Tag Archives: Josh Hawley

Election Night Preview — Part Two — Prime Time Hour One (8:00 to 8:59 p.m. Eastern)

While there are some significant states that close before 8:00 p.m. Eastern, that time marks when election coverage truly kicks off.  Aside from the realities of the broadcast networks that as for two basic reasons.  First, as discussed last weekend, vote counting is slow.  Since people in line when the polls “close” can still vote, it takes some time to actually shut down a polling place (both in getting the last people processed and out and in the procedures to secure the election materials after the polling place closes).  And then the counting usually have to be transported to some central location for the local election authority.  Thus, the first hour of returns tend to be the results of early voting and absentee ballots (in those states which release those separately from the election day returns) and a handful of smaller counties.  It is only in the second and third hour of counting that you start getting the rest of the smaller counties and the first returns from the really big counties.  Second, not every state closes at 7:00 p.m., local time, and a good chunk of the states are not in the Eastern time zone.  Only two states (Indiana and Kentucky) close at 6:00 p.m. local time.   While 7:00 p.m. is one of the more popular local times to close, only nineteen states close then (and only five of those are in the Eastern time zone).  Four states (Arkansas, North Carolina, Ohio, and West Virginia) close at 7:30 p.m. local time.    The most popular poll closing time is actually 8:00 p.m. when twenty-two jurisdictions close their polls.  You have two states (Tennessee and Nebraska) which despite being split in two time zones have opted to have all the polls close at the same real time (meaning in the eastern part of the state, the polls close at 8:00 p.m. local time while in the western part of the state, the polls close at 7:00 p.m. local time).  Lastly, two states (New York and North Dakota) close at 9:00 p.m. local time.

So when 8:00 p.m. Eastern time rolls around, you have polls closing in the ten jurisdictions wholly in the Eastern time zone that close at 8:00 local time.  You also have the polls in the western part of Florda closing at what is 7:00 p.m. local time in that part of Florida to finish out Florida.  You have the polls closing at 8:00 p.m. local time in the part of Michigan in the Eastern time zone (all but the Western part of the Upper Peninsula), You have the polls closing simultaneously at either 8:00 p.m. local time or 7:00 p.m. local time in Tennessee.  You have all of the polls closing at 7:00 p.m. local time in Alabama, Illinois, Mississippi, Missouri, and Oklahoma.  And you have polls closing at 7:00 p.m. local time in the eastern parts of Kansas, South Dakota, and Texas.  Of those last three states, only South Dakota is roughly evenly divided geographically between Central and Mountain time and only tiny slivers of Kansas and Texas are in the Mountain time zone.  In short, you go from approximately ten jurisdictions being closed, to the majority of almost thirty jurisdictions being closed.  For all intents and purposes, election night starts at 8:00 p.m. Eastern.

As the hour starts, we should have already had some expected projections from the early states.  And the early news is more likely to be bad news than good news, but it is expected bad news that should not cause people to panic.  Barring a miracle, by 8:00 p.m. Eastern, the networks and the AP will have projected Donald Trump the winner in Indiana, Kentucky, South Carolina, and West Virginia.  They will also have projected the Republicans as winning two Senate seats (Indiana and West Virginia) to one for the Democrats (Vermont) for a gain of one although it is possible that the Virginia Senate seat might also be projected before 8:00 p.m.  And most of the early House seats projected will be Republican with a couple of seats gained in North Carolina. Continue Reading...

Posted in Elections, General Election Forecast | Also tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Comments Off on Election Night Preview — Part Two — Prime Time Hour One (8:00 to 8:59 p.m. Eastern)

Primary Elections — Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Washington, Hawaii

Another week, another set of primaries.  While the national media is focused on who will be the next Vice-President of the United States,  the results of these elections will determine what seats might be competitive in November, and, in some cases, the winner is all but certain to be holding office in January.  On Tuesday, there will be primaries in Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, and Washington.  On Saturday, there will be primaries in Hawaii.

In Kansas, Republican engaged in extreme gerrymandering.  The Republicans’ problem in drawing lines is that half of the state’s population is in a handful of counties in Eastern Kansas covering the western suburbs of Kansas City, the state capitol in Topeka, and the University of Kansas in Lawrence.  While not deep blue, this area is definitely bluer than the rest of the state.  Under the pre-2020 lines, the Second District was a lean Republican district and the Third District was a swing district with a slight edge for the Democrats.  To try to “fix” this, the Republicans in Kansas drew some weird lines to make the First District (western Kansas) and the Second District (Topeka and Lawrence) into a weird interlocking jigsaw puzzle which allowed moving some blue areas out of the Third District (K.C. suburbs) into the Second District while adding enough red areas into the Second District to make it redder. The impact was to make the Second District relatively safe while keeping the Third District competitive but slightly favorable to the Republicans.

During the past several cycles, the Second District has been something of a revolving door.  The candidate elected in 2018 was scandal plagued and lost the primary in 2020.  The candidate who won in 2020 got tired of the shenanigans in Washington after a mere four years and opted against seeking a third term. As a result, there are five candidates seeking the Republican nomination, three of whom are roughly equal in fundraising.  The two leading candidates appear to be Jeff Kahrs who serves on the staff of the current representative and appears to have the endorsement of what passes for the Republican establishment in Kansas and former state Attorney General and failed gubernatorial candidate Derek Schmidt who has the support of the Trump wing of the Kansas party. Continue Reading...

Posted in Elections, House of Representatives, Primary Elections, Senate | Also tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Comments Off on Primary Elections — Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Washington, Hawaii

Supreme Court Update

Before departing for the holidays, the Supreme Court had a couple of “gifts” of merits review in a couple of high profile cases with the possibility of a third before New Year’s.

Starting at the top of the list is the dubious case brought by Mrs. Senator Josh Hawley.  (Normally, the fact that a relative of a politician is involved in a case would not be noteworthy but whne you put yourself out as a power couple and you file the case in a location which assures that it will be heard by a judge who donated to the relative’s campaign and the relative played a large role in getting that judge appointed to the bench, this clearly qualifies as a team effort for which both share the blame.)  In this case, plaintiffs are a group of doctors who claim that they have standing to challenge the FDA’s decisions on approving Mifepristone because at some point they may be forced to provide treatment for a patient who took Mifepristone and had complications.  These political doctors sought to both invalidate recent changes to the guidance that the FDA gives on Mifepristone and its original approval.  Having filed the case in a location that assured them that the case would be heard by a judge who would twist the law and the facts to rule in their favor, they succeeded at the trial court on both parts of their case.  The FDA and the drug manufacture appealed this rubber stamp decision to the Fifth Circuit.  Even the Fifth Circuit could not twist the law in a manner that would allow them to affirm the decision as it relates to the original approval of Mifepristone, but they did find flaws in the administrative process which allowed them to affirm the decision with regards to the more recent changes approving a broader use for Mifepristone.  Everybody then sought U.S. Supreme Court review.  Several months ago, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the Fifth Circuit’s ruling.  This past week, the Supreme Court granted the review sought by the FDA and the drug manufacturer, but denied the review sought by the medical hacks.

While this Supreme Court having any case related to abortion is always a matter of concern, the decision to take the FDA’s appeal and reject the appeal by the medical hacks is the best result possible for the pro-choice community.  And, the main issue in the case is the FDA procedures for approving medications and expanding “on label” uses after initial approval.  As such, the impact of a ruling against the FDA in this case would have a major negative impact on pharmaceutical companies.  As such, it is possible that six of the justices might put the abortion aspects of this case to the side and simply focus on it as an administrative procedure case.   If not, there is always the November elections. Continue Reading...

Posted in Donald Trump, Judicial | Also tagged , , , , Comments Off on Supreme Court Update

Georgia, Recall Elections, Impeachment, and Removal — a Legal Primer

In the aftermath of a weak of sedition and riots, I am seeing a lot of questions about issues related to the seating (or exclusion) of Senators and Representatives.  I am also seeing questions about what can be done to bring a quicker end to the mistake that was the Trump presidency.

Let’s start with the Georgia elections.  As we learned in November, it takes time to finalize the election results.  In Georgia, there are three key deadlines.  The first is the deadline for receipt of overseas ballots and for the curing of “rejected” absentee ballots and for determining the validity of provisional ballots.  That deadline was the close of business today.     So, at the present time, all  of the counties should know if they have any votes left to count.

The second deadline is next Friday — January 15.  By that date, all of the approximately 160 counties are supposed to have completed their county canvass and certified all votes to the Secretary of State.  This deadline can be extended if the Secretary of State orders a pre-certification audit (as happened in the presidential race).  (It is unclear how the audit will apply to the Senate races.  The state law required one for the November election but is ambiguous as to the run-off election.  The Secretary of State also opted for a complete hand recount of all votes in the presidential race — which technically is not an audit — but the statute only requires an audit of random counties and precincts.  If a proper – in other words,  limited — audit is conducted, the counties that have to do the audit may not need an extension.) Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 General Election, Donald Trump, Elections, Joe Biden, Senate | Also tagged , , , , , , , Comments Off on Georgia, Recall Elections, Impeachment, and Removal — a Legal Primer

The Count

To quote the Grateful Dead, “what a long, strange trip it’s been.”  Our hopes for a decisive enough result that the winner would be clear on November 3 failed to come to fruition.  And since then, Trump and his allies have thrown everything but the kitchen sink into denying reality.  Even as late as this week, Trump’s allies have been filing meritless cases to try to have judges cancel the votes in various states.  And almost all of the case have been rejected by the courts.  To date, the Supreme Court has not accepted any cases, and have left most cases proceed on the normal schedule (which means no decisions on taking any of them prior to January 8 when the Supreme Court next meets).

That leaves us down to one last abuse of the legal process — the joint Congressional session to count the electoral votes sent by the states.  The current process dates back to the aftermath of the election of 1876.  In that election, you had a handful of states with conflicting results certified by different entities.  As such, you had multiple states sending votes from individuals that had been recognized by some part of state government as the official electors.  Ultimately, a commission was established to resolve those disputes.  While it took around a decade to get legislation through Congress, the Electoral Count Act of 1887 set forth the key provisions that are still in place today.   The current language in Title 3 sets forth a multi-stage process.

First, prior to election day, each state legislature shall set forth the rules governing the selection of electors.  These rules besides designating who makes the selection also dictate the procedures to be followed during that selection, the role to be played by various state agencies (legislatures, state election authorities, and local election authorities) in running the selection process, and who has the power to resolve disputes that might arise during the selection process (courts, state election authorities, local election authorities, and legislatures).  While the Constitution does not mandate the use of the popular vote to select electors (and, in the early days, some states had the legislature pick the electors), every state has now opted for using some variation of the popular vote to pick electors.  And every state has adopted procedures in which the initial resolution of election disputes are made by local election authorities and state election authorities with the potential for judicial review of those decisions. Continue Reading...

Posted in 2020 General Election, Donald Trump, Electoral College, Joe Biden | Also tagged , , , , , Comments Off on The Count

Voter Fraud and the Missouri Senate Race

Earlier this month, the law on voting where you reside appears to have caught an unlikely person in an election law violation — Missouri’s Attorney General — and presumptive Republican Senate candidate — Josh Hawley.  To understand what happened, a little local background is in order.

The main campus of the University of Missouri is in Columbia — thirty miles away from the state capitol in Jefferson City.  Before becoming Attorney General, Hawley was a law professor at the University of Missouri.  Aside from his full time job, like some law professors, Hawley offered his assistance on cases that he thought deserved his assistance.  One of those cases involved aiding the religious owners of Hobby Lobby in their effort to deny birth control coverage to their female employees.  This case gave Hawley connections to ultra-conservative donors in Washington, and also was a selling point as he went around Missouri speaking to local Republicans in rural counties.   These two advantages allowed him to pull an upset last year in the Republican primary over the “establishment” conservative candidate in the Republican primary, and the Trump landslide helped him win the general election.

After the election is where the fun begins.  First, among the changes that flowed from the 2016 election, the new Republican governor appointed the state representative who represented part of Columbia and the surrounding area to an administration positions.  Before becoming Attorney General,  Hawley and his family lived in this district.   The Governor set the special election to fill this seat for this August (one of the available election dates under state law). Continue Reading...

Posted in Elections, GOP, Senate | Also tagged , Comments Off on Voter Fraud and the Missouri Senate Race