Residency requirement
Andrew Martin, Democratic candidate for state Assembly District 9, may have bought a condominium in the district last year, but on the day before the Nov. 6 election, District Judge Ron Bare ruled Martin’s Republican opponent, Kelly Hurst, was right: Mr. Martin actually still lived in a larger home just outside the district. But it won’t matter.
There was no time to do anything about getting Mr. Martin’s name off the ballot. Mr. Martin proceeded to win the election in the heavily Democratic district by 1,300 votes. And early next year, he’ll be seated.
Why? State law dictates the challenger would have to foot the entire bill for a further legal challenge – $50,000 that Mr. Hurst doesn’t have. And at this point, even if Martin were disqualified, he’d be replaced not by Mr. Hurst, but by a different Democrat.
The final decision on who shall be seated would be up to the Assembly, where Democrats outnumber Republicans, 27-15. At this point, Mr. Hurst warns, “Someone from California could serve in the Assembly in Nevada.”
Paging Arnold Schwarzenegger? At the very least, lawmakers would be wise to clarify the law on such matters, as some have already vowed to do. No party holds the majority forever. And elephants have long memories.
