often distancing himself from (to many Massachusetts voters) unpopular national Republican Party. One contrary example was his embrace of Blunt amendment on contraceptives, a stand that enraged pro-choice progressives but may have been calculated to appeal to Catholics upset with President Obama's mishandling of religious liberty concerns involved. The most prominent and silliest issue exploited by Brown was question of Warren's claim to Cherokee heritage. Though heritage question generated a lot of news stories and tweets it had little or no impact with electorate. …

Methods of Selecting and Retiring Judges in a Metropolitan District

Justice is not administered by an executive head plamning how a large number of employees shall do clerical work or tend machines. Its ultimate source is in the operation of the mind of the judge upon certain facts presented to him in a judicial investigation. The power of the state to preserve order and settle the rights of parties is subject to be invoked in one way or another, according as the judge's mind reacts and operates. Clearly, therefore, the way in which the minds are selected for this important public duty and the way they are retired are of the first importance to the due administration of justice. It may be that in some frontier or sparsely settled rural districts where extra-legal government does not exist, judges are in a degree really elected by the people. It may be that in such communities the electorate does actually pick out that one among the lawyers whom it wishes to act as judge. There may be other communities which are well satisfied with the results obtained by special judicial elections at which the candidates are nominated by petition only and where the ballot is in form non-partisan. An analysis of conditions in such communities will usually show that extra-legal government by politocrats is very weak or non-existent and that the power of selecting and retiring judges really resides in the lawyers subject only to the approval of the electorate.

The Operation of the Recall in Oregon

The “final crowning act to complete the temple of popular government here” was the adoption of the “recall” by a constitutional amendment in June, 1908. This provision allows the recall of any elective public officer by the voters of the district from which he was elected. The recall is instituted by filing a petition demanding the recall, signed by twenty-five per cent of the number of electors who voted in the district at the preceding election for justice of the supreme court. The petition must set forth the reasons for the demand. The officer may avoid a recall election by resignation. If he does not resign within five days after the petition has been filed, a special election (in practice it may be called at the same time as the general election) is called to determine whether he shall continue in office. He is virtually a candidate for reëlection without nomination, since others may be nominated for the office, and the person receiving the highest number of votes cast at the election is declared elected, whether he is the person whose recall is demanded or another. No petition may be circulated against an officer until he has held office for six months except in the special case of a member of the legislature, where it may be filed within five days from the beginning of the first session after his election. After one recall election no additional recall petitions may be filed against the same officer during the same term unless the petitioners pay into the public treasury the amount of the expenses of the preceding recall election.

Special Elections as Affected by Section 18 of the Schedule

Special Elections as Affected by Section 18 of the Schedule

Elections: Conduct of Special Elections: Preparation of Ballots

Elections: Conduct of Special Elections: Preparation of Ballots