| This issue was originally printed on white paper. |
1. Colorado: Representative Debbie Allen (R-Aurora) is introducing a bill to raise the number of signatures needed for third party and independent candidates. Activists in Colorado are already working to oppose the bill, which doesn't have a number yet.
Existing Colorado petition requirements are 5,000 for third party and independent candidates for president, 1,000 for other statewide office, 500 for U.S. House, 1,000 for state legislature, and 600 or 20% of the last vote (whichever is less) for county office. Since a separate petition is required for each candidate, a new party which wished to run a full slate of candidates for all partisan office in the state in 1994 would have needed 279,057 valid signatures, to be collected in six weeks. The Allen proposal would change all petitions to 2% of the last vote, increasing the total to about 450,000 valid signatures in the same time span. 31,384 would be needed for president.
The Colorado third party vote for Governor in 1994 (6%) was the highest it has been since 1914. Allen seems to think... the more people want to vote for third parties, the more important it is to stop them!
2. Maine: a legislator has pre-filed a bill to raise the vote test for a party to remain qualified, from 5% of the gubernatorial vote, to 8%. This is an obvious attack on the Green Party, which polled 6.4% for Governor last year. Maine legislative procedures do not identify the author of pre-filed bills, but as soon as the bill has a number, the sponsor will be known.
3. New Hampshire: Rep. Ray Buckley has introduced a bill to change presidential primary ballot access, from a filing fee, to 2,000 signatures of party members. Since the Libertarian Party only has 3,330 members, it would make it impossible for it to use its own presidential primary. The bill has no number yet.
Congressman Kweisi Mfume of Maryland, a well-respected Democrat who was chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus in the last congress, may introduce the Fair Ballot Access bill in the new 104th Congress, according to Lenora Fulani, who met with him recently. The bill would outlaw restrictive ballot access laws for third party and independent candidates for federal office.
Past congressional bills on ballot access never received a hearing. Congressman Al Swift, chairman of the House Elections Subcommittee, who denied the bill a hearing, is gone. In the new Congress, election bills will be in the House Oversight Committee, chaired by Congressman Bill Thomas, a Republican from Bakersfield, California. Thomas is a political science professor and a former state legislator. In 1977, he introduced a bill in California to make it easier for new parties to get on the ballot. The bill did not pass but it indicates that Thomas is interested, or at least was interested in the past, in ballot access.
Other Republican members of the House Oversight Committee are John Boehner of Ohio, Jennifer Dunn of Washington, Vernon Ehlers of Michigan, Lincoln Diaz-Balart of Florida, Robert Ney of Ohio, and Pat Roberts of Kansas. Democrats have not yet been assigned.
On December 27, the Second Circuit overturned a previous opinion which had struck down section 6-140 of the New York election law. That law requires all ballot access petitions to include the precinct and legislative district number of all signers. The 2nd Circuit said that the law is constitutional. Schulz v Berman, 94-9088.
The opinion was written by Jose Cabranes, a Clinton appointee, and signed by Roger Miner, a Reagan appointee, and Joseph McLaughlin, a Bush appointee.
On November 2, the same panel had affirmed the decision of the U.S. District Court, which was that section 6-140 is unconstitutional. Normally, when a U.S. Court of Appeals agrees with part of a U.S. District Court opinion, but disagrees with another part of it, it states that the lower court decision is "affirmed in part, and reversed in part". In this instance, the panel had simply said "affirmed" on November 2, and that it would explain its reasoning later. The December 27 "explanation" was, therefore, an unpleasant shock.
The New York Libertarian Party, which brought the lawsuit, has asked for a rehearing. The 2nd circuit said that having the precinct number, and the legislative district number, for every signer of a petition, is necessary to prevent fraud. New York state elections officials do not check petitions; the petitions are assumed to be valid unless a private individual or group "challenges" the petition. The purpose of having precinct numbers and legislative district numbers on the petition, for every signer, is to make the challengers' job easier.
The decision is not logical. Since no typical person knows his or her precinct number, the circulators must look up this information later and add it to the petition. Since the circulators are able to find this information from the voter registration records, obviously the challengers could do the same.
Furthermore, New York voter registration records at the county level are now organized in such a manner that no one needs this information; the state voter registration computer only needs a small adjustment so that the numbers would be completely unneeded there also.
The 2nd circuit said that it would cost the state $12,000 to make this final adjustment.
The 2nd circuit also pooh-poohed the difficulty of getting on the ballot in New York. It spoke disparagingly of anyone would who have difficulty getting 15,000 signatures, ignoring the fact that 15,000 signatures only gets a new party's statewide candidates on the ballot, and that another 108,500 signatures would be needed to get a new party's full slate of congressional candidates on, and another 408,000 for a full slate of legislative candidates.
On October 17, 1994, federal judge Barbara Rothstein struck down a Washington state law which makes it illegal for anyone to pay petition circulators on a per signature basis. LIMIT v Maleng, no. C94-162, Seattle. The state is not appealing.
In 1988 the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled that it violates the First Amendment for a state to outlaw the practice of paying anyone to circulate a petition. In response, Washington had banned paying circulators for initiatives, if the basis for payment was per signature. Washington had long had a law like Colorado's, so Washington passed the new restriction to salvage as much of the old policy as possible. However, it didn't work. The judge noted there was no evidence to support the state's contention that the ban is necessary to eliminate fraud. She noted evidence presented by the plaintiff, that petitions circulated by paid workers have higher validity rates, than petitions circulated by volunteers.
The only other state which bans payment on a per signature basis is New York, where the ban relates to candidate petitions.
On November 8, 1994, a write-in candidate was elected to the Kansas House. Ellen Samuelson polled 4,118 write-ins, to defeat the only candidate listed on the ballot, who received 3,435. This is the fourth write-in candidate to be elected to a state legislature in the last six years.
1. California: On December 21, the state abandoned its effort to get the 9th circuit to rule that the ban on party endorsements in local races should be in effect, while the case is pending. Instead, the Attorney General will simply concentrate on trying to get U.S. District Court Judge William Orrick to rule that the ban on party speech is constitutional. California Democratic Party v Lungren, no. C94-1703.
2. Georgia (1): On December 12, the Libertarian Party dismissed its appeal in the 11th circuit, over whether an injunction should have been granted, in its ballot access lawsuit against the 5% petition for congressional and legislative candidates. Instead, the party will concentrate on persuading the U.S. District Court that the 5% requirement is unconstitutional.
Georgia (2): On January 6, the U.S. Supreme Court announced it will hear the Georgia "racial gerrymandering" case, in addition to the Louisiana one already accepted. The Georgia case is Johnson v Miller, no. 94-631.
3. New Jersey: On December 20, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that the state's constitutional provision on free speech is so strong, that malls must let leafletters and petitioners onto their parking lots and walkways. New Jersey is the sixth state to interpret its own constitution in this way; the others are California, Colorado, Massachusetts, Oregon and Washington. N.J.Coalition Against War v JMB Realty Co., no. A-124.
4. Ohio: A few months ago, a challenge was filed in federal court to political gerrymandering of congressional districts. The lead plaintiff is former Congressman Clarence Miller, a Republican whose district was eliminated in 1991 by the state legislature, after Ohio lost two seats in the House. This type of lawsuit has not won in the past, but since the U.S. Supreme Court may be more activist against gerrymandering than it has been in the past, anything can happen. Miller v State of Ohio, C2-94-1116, Sou. Dist., Eastern Div.
Ballot Access News has just learned that the 1994 session of the Utah legislature made it easier for a party to remain on the ballot. The old law required a party to poll 2% of the statewide congressional vote, for any of its candidates.
The new law lets a party add up the vote of all of its district candidates, to attain that 2% vote standard. As a consequence, the Libertarian Party is still a qualified party in Utah after all. Although no single Libertarian received as much as 10,086 votes, the cumulated vote of various Libertarian legislative candidates did exceed this standard. The new law still wasn't enough to save the American, Independent American or Socialist Workers Parties, which did go off the ballot. It is easy for a party to get back on in Utah anyway; only 500 signatures are required.
Another change made by the 1994 election code revision was to delete the requirement that the petition carry language that the signers wish to participate in the party's county organizing conventions. However, the bill also moved the petition deadline from March 15 of an election year, to January 1.
On January 6, 1995, federal judge Joseph Young again ordered Worcester County, Maryland, to use cumulative voting for elections of County Commission, but only for general elections. He approved the county's district lines for primary elections. Cane v Worcester County, no. 92-cv-3226. He also set the date of the next election for November 7, 1995. The county may appeal.
| STATE | REQUIREMENTS | SIGNATURES COLLECTED | DEADLINES | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FULL PARTY | CAND. | LIBT | PATRIOT | GREEN | TAXPAYR | PARTY | CAND. | |
| Alabama | 11,991 | 11,991 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Sep 2 | Sep 2 |
| Alaska | 2,586 | 2,586 | 0 | (on) | (on) | 0 | doubt | doubt |
| Arizona | 15,062 | es:8,000 | reg:7,574 | 0 | 0 | 0 | May 21 | Jun 30 |
| Arkansas | 21,506 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Jan 2 | Sep 15 |
| California | reg:89,006 | 147,238 | (on) | reg:466 | (on) | (on) | 10-24-95 | Aug 9 |
| Colorado | no-proc. | 5,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -- | Aug 6 |
| Connecticut | no-proc. | 7,500 | (can't) | (on) | (can't) | (can't) | -- | Aug 9 |
| Delaware | es:reg:180 | es:3,600 | (on) | reg:130 | reg:5 | reg:168 | Aug 17 | Jul 15 |
| D.C. | no-proc. | es:3,200 | (can't) | (can't) | (can't) | (can't) | -- | Aug 20 |
| Florida | 196,788 | 65,596 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Jul 16 | Jul 15 |
| Georgia | 30,036 | 30,036 | (on) | 0 | 0 | 0 | Jul 9 | Jul 9 |
| Hawaii | 4,889 | 3,829 | (on) | 0 | 0 | 0 | Apr 24 | Sep 6 |
| Idaho | 9,644 | 4,822 | (on) | 0 | 350 | 0 | Aug 31 | Aug 26 |
| Illinois | no-proc. | 25,000 | (on) | 0 | 0 | 0 | -- | Aug 5 |
| Indiana | no-proc. | 29,822 | (on) | 0 | 0 | 0 | -- | Jul 15 |
| Iowa | no-proc. | 1,500 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -- | Aug 16 |
| Kansas | 16,418 | 5,000 | (on) | 0 | 0 | 0 | Jun 1 | Aug 6 |
| Kentucky | no-proc. | 5,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -- | Aug 29 |
| Louisiana | 0 | 0 | 0 | (on) | 0 | 0 | Jun 30 | Aug 29 |
| Maine | 25,551 | 4,000 | (can't) | (can't) | (on) | (can't) | 12-14-95 | Jun 4 |
| Maryland | 10,000 | es:75,000 | 1,900 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Aug 5 | Aug 5 |
| Massachsts. | reg:34,000 | 10,000 | (on) | reg:13 | reg:40 | 0 | Jul 1 | Jul 30 |
| Michigan | 30,891 | 30,891 | (on) | 0 | 0 | 0 | Jul 18 | Jul 18 |
| Minnesota | 89,731 | 2,000 | (can't) | (on) | (can't) | (can't) | May 1 | Sep 10 |
| Mississippi | (org.) | 1,000 | (on) | 0 | 0 | (on) | Apr 1 | Sep 6 |
| Missouri | 10,000 | 10,000 | (on) | 0 | 0 | 0 | Aug 5 | Aug 5 |
| Montana | 9,473 | 9,473 | (on) | 0 | 0 | 0 | Mar 14 | Jul 31 |
| Nebraska | 5,741 | 2,500 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Aug 1 | Aug 27 |
| Nevada | 3,761 | 3,761 | (on) | 0 | 1,000 | (on) | Jul 11 | Jul 11 |
| New Hampshire | no-proc. | 3,000 | (on) | 0 | 0 | 0 | -- | Aug 7 |
| New Jersey | no-proc. | 800 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -- | Jul 29 |
| New Mexico | 2,339 | 14,029 | (on) | 0 | (on) | 0 | Jul 9 | Sep 10 |
| New York | no-proc. | 15,000 | (can't) | (on) | (can't) | (can't) | -- | Aug 20 |
| North Carolina | 51,904 | es:80,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | doubt | Jun 28 |
| North Dakota | 7,000 | 4,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Apr 12 | Sep 6 |
| Ohio | 34,500 | 5,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11-20-95 | Aug 22 |
| Oklahoma | 49,751 | 41,711 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | May 31 | Jul 15 |
| Oregon | 18,316 | 14,601 | (on) | (on) | (on) | 0 | Aug 27 | Aug 27 |
| Pennsylvania | no-proc. | es:30,000 | (can't) | (can't) | (can't) | (can't) | -- | Aug 1 |
| Rhode Island | 18,069 | 1,000 | (can't) | (can't) | (can't) | (can't) | Aug 1 | Sep 6 |
| South Carolina | 10,000 | 10,000 | (on) | (on) | 0 | (on) | May 5 | Aug 1 |
| South Dakota | 7,792 | 3,117 | (on) | 0 | 0 | 0 | Apr 2 | Aug 6 |
| Tennessee | 37,179 | 25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | May 1 | Aug 20 |
| Texas | 43,947 | 61,541 | (on) | 0 | 0 | 0 | May 19 | May 9 |
| Utah | 500 | 300 | (on) | 0 | 0 | 0 | Jan 2 | Sep 1 |
| Vermont | (org.) | 1,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Sep 19 | Sep 19 |
| Virginia | no-proc. | es:16,000 | (can't) | (can't) | (can't) | (can't) | -- | Aug 23 |
| Washington | no-proc. | 200 | (can't) | (can't) | (can't) | (can't) | -- | Jul 6 |
| West Virginia | no-proc. | 6,837 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -- | Aug 1 |
| Wisconsin | 10,000 | 2,000 | (on) | 0 | 0 | (on) | Jun 1 | Sep 3 |
| Wyoming | 8,000 | 9,810 | (on) | 0 | 0 | 0 | May 1 | Aug 25 |
Key: "no-proc." means "No procedure exists", "(can't)" means "Can't start yet", "(on)" means "already on ballot", "(org.)" means "just be organized", "reg:" means number of registered voters, "es:" means "estimated".
Other nationally-organized parties already on: Nat. Law in Nev., Vt; Grassroots in Vt.; New Party in Wis.; Workers World in Mich. "FULL PTY" is a procedure by which a new party can qualify before it chooses candidates; not every state has such a procedure. Arizona parties need either 15,062 petition sigs. OR approx. 14,500 registrants. "(on)" in Patriot Party column for Alaska and Ct. is only good for president, not other office. In some states it is possible to start the full party procedure now, but not the candidate procedure. For these states, the entry in each party's column refers to the more commonly-used method.
| Rep. | Dem. | Libt. | Patr. | US-Tax | Green | Grassrts | SocWkr | Other | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 604,926 | 594,169 | ? | ||||||
| Alaska | 87,157 | 87,693 | 1,743 | 8,727 | 27,838 | ||||
| Arizona | 593,492 | 500,702 | 35,222 | 191 | |||||
| Arkansas | 287,904 | 428,936 | |||||||
| California | 4,777,674 | 3,517,777 | 149,123 | 133,734 | ? | 80,354 | |||
| Colorado | 432,042 | 619,205 | 40,397 | 16,956 | 7,722 | ||||
| Connecticut | 415,201 | 375,133 | 356,720 | ||||||
| Florida | 2,071,068 | 2,135,008 | ? | 583 | |||||
| Georgia | 756,371 | 788,926 | ? | 31 | |||||
| Hawaii | 107,908 | 134,978 | 12,969 | 113,158 | |||||
| Idaho | 216,123 | 181,363 | 15,860 | ||||||
| Illinois | 1,984,318 | 1,069,850 | 52,388 | 6 | 4 | ||||
| Iowa | 565,814 | 414,453 | 2,772 | 770 | 9,242 | ||||
| Kansas | 526,113 | 294,733 | 41 | ||||||
| Maine | 117,990 | 172,951 | 32,695 | 187,405 | |||||
| Maryland | 702,101 | 708,094 | ? | 104 | |||||
| Massachsts. | 1,533,380 | 611,641 | 14,698 | ? | 3,907 | ||||
| Michigan | 1,899,101 | 1,188,438 | |||||||
| Minnesota | 1,094,165 | 589,344 | 15,467 | 20,785 | 3,022 | 4,611 | |||
| Nebraska | 148,230 | 423,270 | 5,085 | ||||||
| Nevada | 156,875 | 200,026 | 3,978 | 10,012 | |||||
| New Hampshire | 218,134 | 79,686 | 13,709 | ||||||
| New Mexico | 232,945 | 186,686 | 47,990 | ||||||
| New York | 2,538,702 | 2,364,904 | 9,506 | 217,490 | 5,410 | 67,750 | |||
| Ohio | 2,401,567 | 835,848 | 24 | 108,793 | |||||
| Oklahoma | 466,740 | 294,936 | 233,336 | ||||||
| Oregon | 517,874 | 622,083 | 20,183 | 58,449 | 195 | ||||
| Pennsylvania | 1,627,976 | 1,430,099 | 33,602 | 33,235 | ? | 460,269 | |||
| Rhode Island | 171,194 | 157,361 | 32,822 | ||||||
| South Carolina | 470,756 | 447,002 | 5,875 | 8,003 | |||||
| South Dakota | 172,515 | 126,273 | 12,825 | ||||||
| Tennessee | 807,104 | 664,252 | 15,693 | ||||||
| Texas | 2,350,825 | 2,015,321 | 28,456 | ? | |||||
| Vermont | 40,292 | 145,661 | 2,118 | 22,515 | |||||
| Wisconsin | 1,051,326 | 482,850 | 11,639 | 9,188 | 8,150 | ||||
| Wyoming | 118,016 | 80,747 | 2,227 | ||||||
| TOTAL | 32,263,919 | 24,970,399 | 405,795 | 316,792 | 201,334 | 119,337 | 22,903 | 9,226 | 1,762,379 |
The "Other" column consists of: Alaska, Alaska Independence; California, Peace & Freedom; Colorado, Prohibition; Connecticut, A Ct. Pty, Independence & Concerned Citizens; Hawaii, Best; Idaho, indp.; Iowa, Natural Law (3,737) & indp. (5,505); Maine, independent; Massachusetts, LaRouche independent; Minnesota, indp.; Nebraska, write-in indp.; New York, Right to Life; Ohio, indp.; Tennessee, independents; Vermont, Nat. Law (1,668) and independents; Wisconsin, independent. The small numbers in Ariz., Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Maryland, and Oregon are for declared write-in independent candidates.
In New York, the Democratic column includes 92,001 votes cast for the Democratic nominee under the Liberal label; the Republican column includes 328,605 votes under the Conservative label and 54,040 under the Tax Cut Now label. "Patriot" column includes some state parties which are called "Independence" or "Independence Fusion".
The chart above does not include scattering write-in votes, or tabulations in some states of the number of blank votes. "?" means the party had a write-in candidate but the state hasn't tabulated those votes.
In gubernatorial elections four years ago, the Libertarian Party had 10 candidates on the ballot and received 399,045 votes for Governor. The Green Party had one on the ballot and received 6,815. The Socialist Workers Party had 3 on the ballot and received 24,505. The Grassroots Party had one on the ballot and received 17,176. The Patriot, U.S. Taxpayers and Natural Law Parties didn't exist in 1990.
| Rep. | Dem. | Libt. | Patr. | US-Tax | Green | Grassrts | SocWkr | Other | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 50.45 | 49.55 | w | ||||||
| Alaska | 40.89 | 41.14 | .82 | 4.09 | 13.06 | ||||
| Arizona | 52.54 | 44.33 | 3.12 | w | |||||
| Arkansas | 40.16 | 59.84 | |||||||
| California | 55.18 | 40.63 | 1.72 | 1.54 | w | .93 | |||
| Colorado | 38.70 | 55.47 | 3.62 | 1.52 | .69 | ||||
| Connecticut | 36.20 | 32.70 | 31.10 | ||||||
| Florida | 49.23 | 50.75 | w | w | |||||
| Georgia | 48.95 | 51.05 | w | w | |||||
| Hawaii | 29.24 | 36.58 | 3.51 | 30.67 | |||||
| Idaho | 52.29 | 43.88 | 3.84 | ||||||
| Illinois | 63.88 | 34.44 | 1.69 | w | w | ||||
| Iowa | 56.98 | 41.74 | .28 | .08 | .93 | ||||
| Kansas | 64.09 | 35.90 | w | ||||||
| Maine | 23.09 | 33.84 | 6.40 | 36.67 | |||||
| Maryland | 49.78 | 50.21 | w | w | |||||
| Massachsts. | 70.87 | 28.27 | .68 | w | .18 | ||||
| Michigan | 61.51 | 38.49 | |||||||
| Minnesota | 63.34 | 34.12 | .90 | 1.20 | .17 | .27 | |||
| Nebraska | 25.71 | 73.41 | w | ||||||
| Nevada | 42.30 | 53.93 | 1.07 | 2.70 | |||||
| New Hampshire | 70.02 | 25.58 | 4.40 | ||||||
| New Mexico | 49.81 | 39.92 | 10.26 | ||||||
| New York | 48.79 | 45.45 | .18 | 4.18 | .10 | 1.30 | |||
| Ohio | 71.77 | 24.98 | w | 3.25 | |||||
| Oklahoma | 46.91 | 29.64 | 23.45 | ||||||
| Oregon | 42.49 | 51.04 | 1.66 | 4.80 | w | ||||
| Pennsylvania | 45.41 | 39.89 | .94 | .93 | w | 12.84 | |||
| Rhode Island | 47.37 | 43.54 | 9.08 | ||||||
| South Carolina | 50.53 | 47.98 | .63 | .86 | |||||
| South Dakota | 55.36 | 40.52 | 4.12 | ||||||
| Tennessee | 54.28 | 44.67 | 1.06 | ||||||
| Texas | 53.49 | 45.86 | .65 | w | |||||
| Vermont | 19.13 | 69.17 | 1.01 | 10.69 | |||||
| Wisconsin | 67.26 | 30.89 | .74 | .59 | .52 | ||||
| Wyoming | 58.72 | 40.17 | 1.11 | ||||||
| MEDIAN | 50.13 | 41.44 | 1.07 | .93 | 1.54 | 3.51 | 1.11 | .10 |
"w" means a write-in candidate. Percentages were not calculated for write-in candidates.
At the November 1994 election, two nationally-organized third parties polled over 30% of the vote in a statewide race. This is the first time any nationally-organized third party has polled over 30% of the vote in a partisan statewide election, since 1968 (when George Wallace's American Party carried several southern states for president).
In November 1994, the Green Party of New Mexico polled 32.66% for State Treasurer, and the Libertarian Party of Montana polled 31.02% for Clerk of the Supreme Court. Both races had only two candidates in the race, a Democrat and the third party candidate.
The election returns for U.S. Senate in the December 15, 1994 B.A.N. were incorrect for Missouri. The correct figures for U.S. Senate in Missouri are: Republican 1,060,149 (59.72%), Democratic 633,697 (35.70%), Libertarian 81,264 (4.58%), indp. write-in 6.
The same B.A.N. had a registration chart, but with no New Mexico data for the Green or Libertarian Parties. Since then a survey of the counties has shown that, just before the November 1994 election, there were about 900 Libertarians, and about 700 Greens. More exact figures are unavailable, since five counties (including Santa Fe County, the second biggest) can't provide the data.
The Nov. 15, 1994 B.A.N. reported that third parties had elected legislators in New Hampshire and Vermont, but did not report on independents. Last fall, independents were elected to the legislatures of Alaska, California, Maine, Massachusetts, South Carolina and Vermont.
Some third party candidates won local elections last fall. All were non-partisan, except in Alabama & Hawaii.
1. Green Party: Jason Kirkpatrick, Arcata city council; Steve Schmidt, Menlo Park city council; Dona Spring, Berkeley city council; Barbara Carr, La Mesa School Board; and three to special conservation and planning district boards (all in California); also see Hawaii article [below].
2. Libertarian Party: Marrice Aho, city council of Mololla, Or.; Dan Gallegos, transportation board of Denver, Co.; Steve Ziegler, School Board of Charles County, Md.; Bonnie Flickinger, city council of Moreno Valley, Ca.; Sandy Webb, city council of Simi Valley, Ca.; and four to neighborhood or special district boards in Florida, Virginia and D.C.
3. Patriot Party: Nate Roberson, County commissioner in Greene County, Alabama.
4. Peace & Freedom Party: Marsha Feinland, rent control board, Berkeley, California.
The National Alliance, newspaper of the New Alliance Party, which has been published since 1979, ceased publication at the end of 1994. The New Alliance Party has integrated itself into the Patriot Party, and a Patriot Party newsletter is about to be launched. In states where N.A.P. is a qualified party, the party name is being changed to Patriot Party.
The Tax Cut Now Party became a fully-qualified party in New York last fall, by polling over 50,000 votes for Governor. However, the party has never had any independent existence; it was created by Republicans, in order to give gubernatorial candidate George Pataki a third line on the ballot. No one expected it to poll enough votes to attain legal existence.
Republican activists are in the process of electing themselves party officers of the Tax Cut Now Party, to insure that the "party" does not take on a life of its own. Under New York state law, a new party's Bylaws and structure are determined by its candidates for statewide office at the previous election.
Keiko Bonk-Abramson, re-elected last November to the Hawaii County Council (a partisan election) as the Green Party nominee, inadvertently was the swing vote in organizing that legislative body. Also elected to the Council were 4 Democrats and 4 Republicans. In the vote to organize the Council, Bonk-Abramson voted with the Republicans, taking county control away from the Democrats for the first time in decades. In the topsy-turvy world of Hawaii County politics, Democrats have been advocates of development and Republicans, at least recently, have been slow-growthers.
Both the Republican and the Democratic national conventions in 1996 will be held in August. This is the first time since 1968 that the major party presidential nominating conventions have been so late in the election year. Usually, one is in August and the other is in July. The late dates will bolster legal arguments that early petition deadlines for third party and independent presidential candidates are discriminatory.