Some thoughts about a couple of pieces of legislation at the state house:
The first is a resolution. Delegate Kayla Young (D-Kanawha) has introduced House Joint Resolution 27 calling for an amendment to the state constitution guaranteeing women the right to control their reproductive decisions, including abortion.
The proposal is similar to one that passed in Ohio. Last November, 57% of Ohio voters approved new constitutional protections for reproductive rights. The Associated Press reported that, “It was the seventh straight victory in statewide votes for supporters of abortion access nationally since the U.S. Supreme Court” overturned Roe v. Wade.
West Virginia Delegate Mike Pushkin (D-Kanawha), who signed on to the resolution, said “voters should have a say in the matter.”
But it will be difficult to get that on the ballot. The Republican-dominated legislature has already outlawed abortion except in rare circumstances. The proposed resolution would have to be approved by two-thirds of the members of both the House and Senate to get on the ballot, and that is highly unlikely.
Still, Pushkin, who is the minority chair of the committee on Health and Human Resources, would like to see it on the agenda. “I would hope so,” he said. “It’s hard to argue with letting voters decide.”
Another piece of legislation that stands out to me is HB 4350. That bill would eliminate the ability of the state’s political parties to fill vacancies on the ballot after the filing period has expired, except in certain rare circumstances.
Both the Democratic and Republican parties have taken advantage of that allowance over the years to round out their ballots. Often, parties find plenty of qualified and interested candidates in a short time who simply hadn’t considered public service until approached.
Our David Beard reported, “Lead sponsor Josh Holstein, (R-Boone) said he introduced the bill because all candidates deserve to know who their opponents will be, even candidates for open seats, and to know that all candidates have followed the process. It’s unfair that someone can come in and be appointed. ‘What’s the point of a filing period if we don’t follow it?’ ”
OK, and certainly it is to a candidate’s advantage to get past the filing period and sail to election or re-election without opposition. However, election laws and procedures should be based on what benefits the voters, not the candidates.
In elections, choice is always better. However, I suspect that Republicans believe this is another mechanism for maintaining their super-majorities, even though a few Republicans did join with Democrats in opposing the bill. It still passed the House 79-18 and now goes to the Senate.
Interestingly, not that many years ago, it was the Republican party that came through the filing period with lots of vacancies on local and statewide ballots. They took advantage of the law to recruit more candidates to at least try to make races competitive and give voters a choice.
I have never heard a voter complain about the current ballot-filling process. Absent that, there is no need to change the law to accommodate politicians who are worried about a little competition.
