Pennsylvania House Bill HB36

Pennsylvania 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/7/23
• Refer: 3/7/23

Caption

In district election officers, further providing for election officers to be sworn; in dates of elections and primaries and special elections, further providing for affidavits of candidates; in nomination of candidates, further providing for petition may consist of several sheets and statement of circulator, for affidavits of candidates, for examination of nomination petitions, certificates and papers and return of rejected nomination petitions, certificates and papers, for vacancy in party nomination by failure to pay filing fee or for failure to file loyalty oath, for affidavits of candidates, for filling of certain vacancies in public office by means of nomination certificates and nomination papers and for substituted nominations to fill certain vacancies for a November election; in ballots, further providing for form of ballots and printing ballots; in returns of primaries and elections, further providing for manner of computing irregular ballots; and replacing references to "justice of the peace" with "magisterial district judge."

Impact

The changes introduced by this bill are intended to strengthen the integrity and clarity of the election process in Pennsylvania. By enforcing that all election officers take an oath, the bill aims to enhance accountability among those managing the election process. The amendment to the procedure around ballot paperwork, particularly the inclusion of multiple sheets for nomination petitions, is expected to facilitate a smoother nomination process for candidates, potentially increasing the diversity of candidates in elections.

Summary

House Bill 36 amends the Pennsylvania Election Code, updating provisions related to election officers, candidate nominations, and ballot handling. It requires all election officers to be sworn in prior to their duties and clarifies the procedure for candidates to file affidavits alongside their nomination petitions. The bill includes stipulations that allow nomination petitions to consist of multiple sheets and modifies the rules for how irregular ballots are computed and certified by the county boards of elections. Furthermore, it replaces references to 'justices of the peace' with 'magisterial district judges' to reflect current terminology.

Sentiment

General sentiment around HB 36 varies. Proponents of the bill, including several legislators, view it as a necessary update to correct and clarify existing laws that may have been ambiguous or outdated. Supporters argue that these modifications will contribute to transparent and fair election practices. Conversely, there are some concerns among critics about the implications of these changes on local election dynamics, particularly regarding the fine details of ballot counting procedures, which could lead to disputes in close races.

Contention

Notable points of contention revolve around the changes to how irregular ballots are treated, which some argue could disenfranchise voters if their ballots are not counted due to minor mistakes. Additionally, the replacement of 'justices of the peace' with 'magisterial district judges' may raise questions about the visibility and understanding of judicial roles in election contexts. These adjustments serve to consolidate authority and redefine roles within the election framework, which can be contentious among those advocating for local judicial autonomy.