| This issue was originally printed on white paper. |
Table of Contents
DID THE DEMOCRATS ERR ON NADER?
Before the November 2, 2004 election, the Democratic Party took legal action to keep Ralph Nader off the ballot in 18 states. A look at the election returns shows that John Kerry was not helped by this strategy, for three reasons:
Battleground States v. Safe States
Nader’s share of the vote was far higher in states that were known to be safe for either Bush or Kerry, than in "battleground" states. Nader polled .67% of the total vote cast, in states where he was on the ballot. The states in which he polled percentages above his national average were entirely states that were "safe" for one of the major contenders. Nader’s percentages in the states that were better for him than average were:
| Alaska |
1.63%
|
| Vermont |
1.44%
|
| Montana |
1.37%
|
| New York |
1.35%
|
| Utah |
1.22%
|
| North Dakota |
1.20%
|
| Wyoming |
1.13%
|
| South Dakota |
1.11%
|
| Maine |
1.09%
|
| Rhode Island |
1.07%
|
| Connecticut |
.82%
|
| Washington |
.81%
|
| Kansas |
.79%
|
| Nebraska |
.73%
|
In each of these states, the margin between Kerry and Bush was more than 7%. In most of them, it was above 15%.
Also, Nader write-ins were canvassed in 12 of the 14 states in which he received write-in votes. His best write-in tallies, as a percentage of the total vote cast, were:
| Idaho |
.19%
|
| Massachusetts |
.17%
|
| California |
.16%
|
| Arizona |
.14%
|
| Texas |
.12%
|
Again, none of these were battleground states. The only battleground states that provided a write-in tally were Pennsylvania, where Nader’s percentage was only .05%, and Missouri, .07% (Ohio and Oregon were battleground states, but elections officials in those two states won’t reveal how many write-ins Nader polled). Other write-in tally states were Georgia, .07%, Illinois, .07%, Indiana, .05%, North Carolina .05%, and Virginia .07%.
Vote Analysis Within States
An analysis of the voter for Nader within each state shows that Nader received more support from areas that were relatively pro-Bush, than from areas that were pro-Kerry. When Nader’s best county in each state is identified, three-fourths of the time it is a county that (relative to that state) is more pro-Bush. Following is a list of the best Nader counties, for all the states in which Nader was on the ballot. Alaska doesn’t have counties, so the list uses legislative districts.
Following each county is that county’s Bush percentage, and then that state’s Bush percentage.
| Clay, Alabama | 70.3 | 62.5 |
| Sitka, Alaska | 54.1 | 61.2 |
| Marion, Ark. | 60.1 | 54.3 |
| San Juan, Co. | 44.4 | 51.7 |
| Windham, Ct. | 45.7 | 43.9 |
| Kent, Del. | 56.4 | 45.7 |
| Sumter, Fl. | 62.2 | 52.1 |
| Emmet, Iowa | 52.3 | 49.9 |
| Rush, Ks. | 68.5 | 62.0 |
| Metcalfe, Ky. | 63.6 | 59.5 |
| St. Bernard, La. | 65.7 | 56.7 |
| Piscatquis, Me. | 53.3 | 44.6 |
| Howard, Md. | 44.7 | 43.0 |
| Keeweenau, Mi. | 54.3 | 47.8 |
| Cook, Minn. | 45.1 | 47.7 |
| Sharkey, Miss. | 36.2 | 59.0 |
| Mineral, Mt. | 67.6 | 59.1 |
| Butler, Neb. | 72.5 | 66.0 |
| Mineral, Nev. | 58.0 | 50.7 |
| Carroll, N.H. | 51.8 | 49.0 |
| Warren, N.J. | 61.3 | 46.2 |
| Sierra, N.M. | 61.3 | 49.8 |
| Ulster, N.Y. | 43.1 | 40.2 |
| Hettinger, N.D. | 69.9 | 62.9 |
| Washington, R.I. | 42.5 | 38.9 |
| Georgetown, S.C. | 53.4 | 58.0 |
| Fall River, S.D. | 62.8 | 59.9 |
| Perry, Tn. | 48.3 | 56.8 |
| Grand, Utah | 51.1 | 71.5 |
| Washington, Vt. | 36.6 | 38.9 |
| Ferry, Wash. | 60.4 | 45.6 |
| Lincoln, W.V. | 49.4 | 56.1 |
| Rusk, Wi. | 50.3 | 49.4 |
| Albany, Wy. | 54.4 |
69.0 |
Nader was on the ballot in 34 states. In 25 (virtually three-fourths of those states), his strongest county was a county that was more pro-Bush than its own state. In other words, Nader’s centers of strength were in disproportionately Republican areas.
The results above, showing that Nader centers of strength were mostly in places that were pro-Bush (relative to other places in that state), suggest that most Nader voters leaned more to Bush than to Kerry.
The vote cast for president in Nader’s strongest counties, this time ignoring what state they were in, also supports the idea that Nader voters leaned toward Bush over Kerry. Nader polled over 2% of the vote in 21 counties. The vote in these counties was 279,541 Bush, 271,867 Kerry. Although these totals are close, they show more support for Bush. Note that polls just before the election also showed that Nader voters, if forced to choose between Kerry and Bush, slightly favored Bush.
The 21 best Nader counties, in order, were Grand, Utah (2.83%, his best); Sitka, Ak.; Hettinger, N.D.; Mineral, Mt.; Ulster, N.Y.; Washington, N.Y.; Tompkins, N.Y.; Cordova, Ak.; Essex, N.Y.; Oneida, N.Y.; Livingston, N.Y.; Seneca, N.Y.; Rensselaer, N.Y.; San Juan, Co.; Divide, N.D.; Clinton, N.Y.; Emmons, N.D.; Schoharie, N.Y.; Columbia, N.Y.; Delaware, N.Y.; and Oswego, N.Y.
Grand County is in southeast Utah. The main town is Moab. It was also Nader’s best Utah county in 2000.
Legal Challenges Mostly Failed
A final reason that the Democratic strategy of keeping Nader off the ballot did not help them, was that these legal challenges mostly failed, even though Democrats hired some of the best election law attorneys in the nation. Democrats filed lawsuits or administrative challenges to keep Nader off the ballot in 18 states, but in only 4 states did these challenges succeed. The 18 states were: Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin. In five of these states (Arizona, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia), Nader did fail to appear on the ballot. However, Democratic Party activity was beside the point in Virginia, where he failed because elections officials said he didn’t have enough valid signatures. Thus, Democratic legal efforts only kept Nader off the ballot in 4 states.
Furthermore, the result of the Democratic legal activity was to give Nader publicity that he would not have had otherwise. Also, the challenges made Democrats appear to be hypocrites, since the Democratic mantra in 2000 had been, "Count every vote!" No poll appears to have been conducted, asking the voters’ opinion of the challenges. But it is clear that some voters were offended by the challenges, since they were an attack on the right of voters to vote for the candidate of their choice.
DISOBEDIENT ELECTOR GETS LITTLE NOTICE
On December 13, one of the Minnesota Democratic presidential electors did not vote for John Kerry. Instead, he or she voted for John Edwards for president, as well as for vice-president. Edwards is the first person to receive an electoral vote for both president and vice-president since 1872, when B. Gratz Brown received 18 for president, and 47 for vice-president. Brown was the Democratic nominee for vice-president that year, but Horace Greeley, the Democratic nominee for president, died before the December meeting of the electors.
Neither the New York Times nor the Washington Post mentioned what happened in Minnesota. No one knows which elector was "unfaithful," since the votes were secret.
MONTANA SUPREME COURT UNSEATS JORE
On December 28, the Montana Supreme Court ruled that Rick Jore is not a member of the State House of Representatives. Big Spring v Jore, 04-851. The vote was 6-1. Jore would have been the first Constitution Party nominee to win a state legislative election.
The race in the 12th district had three candidates on the ballot, from the Constitution, Democratic and Republican Parties. The first count showed Jore beating the Democrat by one vote, with the Republican placing third. A recount showed a tie. The Democratic nominee, Jeanne Windham, then sued to invalidate seven of the Jore votes. Seven voters changed their minds while voting. They had apparently voted for the Republican, and then scratched out that choice, and voted for Jore.
The lower court felt that voter intent was clear, since three of the voters stepped forward and said that they indeed had voted for Jore. The Supreme Court did not explain its order, but said it would explain later. Jore would have been seated if the tie had been upheld, since the Governor had appointed him on December 16.
On December 27, San Diego City Attorney Michael Aguierre said he will issue an advisory opinion on whether 5,547 write-ins for Donna Frye are valid. If he says "Yes," and his opinion is upheld, then Frye wins. The 5,547 write-ins are in doubt because the voter wrote her in, but didn’t mark the checkbox.
Without those write-ins, Frye loses to ballot-listed incumbent Mayor Dick Murphy. Murphy polled 157,938; Frye received 155,454 write-ins that are unquestionably valid.
Arizona: the Libertarian Party lawsuit over whether the party may prevent independent voters from voting in its primary is on hold, until the U.S. Supreme Court decides the Oklahoma Libertarian case (see Oklahoma entry below).
Minnesota: the State Supreme Court released its full opinion in the Independence Party case on November 10. Moore v Kiffmeyer, A04-1775. In September that Court had issued an order putting the party’s nominees on the ballot, and had said it would explain later. The decision says that a state law, disqualifying all of a ballot-qualified party’s nominees if the party doesn’t enjoy a high turnout in its own primary, serves no state interest and is unconstitutional.
New York: on December 28, the 2nd circuit voted to rehear Muntaqim v Coombe, 01-7260. The issue is whether the Voting Rights Act protects the right of felons to vote. The first panel had dismissed the lawsuit.
North Carolina: the state has decided not to appeal DeLaney v Bartlett to the 4th circuit. This is very good news; it means that it is now settled that the number of signatures required for statewide independent candidates is too high. It is extremely likely the legislature will now pass a bill lowering it. DeLaney v Bartlett was a project of the Coalition for Free & Open Elections (COFOE). COFOE appreciates the financial help from its members that made this lawsuit possible.
Ohio: two separate decisions of the 6th circuit each opened up a new area for petitioning. United Church of Christ v Gateway Economic Dev., 383 F 3d 449 said that the sidewalks encircling Cleveland’s stadiums are public fora. Parks v Finan, 385 F 3d 694, struck down a law requiring individuals who engage in First Amendment activity on the State Capitol grounds, to first get a permit.
Pennsylvania: the U.S. Supreme Court will probably say whether or not it will hear Ralph Nader’s ballot access appeal on January 10. Nader v Serody, 04-550.
Oklahoma: the U.S. Supreme Court will hear Clingman v Beaver, 04-37, on January 19. One amicus brief was filed on the side of the Oklahoma Libertarian Party (which is seeking the right to open up its primary to all voters). That brief is jointly from the Northwest Legal Foundation and the Coalition for Free & Open Elections (COFOE). COFOE extends its thanks to attorney Richard Shepard, who wrote the brief.
Texas: a 3-judge U.S. District Court will again hear the Democratic lawsuit against the congressional re-districting, on January 21. That court had rejected the suit, but the U.S. Supreme Court then told it to re-hear the case. The issue is whether it was legitimate for the Republican-controlled legislature to redraw the lines in 2003, when they had already been redrawn (to take account of the 2000 census) in 2001. Session v Perry, 2:03-cv-354.
National: the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. circuit, will hear Initiative & Referendum Institute v U.S. Postal Service, 04-5045, on Feb. 8. The issue is whether the post office can ban petitioning on its sidewalks.
On December 17, the Quebec Provincial government released a draft bill for a proportional representation system. The system would be similar to Germany’s system, called a "mixed" system. It retains 75 district seats, and 50 seats filled from party lists. Hearings will be held soon.
California: Assemblyman Juan Vargas will introduce a bill to legalize write-ins, even when the box next to the name written in is not checked.
Connecticut: the Working Families Party will try to get bills introduced to liberalize the definition of qualified minor party. Current law only requires a vote of 1%, but each office is considered separately. In every other state except Georgia and Illinois, when one candidate meets the vote test, that qualifies all the party’s nominees in the next election.
Illinois: activists seeking better ballot access laws have organized as "Free and Equal Elections." Contact freecoalition@gmail.com.
Maine: Rep. John Eder will submit a bill, expanding the definition of "qualified party." Currently it is a group that polls 5% at either of the last two elections for the office at the top of the ticket. The bill will add an alternative, that it be a group with 10,000 registered members.
Massachusetts: Rep. Patricia Jehlen will introduce a bill to legalize fusion.
Michigan: Sen. Alan Cropsey and Rep. Tim Moore will introduce bills to let qualified parties change their names.
Oklahoma: Rep. Marian Cooksey will introduce a bill to improve ballot access for new and minor parties.
On December 17, a special session of the Ohio legislature passed a 220-page Campaign Finance bill. The bill was not even introduced until December 13. Among other changes, it makes it illegal for anyone to pay petition circulators per name.
The bill passed 20-10 in the State Senate, and 55-33 in the House. It is possible that the bill will be vetoed.
DEMOCRATS TO STUDY PRIMARY DATES
On December 10, the Democratic National Committee formed a 40-member panel to study whether the party should work to end Iowa and New Hampshire’s "first in the nation" status, in the presidential nomination process. If the party decides to pursue this goal, it could seek federal legislation on presidential primary dates. Or, it could end Iowa’s status with an internal national party bylaw.
The committee also broadcast a statement the following day, which said, "America’s story is one of expanding opportunity and suffrage, and one of our fundamental principles is that every eligible citizen is entitled to cast his or her vote and to have that vote counted."
| - |
Republican |
Democratic |
Libertarn. |
Green |
Constitn. |
Reform |
other (1) |
other(2) |
indepndnt |
|
Alabama |
1,079,657 |
708,425 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Alaska |
213,216 |
67,074 |
7,157 |
11,434 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Arizona |
1,127,591 |
597,526 |
146,316 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Arkansas |
357,840 |
426,380 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
4 |
|
Calif. |
5,030,821 |
6,223,698 |
214,805 |
116,477 |
8,163 |
0 |
29,684 |
0 |
99 |
|
Colorado |
991,835 |
995,283 |
17,788 |
12,739 |
12,596 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
8,770 |
|
Conn. |
629,934 |
785,747 |
4 |
7,182 |
2,545 |
0 |
3,196 |
0 |
130 |
|
Del. |
245,978 |
105,716 |
2,014 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2,337 |
0 |
0 |
|
D.C. |
18,296 |
202,027 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Florida |
3,319,296 |
2,212,324 |
86,315 |
0 |
5,260 |
0 |
856 |
0 |
3,443 |
|
Georgia |
1,819,817 |
1,140,869 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
53 |
|
Hawaii |
148,443 |
261,884 |
6,243 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Idaho |
401,366 |
171,060 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Illinois |
2,270,757 |
2,674,375 |
36,629 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
5,087 |
|
Indiana |
1,381,699 |
999,082 |
35,470 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Iowa |
822,653 |
624,620 |
8,313 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1,756 |
|
Kansas |
723,794 |
386,970 |
42,663 |
0 |
0 |
2,956 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Kentucky |
1,017,379 |
602,085 |
8,121 |
0 |
2,388 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
5,069 |
|
Louisiana |
936,801 |
609,181 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Maine |
283,210 |
418,380 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
8,586 |
0 |
0 |
|
Maryland |
896,232 |
1,310,791 |
0 |
44,563 |
1,849 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
6 |
|
Mass. |
435,239 |
2,059,984 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
74,432 |
|
Michigan |
2,288,594 |
2,242,435 |
54,093 |
18,365 |
23,598 |
0 |
2,153 |
1,818 |
0 |
|
Minn. |
1,236,094 |
1,399,624 |
0 |
26,917 |
0 |
0 |
56,490 |
0 |
2 |
|
Miss. |
658,589 |
334,605 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
82,583 |
0 |
0 |
40,426 |
|
Missouri |
1,429,767 |
1,192,674 |
33,937 |
0 |
10,634 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Montana |
286,076 |
145,606 |
12,548 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Nebraska |
515,115 |
230,697 |
4,656 |
11,108 |
3,396 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Nevada |
420,711 |
333,912 |
20,119 |
0 |
16,691 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
N. Hamp. |
396,024 |
243,506 |
11,311 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
N. Jersey |
1,514,784 |
1,721,392 |
16,379 |
10,033 |
0 |
0 |
2,976 |
2,684 |
16,347 |
|
N. Mex. |
357,805 |
384,900 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
194 |
|
N. York |
2,209,291 |
3,457,124 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
200,933 |
332,363 |
22,707 |
|
No. Car. |
1,743,131 |
1,669,864 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
76 |
|
No. Dak. |
125,684 |
185,130 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Ohio |
2,650,045 |
2,514,479 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
18,772 |
|
Okla. |
875,033 |
389,029 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
110,548 |
|
Oregon |
761,545 |
951,688 |
11,255 |
0 |
29,831 |
0 |
10,678 |
0 |
0 |
|
Penn. |
2,565,077 |
2,478,239 |
54,751 |
14,353 |
34,573 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
4,142 |
|
R.I. |
112,958 |
279,315 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3,303 |
0 |
6,196 |
|
S.Car. |
913,168 |
486,479 |
0 |
28,947 |
8,604 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
S.Dak. |
178,823 |
207,837 |
2,808 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Tenn. |
1,160,821 |
1,031,959 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
25,958 |
|
Texas |
4,012,534 |
2,713,968 |
180,389 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
51,712 |
|
Utah |
520,403 |
361,628 |
3,691 |
2,189 |
13,140 |
0 |
7,806 |
0 |
0 |
|
Vermont |
74,271 |
21,684 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3,018 |
0 |
205,774 |
|
Virginia |
1,817,422 |
1,023,187 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
149,442 |
|
Wash. |
1,095,493 |
1,608,751 |
19,817 |
5,934 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
W.Va. |
303,042 |
415,396 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3,218 |
0 |
0 |
|
Wisc. |
1,380,819 |
1,368,537 |
9,485 |
10,018 |
13,738 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
9,846 |
|
Wyoming |
132,107 |
99,989 |
6,581 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
TOTAL |
55,887,080 |
53,077,115 |
1,053,658 |
320,259 |
187,006 |
85,539 |
335,234 |
335,048 |
760,985 |
The "other parties(1)" column for this chart is: Cal., Peace & Freedom; Ct., Working Fam.; Del., Independent Pty; Fl., Soc. Workers; Me., Soc. Equality; Mi., Nat. Law; Mn., Independence; N.J., Soc. Wkrs.; N.Y., Consv; Or., Socialist; R.I., Socialist; Ut., Pers. Choice; Vt., Lib. Union; W.V., Mountain.
The "other parties(2)" column is Mi., Soc. Eq.; N.J., 1,515 Consv., 1,169 Soc.; N.Y. 189,580 Indpc., 142,783 Working Fam.
DEMOCRATS WIN SENATE POPULAR VOTE
On November 2, Democrats only won 14 of the 34 U.S. Senate seats. Ironically, though, Democratic nominees for U.S. Senate won 51.04% of the total vote cast for U.S. Senate (that includes .45% of the total national vote, cast for the Democratic nominee in New York under the Independence and Working Families Parties labels). See the chart below for a state-by-state breakdown.
|
-
|
Democratic |
Republican |
Libertar. |
Constitn |
Green. |
Reform |
SWP |
other |
indepndnt |
|
Alabama |
595,018 |
1,242,200 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Alaska |
140,424 |
149,773 |
1,240 |
0 |
3,053 |
0 |
0 |
3,785 |
9,617 |
|
Arizona |
404,507 |
1,505,372 |
51,798 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Arkansas |
580,973 |
458,036 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
340 |
|
Calif. |
6,955,728 |
4,555,922 |
216,522 |
81,224 |
0 |
0 |
43 |
243,846 |
10 |
|
Colorado |
1,081,188 |
980,668 |
10,160 |
18,783 |
0 |
6,481 |
0 |
0 |
10,192 |
|
Conn. |
945,347 |
457,749 |
9,188 |
12,442 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Florida |
3,590,201 |
3,672,864 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
25 |
166,642 |
162 |
|
Georgia |
1,287,690 |
1,864,202 |
69,051 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
38 |
|
Hawaii |
313,629 |
87.172 |
5,277 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
9,269 |
|
Idaho |
4,136 |
499,796 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Illinois |
3,598,277 |
1,391,030 |
69,276 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
84,051 |
|
Indiana |
1,496,976 |
903,913 |
27,344 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Iowa |
412,365 |
1,038,175 |
15,218 |
0 |
11,121 |
0 |
1,874 |
0 |
0 |
|
Kansas |
310,337 |
780,863 |
21,842 |
0 |
0 |
15,980 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Kentucky |
850,855 |
873,507 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Louisiana |
877.482 |
943,014 |
15,097 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
12,463 |
|
Maryland |
1,504,691 |
783,055 |
204 |
9,009 |
24,816 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
156 |
|
Missouri |
1,158,261 |
1,518,089 |
19,648 |
10,404 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Nevada |
494,805 |
284,640 |
9,559 |
6,001 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2,095 |
0 |
|
N. Hamp. |
221,549 |
435,847 |
? |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
N. York |
4,384,907 |
1,625,069 |
19,073 |
0 |
36,942 |
0 |
14,811 |
605,877 |
16,196 |
|
No. Car. |
1,632,527 |
1,791,450 |
47,743 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
362 |
|
No. Dak. |
211,843 |
98,553 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Ohio |
1,961,002 |
3,464,044 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
? |
0 |
296 |
|
Okla. |
596,750 |
763,433 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
86,663 |
|
Oregon |
1,128,728 |
565,254 |
29,582 |
12,397 |
43,053 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Penn. |
2,334,126 |
2,959,909 |
79,263 |
220,056 |
0 |
0 |
? |
0 |
0 |
|
S.Car. |
704,384 |
857,167 |
10,678 |
13,464 |
4,245 |
138 |
0 |
5,859 |
0 |
|
S.Dak. |
193,340 |
197,848 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Utah |
258,955 |
626,640 |
0 |
17,289 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
8,824 |
18 |
|
Vermont |
216,972 |
75,398 |
0 |
0 |
3,999 |
0 |
0 |
7,365 |
3,300 |
|
Wash. |
1,549,708 |
1,204,584 |
34,055 |
0 |
30,304 |
0 |
? |
0 |
0 |
|
Wisc. |
1,632,697 |
1,301,183 |
8,367 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
6,662 |
|
TOTAL |
43,630,378 |
39,956,419 |
770,185 |
401,069 |
157,533 |
22,599 |
16,753 |
1,044,293 |
239,795 |
The "other parties" column for the Senate chart above is: Ak., Alaskan Independence; Cal., Peace & Freedom; Fl., Veterans; Nev., Nat. Law; N.Y., 220,960 Conservative, 216,198 Independence, 168,719 Working Families; S.C., United Cit.; Ut., Personal Choice; Vt., 6,486 Marijuana and 879 Liberty Union.
|
-
|
Democratic |
Republican |
Libertar. |
Constitn |
Green. |
Mountain |
Marijuana |
other |
indepndnt |
|
Delaware |
185,687 |
167,115 |
1,450 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
10,756 |
0 |
|
Indiana |
1,113,879 |
1,302,907 |
31,694 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
23 |
|
Missouri |
1,301,442 |
1,382,419 |
24,378 |
11,299 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Montana |
225,016 |
205,313 |
7,424 |
0 |
8,393 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
N.Hamp. |
339,927 |
325,514 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
No. Car. |
1,939,154 |
1,495,021 |
52,513 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
No. Dak. |
84,877 |
220,803 |
4,193 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Utah |
380,359 |
531,190 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
8,399 |
12 |
|
|
Vermont |
117,327 |
181,540 |
2,263 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
4,221 |
1,298 |
2,431 |
|
Wash. |
1,373,362 |
1,373,232 |
63,465 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
W. Va. |
472,758 |
253,131 |
75 |
0 |
0 |
18,430 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
TOTAL |
7,533,788 |
7,438,185 |
187,455 |
11,299 |
8,393 |
18,430 |
4,221 |
20,453 |
2,466 |
The "other" is: Del., Indp. Pty.; Ut., Personal Choice; Vt., Liberty Union.
The December 1, 2004 B.A.N. mentioned that the Green Party had re-elected its state legislator in Maine, John Eder. The Green Party also won two other partisan elections on November 2, 2004. It re-elected its County Commissioner in San Miguel County, Colorado, Art Goodtimes. He received more than 50% of the vote against a Democrat and a Republican. Also, the Green Party elected a Lee County, Mississippi election board member, John Wages. He was unopposed.
The party also elected or re-elected 14 of its members to non-partisan office in California. It elected a San Francisco County Supervisor. It also elected nine city council members: two each in Arcata and Sebastopol, and one each in Richmond, San Luis Obispo, Richmond, Fort Bragg, and Aliso Viejo. It also elected school board members in San Francisco and Berkeley, and elected a member of the Santa Monica Rent Control Board, and a director of the Humboldt Bay Water Board.
The party also elected or re-elected members to these offices: six Washington, D.C. Neighborhood Advisory Commissions; a Tallahassee, Fl. Soil and Water District Commissioner; a Black Hawk County, Iowa Soil and Water Commissioner; two School Board members in Portland, Me.; a city council member in Belfast, Me.; a city commissioner in Mt. Pleasant, Michigan; a city councilmember in Talent, Oregon; two city councilmembers in Corvallis, Oregon; a Soil and Water Conservation Board member in East Multnomah, Oregon; a Soil and Water District Board member in Benton County, Oregon; and a Freeholder in Lopez, Washington.
LIBERTARIAN PARTY ELECTION WINS
The Dec. 1 B.A.N. mentioned that the Libertarian Party had elected the Dade County, Georgia County Executive, a partisan office. The party gained another partisan office-holder in Kansas on December 28. Anderson County Attorney Frederick Campbell changed his registration from Republican to Libertarian. He had just been re-elected last month, so he doesn’t need to run for re-election until 2008.
On November 2, Libertarian Party members also were elected or re-elected to eight offices in California. The offices were two members of the Oceano Community Services Board, and one member each to the Esparto Community Service Board, the Carlotta Community Service Board, the Lakeside Planning Board, the Vista Irrigation District, the Rancho Simi Park District Board, and the Concord Health Care District Board.
Libertarian Party members were also elected to non-partisan office in other states. The offices were city council in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota; city council in Otsego, Minnesota; three Florida Soil and Water Conservation Boards, in Lee, Palm Beach and Seminole Counties; a school board member in Norton, Massachusetts; and three school board members in Pima County, Arizona. Finally, a party member who is a Superior Court Judge in Phoenix, Arizona, won a retention election.
An America First Party member was elected to the Brevard County, Florida, Zoning Board, a non-partisan office.
Si Gerson, COFOE Secretary from COFOE’s founding in 1985 until 1999, died on December 26, 2004. He was also the Communist Party’s rep to the COFOE Board. Gerson was 94. In 1948, when the Communist Party had two members on the New York city council, one of those city members died. Under the city charter at the time, if a member died, his or her political party could name a replacement. The Communist Party chose Gerson for the council. However, his nomination was blocked in court, on the grounds that the Communist Party was not a "political party," even though it had won partisan elections in the city under its own label.
Gerson was the Communist Party’s foremost expert on ballot access law. The New York Times carried a rare op-ed on that subject in 1976, and Gerson was the author. The Communist Party isn’t very interested in ballot access any longer, since it never runs candidates nowadays.
SUBSCRIBING TO BAN WITH PAYPAL
If you use Paypal, you can subscribe to B.A.N., or renew, with Paypal. If you use a credit card in connection with Paypal, use ban@richardwinger.com. If you don’t use a credit card in conjunction with Paypal, use sub@richardwinger.com.
Ballot Access News. is published by and copyright by Richard Winger. Note: subscriptions are available!