"The Legislature (by a two-thirds vote of each house) shares the power to place proposed amendments before the electorate. California, however, is unique among American jurisdictions in prohibiting its Legislature, without express voter approval, from amending or repealing even a statutory measure enacted by the voters unless the initiative itself specifically confers this power.

Thus it is considerably easier to amend the California Constitution than the U.S. Constitution, under which an amendment may be proposed either by a vote of two-thirds of each house of Congress or by calling a convention. An amendment can be ratified only by the legislatures of (or by conventions held in) three-quarters of the states.

As a result, while only 17 amendments to the U.S. Constitution (in addition to the Bill of Rights, ratified in 1791) have been adopted since that document was ratified in 1788, more than 500 amendments to the California Constitution have been adopted since the document's ratification in 1879."

Bowen's office announced that it will hold a public hearing March 17 at her Sacramento office to discuss the findings of its investigation into the problem, and to take public comment on the possible withdrawal of the state's approval of the voting system. Meanwhile, the two other counties in the state that use the system are left contemplating what its decertification would mean, and some election advocates are lobbying for some punitive action to be taken against Premier Elections Solutions."

Here is the full article.

"As part of a program intended to ensure the integrity of California elections, Debra Bowen, in her official capacity as the California Secretary of State (the Secretary), decertified and then immediately recertified a number of voting systems in use throughout the state. As a condition of recertification, the Secretary imposed a comprehensive system of postelection manual ballot tallying on local elections officials.

In this appeal, we consider a challenge raised by plaintiffs County of San Diego and Deborah Seiler, in her official capacity as Registrar of Voters for the County of San Diego, and interveners the counties of Kern, Riverside and San Bernardino (collectively, the Counties) to these requirements. The Counties contend that the Secretary does not ave the authority to impose the tallying requirements and that even if the Secretary does possess such authority, she was required, but failed, to act pursuant to the mandates of the Administrative Procedures Act (the APA)."

As we explain below, we disagree with the Counties on the question of the Secretary's authority to issue the ballot tallying requirements. We agree, however that the Secretary's issuance of the requirements was subject to the APA. Consequently, regardless of the wisdom of, or necessity for, the postelection manual ballot tallying requirements, they are void under California law due to the Secretary's failure to adhere to the procedures set forth in the APA."

"A Sacramento judge on Friday said state officials do not have to rewrite the ballot summary describing Proposition 8, the gay marriage ban voters will consider in November.

The ruling is a setback for the initiative's supporters, who say the title and summary written by Attorney General Jerry Brown are argumentative and could prejudice voters. They say Brown should have written a more neutral statement.

Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley disagreed. In his 8-page ruling, the judge said the title and summary is an "accurate statement" of the proposition by saying it would eliminate the right of gay and lesbian couples to marry.

"The court is not willing to fashion a rule that would require the Attorney General to engage in useless nominalization," Frawley wrote.

In a filing in Franklin County Common Pleas Court on Wednesday, Brunner said malfunctions with Premier equipment caused votes to be dropped in the March primary, although they were later recovered and counted by election workers.

Premier, a division of Diebold Inc., has attributed the problem to a conflict between its election management software and an anti-virus program, and the company has been advising election officials on how to cope with it, a company spokesman said. The company also is seeking a long-term fix."

The story is here.

"Proponents of a ballot measure to ban same-sex marriages in California plan to appear in court today to challenge state Attorney General Jerry Brown's rewording of the measure's ballot summary.

On the petitions circulated last year to qualify the measure for the Nov. 4 ballot, it was described as a "Limit on Marriage."

But Brown's new title and summary of Proposition 8, posted on the Secretary of State's Web site on July 22, states the proposed constitutional amendment "Eliminates right of same-sex couples to marry."

The summary still says Proposition 8 provides that "only marriage between a man a woman is valid or recognized in California."

The titles and summaries of ballot measures are typically scrutinized by both sides in a campaign and often challenged in court if one side feels the wording could sway voters against them.

Jennifer Kerns, a spokeswoman for the Yes on Proposition 8, confirmed that proponents "will file a ballot challenge (today in) Superior Court in Sacramento."

"San Francisco voters will be asked to decide whether to name a city sewage plant in honor of President Bush, after a satiric measure qualified for the November ballot today.

Backers of the measure, who for several months circulated a petition to place the measure on the ballot, turned in more than 12,000 signatures on July 7, said organizer Brian McConnell. The Department of Elections today informed those supporters, the self-proclaimed Presidential Memorial Commission, that they had enough valid signatures -- a minimum of 7,168 registered San Francisco voters - to qualify for the November ballot, he said."

County officials have asked the Superior Court to uphold their refusal to process the petitions, an action that has blocked signature-gathering efforts.

County Counsel Jeanine Nadel has declined to write the necessary ballot title and summary for the measure, asserting that the proposal would be unconstitutional.

"If I were to do the ballot title and summary, I feel it would be misleading the voters," Nadel said. "I feel it's best to take this action now rather than later," Nadel said.

A judge this week granted the county a temporary reprieve from writing a title and summary for the proposed initiative pending the outcome of a July 25 hearing on the issues of the case."

The article is here.

The issue is reaching a boiling point for members of four tribal communities in Alaska, who are currently arguing in federal court that state and local election officials haven't provided them with effective oral language assistance and voting materials in their traditional Yup'ik language. Yup'ik is the primary form of communication for Natives in the Bethel, Alaska, region.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the Native American Rights Fund, both of which are representing the Native plaintiffs in the case, say that with the exception of two poorly translated radio ads in 2006, no other election information has been provided to date in the Yup'ik language."

The article is here.

"As the city's elections official, it is my ministerial duty to ensure compliance with all procedural mandates," Norris said."

The article is here.

"An initiative to take redistricting out of the hands of the Legislature will be on the November ballot, backed by a couple of strange political bedfellows.

Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and former state Controller Steve Westly, a Democrat who lost his primary bid to challenge Schwarzenegger in 2006, are co-chairs of the effort to change the way California draws most of its political boundaries.

Westly and Schwarzenegger also worked together in 2004 as co-chairs of the group backing Propositions 57 and 58, which were designed to ease the state's budget woes.

"This is not a Democratic or Republican initiative at all," said Jeannine English, state president of the AARP, one of the sponsors of the ballot measure. "We think this is fair and has broad-based support."

The initiative, which backers have dubbed the California Voters First Act, will create a 14-member redistricting commission with responsibility for drawing the boundaries for Assembly, state Senate and Board of Equalization districts after the 2010 census. The district boundaries must follow geographic, city and community lines and ignore partisan political considerations.

Eight commissioners would be selected by the state auditor's office in a random drawing of candidates selected by a review panel. Those eight would choose the other six members from the applicant pool."