July 5, 2005 Ė Volume 21, Number 3

This issue was originally printed on white paper.

Table of Contents

  1. WILL OREGON IMPOSE A PRIMARY SCREEN-OUT ON INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE PETITIONS?
  2. ACCESS BILLS ADVANCE
  3. IRV BILLS ADVANCE
  4. COLORADO BILLS
  5. SOME ACCESS BILLS DIE
  6. PRIMARY DATE BILLS
  7. OTHER BILL NEWS
  8. CONGRESS
  9. ELECTION RULINGS
  10. DEBATES LOSS
  11. COFOE
  12. BOOK REVIEW: GREEN PARTY TEMPEST
  13. BOOK REVIEW: ON THE BALLOT IN LOUISIANA
  14. MOST CROWDED PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY BALLOT
  15. 2006 PETITIONING FOR STATEWIDE OFFICE
  16. VIRGINIA 2005 STATE ELECTION
  17. NEW JERSEY 2005 STATE ELECTION
  18. ADDITIONAL MINOR PARTY WINS
  19. OHIO SPECIAL CONGRESS ELECTION
  20. REFORM PARTY IS DIVIDED
  21. PROHIBITIONIST LIKELY TO WIN AGAIN
  22. INDEPENDENCE PARTY RE-NOMINATES BLOOMBERG FOR N.Y. MAYOR
  23. SUBSCRIBING TO BAN WITH PAYPAL


WILL OREGON IMPOSE A PRIMARY SCREEN-OUT ON INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE PETITIONS?

Some Oregon legislators seemed determined to pass HB 2614, which would make it illegal for someone who voted in the primary to sign an independent candidateís petition. The bill passed the Senate Rules Committee on June 20, by a vote of 3-2, on a party line vote, with both Republicans voting "no".

The motive for the bill is anger that Ralph Nader even tried to get on the Oregon ballot last year as an independent candidate. Even though he failed to qualify in Oregon, the very idea that he tried seems to enrage some legislators. HB 2614 only makes independent candidate ballot access harder; it does not affect petitions to create new parties, and that is a clue as to the motivation of the billís sponsors.

In the past, many states had laws that made it illegal for primary voters to sign a petition for an independent candidate or for a new party. But all of these laws have been repealed, except for Texasí law (also, Nebraska still doesnít let primary voters sign for an independent presidential candidate, but Nebraska primary voters can sign for new parties and for non-presidential independent candidates).

States that have repealed the primary screen-out are Arizona in 1993, California in 1976, Colorado in 1975, Illinois in 1975, New York in 1984, Rhode Island in 1976, Washington in 1977, and West Virginia in 1999. These laws are a headache to administer. When petitions must be checked, it isnít enough to see if the signer is registered; elections officials must also check to see if the voter voted in the primary.

Federal courts have ruled in seven cases that it is unconstitutional for a state to make it substantially more difficult for an independent candidate to get on the ballot, than for an entire new party to get on the ballot.

If the purpose of restrictive ballot access laws is to keep the ballot from being too crowded, it makes no sense to have more difficult barriers for a single independent candidate than for a new party. This is because when a new party qualifies, it potentially may run a nominee for every partisan office in the state. That activity has a far greater impact on ballot-crowding than a single independent candidate.

Since the number of signatures in Oregon for a new party and an independent candidate are almost exactly the same, and since the deadline is the same, Oregon now makes ballot access for new parties and independent candidates equally difficult. But HB 2614 upsets that. By imposing a primary screen-out on independent candidates, but not on new minor party petitions, Oregon places itself in legal jeopardy for discriminating against independent candidates, relative to minor parties.

When HB 2614 was introduced, it was more severe. It said that no registered member of a qualified party could sign an independent petition. However, when the sponsors realized that a similar law had been declared unconstitutional in a 1999 federal court decision in Arizona (Campbell v Hull), they amended the bill to provide that primary voters canít sign for an independent candidate. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld Texasí primary screen-out law in 1974 (American Party of Texas v White). However, Texas applied the primary screen-out to both new party and independent candidate petitions.

At the hearing on HB 2614 in the Senate Rules Committee on June 14, a witness pointed out that seven federal courts, plus a State Supreme Court, had all ruled that states may not make it more difficult for an independent candidate to get on the ballot, than a new party.

However, only two of the five Senators on the Committee were present to hear that witness. Neither of those two Senators voted for HB 2614 when it passed that Committee on June 20. The only three Senators who voted for the bill on June 20 were those Senators who had not heard the testimony.

Another flaw in the bill is that Oregon has no law telling independent candidates when they may begin to circulate their petitions. Oregonís primary is in late May. The bill doesnít explain how to handle the situation in which a voter signs an independent candidate petition before voting in the primary.

The billís two sponsors, Rep. Derrick Kitts and Rep. Mary Nolan, say that they are guided by the principle that no voter should be allowed to nominate more than a single nominee for the same office. However, Oregon law explicitly permits voters to sign as many independent candidate petitions as they wish, even if the independent candidates are running for the same office. HB 2614 does not seek to amend this law, even though the sponsors are aware of the law. Nor does the bill prohibit any voter from signing as many primary nominating petitions for the same office as the voter wishes to sign, a practice that is currently legal.

The bill could receive a vote in the Senate at any time. If it passes, it then will get a House vote. If you live in Oregon, or if you have any association with any Oregon legislator, please ask that HB 2614 be defeated. See www.leg.state.or.us for a list of Oregon legislators. Point out that Oregon already has more difficult ballot access for independent candidates than the average state. Only one statewide independent candidate (Pat Buchanan in 2000) has qualified in Oregon since 1991.


ACCESS BILLS ADVANCE

Since the June 1 B.A.N., ballot access bills in five states have advanced:

Florida: HB 1567, which defines "national political party" to be a party on the ballot in at least one state besides Florida, was signed on June 20. Such parties may place their presidential nominee on the ballot with no petition and no fee. If this bill had been in place last year, the Reform Party probably would not have needed to win a lawsuit to place Ralph Nader on the ballot.

Illinois: HB 1968 passed the legislature on May 28. It lowers the number of signatures to get on the ballot for Mayor of Chicago (and the other two citywide offices, City Clerk and Treasurer) from 25,000 signatures, to 12,500 signatures.

Minnesota: HF 1481, which adds a new way for a group to attain or keep "qualified party" status, was signed on June 3.

Nevada: AB 455, which gives parties more flexibility as to whom they can nominate, was signed into law on June 13. It also moves the primary from September to August, although it does not affect the dates of minor party conventions.

North Carolina: there are two bills to lower the number of signatures for statewide independent candidates. H1115, backed by the Board of Elections, passed the House on May 17. It lowers the number from 2% of the registered voters, to 2% of the last vote cast. The better bill, H88, which lowers it to one-half of 1% of the last vote cast, has not made any headway since April, but could still pass.

Two other ballot access bills awaiting a Governorís signature are HB 94 in Alaska, and HB525 in Missouri.


IRV BILLS ADVANCE

North Carolina: on May 18, HB 1024 passed the House. It lets ten counties try Instant-Runoff voting.

Vermont: on May 12, H505 was signed into law. It allows Burlington, the largest city in the state, to use IRV in Mayoral elections.


COLORADO BILLS

On June 1, Colorado Governor Bill Owens vetoed HB 1147, which would have made it legal for any adult resident of the state to circulate any type of petition. The Governor didnít like the fact that the bill repeals the law saying that circulators must wear a badge, saying if they are being paid or not.

One consequence of the veto is that it is still illegal in Colorado for a circulator (for a candidate petition) to work outside his or her home district. Last year, a circulator who wanted to help get a legislative candidate onto the Democratic primary ballot sued against this restriction. The lawsuit had been on hold, but now that the bill has been vetoed, the lawsuit will move ahead. Koehler v Davidson, 04B-1377, U.S. Dist. Court.

Governor Owens signed SB206 on June 6. It moves the deadline for an independent presidential candidate to file, from July to June. As far as is known, this is the only restrictive ballot access bill so far that has been signed into law in any state this year.


SOME ACCESS BILLS DIE

Arizona: the legislature adjourned without passing SB 1228, which would have lowered the number of signatures for a new party in mid-term years.

Connecticut: the legislature adjourned without passing SB 1233, which would have set up a procedure for a group to turn itself into a qualified party, in advance of an election.

Texas: the legislature adjourned without passing HB 1721, which would have let primary voters sign minor party and independent candidate petitions.


PRIMARY DATE BILLS

The only state that has moved the date of its presidential primary so far this year is Arkansas. SB235 was signed into law on March 2, and it moves the primary from May to February. Bills to move New Jerseyís June primary to February are likely to pass this year.


OTHER BILL NEWS

California: on June 7, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said that he will not sign any bill to legalize write-ins in which the voter forgot to "x" the box next to the name written in. These bills are SB 1050 and AB 43. The author of SB 1050, Senator Debra Bowen, expects to pass her bill anyway, and hope that either the Governor changes his mind, or that his veto can be overridden.

Louisiana: on June 21, the legislature passed SB 53. It retains the stateís unique "top-two" system for congressional elections. The only change it makes is that the first round of congressional elections would be in late September, and if no one gets 50%, a run-off would be held in November. Current practice is to hold the first round in November, and any needed run-off is in December. In 1997 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the September-November system violates the federal law that tells the states to hold their congressional elections in November. If the Governor signs SB 53, the state will need to persuade federal judge Frank Polozola to lift his injunction against the September-November system.

Maine: the legislature went home without passing LD 329, but the bill is alive and legislative leaders have promised to bring it up the next time the legislature meets. The Governor may call a special session soon. LD 329 makes it easier for a party to gain and retain "qualified" status.

Ohio: HB 3, the Secretary of Stateís omnibus election law bill, has a provision to let voters register into particular parties on the voter registration form. It passed the House on May 17 but the Senate wonít take it up until September or later.

Oregon: on May 20, SB 161 passed the State Senate by 20-10. It would make state elections non-partisan. However, the bill is not expected to pass the House.

Pennsylvania: a bill is being drafted to ease ballot access, in accordance with the recommendations of the Governorís Task Force on Election Code Revision.


CONGRESS

Although many bills of interest have been introduced in Congress this year, only two of them seem to be advancing.

Special elections for U.S. House: earlier this year, Congressman James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) pushed HR841 through the House. It requires the states to hold special elections for U.S. House within 7 weeks of any event that causes the death of at least 100 members of the House. However, the U.S. Senate seemed disinclined to pass HR 841. Now, Congressman Sensenbrenner has amended the contents of his bill into HR 334. HR 334 is a bill that funds Congressí operations, and is considered a "must-pass" bill. Sensenbrennerís maneuver passed by a vote of 268-143.

Campaign finance: HR 1316 passed the House Administration Committee on June 8, and will probably receive a vote on the House floor this month. It makes it possible for a big donor to give large amounts of money to political parties, as long as the money is distributed to many different units of the party. Congressmen Mike Pence (R-Ind.) and Albert Wynn (D-Md.) are the prime co-sponsors.


ELECTION RULINGS

Kentucky: the Secretary of State is revamping the voter registration records, so that soon tallies will be available for the number of voters who are registered in various unqualified parties, as well as the number of independent voters.

New Jersey: the state Elections Department has finally stopped labeling all the minor party candidates as "independents" in the official election returns. The new format, in effect for the 2005 state elections, simply labels each minor party candidate with his or her ballot label. The importance of this is that national publications that gather election returns for each party had been classifying all the minor party candidates in New Jersey as independent candidates. This bad practice will now stop.

New Mexico: the Secretary of State ruled on June 2 that the Libertarian Party is not a qualified party, even though she had said back in February that it is. The law is worded badly. Some interpret it to mean that a party remains on until it runs for both Governor and President and fails to poll as much as one-half of 1% in both races. Others interpret it to mean that if it fails to poll one-half of 1% in either race, it is disqualified. The party did not run for Governor in 2002, but ran for president in 2004 and only polled .31%.


DEBATES LOSS

On June 10, the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, reversed the lower court and said the Federal Election Commission need not investigate the Commission on Presidential Debates to see if it is biased against minor party and independent presidential candidates. The opinion is short and mostly concerns whether federal agencies like the FEC enjoy deference from the courts. Hagelin v FEC, no. 04-5312.


COFOE

The Coalition for Free & Open Elections now has a web site, www.cofoe.org. Since the site is new, it isnít too extensive yet.


BOOK REVIEW: GREEN PARTY TEMPEST

Green Party Tempest, Weathering the Storm of 2004, by Greg Gerritt, 60 pages, $12.00, published 2005 by Moshassuck River Press, 37 Sixth St., Providence RI 02906.

This book tells the story of the Green Party in 2003-2004. It describes the partyís national convention in June from an insiderís perspective, since the author is a veteran party leader who was involved in planning and running that convention.

Even though the author is a long-standing activist in the Green Party, he does not hesitate to criticize the party, and he has some interesting ideas about why Greens sometimes have a difficult time getting along with each other.


BOOK REVIEW: ON THE BALLOT IN LOUISIANA

On the Ballot in Louisiana, Running for President to Fight National Decay, by Bill McGaughey, 399 pages, $16.95, published 2004 by Thistlerose Publications, 1702 Glenwood Av., Minneapolis Mn. 55405.

The book is a first-person account of what it is like to declare oneself a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2004, and then to seek that nomination, if one is extremely motivated, yet has little fame or money.

The author, Bill McGaughey, ran in the Louisiana Democratic presidential primary. He visited 60 towns in his quest to maximize his vote total and to advance his ideas.

The book is funny, because anyone who sets out to run for president with no name recognition and little money, but with some cleverness and a lot of determination, invariably has funny experiences. McGaughey is a good writer, and he freely describes his own mishaps and mistakes. The best parts of the book describe his interactions with newspaper reporters and editorial writers. He polled 3,161 votes in the Louisiana primary, outpolling Dennis Kucinich and Lyndon LaRouche.


MOST CROWDED PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY BALLOT

The chart on page four shows the most crowded presidential primary ballot that each state has ever experienced. This chart supplements the chart contained in the September 1, 2001 Ballot Access News, which shows the most crowded statewide regularly-scheduled general election ballot that any state has ever experienced.

When one examines both charts, one may deduce a law of behavior. If a state requires as few as 5,000 signatures, it will never experience a crowded ballot. In this case, "crowded ballot" is defined as one with more than nine candidates for a single office on the ballot. There are no instances, in either presidential primaries, or in any general elections, where a state with a requirement of 5,000 signatures (or more) had a race with more than nine candidates.

Alabama

1988

9 in Democratic primary

500 signatures + $2,000

Arizona

1996

20 in Republican primary

Just request to be on ballot

Arkansas

1988

10 in Democratic primary

Pay $5,000

California

2000

23 in blanket primary

Be mentioned in news media

Colorado

1992

18 in Democratic primary

Pay $500

Connecticut

1996

10 in Republican primary

Be mentioned in news media

Delaware

2004

9 in Democratic primary

Matching funds or 500 sigs.

District of Columbia

2004

11 in Democratic primary

Just request to be on ballot

Florida

1976

13 in Democratic primary

Be mentioned in news media

Georgia

1976

17 in Democratic primary

Be mentioned in news media

Idaho

1976

8 in Democratic primary

Be mentioned in news media

Illinois

2004

9 in Democratic primary

3,000 signatures

Indiana

2004

6 in Democratic primary

5,000 signatures

Kansas

1980

13 in Republican primary

Pay $100

Kentucky

1988

11 in Democratic primary

Just request to be on ballot

Louisiana

1992

15 in Democratic primary

Pay $750

Maine

1996

9 in Republican primary

Pay $2,500

Maryland

2004

12 in Democratic primary

Be mentioned in news media

Massachusetts

1976

13 in Democratic primary

Be mentioned in news media

Michigan

1996

10 in Republican primary

Be mentioned in news media

Minnesota

1992

16 in Democratic primary

Pay $500

Mississippi

1996

11 in Republican primary

Be mentioned in news media

Missouri

1988

13 in Democratic primary

Pay $1,000

Montana

2004

6 in Democratic primary

Be mentioned in news media

Nebraska

1976

11 in Democratic primary

Be mentioned in news media

Nevada

1996

12 in Republican primary

Pay $1,000

New Hampshire

1992

36 in Democratic primary

Pay $1,000

New Jersey

1976

10 in Democratic primary

1,000 signatures

New Mexico

1996

8 in Republican primary

Be mentioned in news media

New York

2004

9 in Democratic primary

5,000 signatures

North Carolina

1984

9 in Democratic primary

Receive matching funds

North Dakota

1996

8 in Republican primary

Party approval or 300 sigs.

Ohio

1988

8 in Democratic primary

1,000 signatures

Oklahoma

1988

12 in Democratic primary

Pay $2,500

Oregon

1972

11 in Democratic primary

Be mentioned in news media

Pennsylvania

1984

10 in Democratic primary

1,000 signatures

Rhode Island

1992

16 in Democratic primary

Just request to be on ballot

South Carolina

1992

11 in Democratic primary

Pay $2,500

South Dakota

1996

8 in Republican primary

Party approval or 1% pet.

Tennessee

2004

11 in Democratic primary

Be mentioned in news media

Texas

1996

12 in Republican primary

Pay $5,000

Utah

2004

8 in Democratic primary

Pay $500 + party approval

Vermont

1996

7 in Republican primary

$2,000 + 1,000 signatures

Virginia

2004

9 in Democratic primary

10,000 signatures

Washington

1996

10 in blanket primary

Be mentioned in news media

West Virginia

1988

12 in Democratic primary

Pay $2,000

Wisconsin

1972

13 in Democratic primary

Be mentioned in news media

This chart identifies each state's most crowded presidential primary election ballot. See page 3 for more explanation. The four states not mentioned above (Alaska, Hawaii, Iowa, Wyoming) never held a presidential primary.


2006 PETITIONING FOR STATEWIDE OFFICE

STATE
REQUIREMENTS
SIGNATURES COLLECTED
Deadline
FULL PARTY
CAND
LIB'T
GREEN
CONSTI
NAT LAW
REFORM

Alabama

41,012

41,012

1,200

0

0

0

0

in court

Alaska

(reg) 9,258

#3,128

already on

in court

0

0

0

Aug. 22

Ariz.

26,835

est. #20,000

already on

0

0

0

0

June 14

Arkansas

10,000

10,000

*400

0

0

0

0

May 1

Calif.

(reg) 77,389

165,573

already on

already on

already on

already on

39,328

Aug. 11

Colorado

(reg) 1,000

#1,000

already on

already on

already on

534

337

July 10

Connecticut

no procedure

#7,500

already on

0

already on

0

0

Aug. 11

Delaware

est. (reg) 280

est. 5,600

already on

already on

already on

257

211

July 15

D.C.

no procedure

est. #3,800

can't start

already on

can't start

can't start

can't start

Aug. 30

Florida

be organized

pay fee

already on

already on

already on

already on

already on

July 18

Georgia

42,676

#42,676

already on

0

0

0

0

July 11

Hawaii

648

25

already on

already on

0

already on

0

July 25

Idaho

11,968

5,984

already on

0

already on

already on

0

Aug. 31

Illinois

no procedure

#25,000

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

June 26

Indiana

no procedure

#29,553

already on

*4,000

0

0

0

June 30

Iowa

no procedure

#1,500

0

0

0

0

0

Aug. 18

Kansas

16,477

5,000

already on

0

0

0

already on

July 31

Kentucky

no procedure

#2,400

0

0

0

0

0

Aug. 8

La.

(reg) 1,000

pay fee

already on

virtual on

47

20

*already on

Sep. 7

Maine

24,798

#4,000

0

already on

0

0

0

May 25

Maryland

10,000

est. 29,400

already on

already on

already on

0

0

Aug. 7

Mass.

est. (reg) 41,000

#10,000

23,900

9,509

56

44

1,168

Aug. 1

Michigan

31,731

31,731

already on

already on

already on

already on

0

July 20

Minnesota

141,420

#2,000

0

0

0

0

0

July 18

Mississippi

be organized

1,000

already on

already on

already on

already on

already on

April 7

Missouri

10,000

10,000

already on

0

0

0

0

July 31

Montana

5,000

#5,000

already on

0

*550

0

0

May 30

Nebraska

4,735

2,500

300

*3,500

0

0

0

Aug. 29

Nevada

7,915

7,915

already on

0

already on

0

0

July 7

New Hamp.

20,299

#3,000

0

0

0

0

0

Aug. 9

New Jersey

no procedure

#800

0

0

0

0

0

June 6

New Mex.

3,782

14,079

*50

already on

already on

0

0

July 11

New York

no procedure

#15,000

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

Aug. 22

No. Car.

69,734

law is void

25,200

8,900

0

0

0

June 30

No. Dakota

7,000

1,000

0

0

0

0

0

Sep. 8

Ohio

56,280

5,000

in court

0

0

0

0

May 1

Oklahoma

73,188

pay fee

in court

0

0

0

0

June 21

Oregon

18,381

18,356

already on

already on

already on

0

0

Aug. 29

Penn.

no procedure

#66,827

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

Aug. 1

Rhode Isl.

21,815

#1,000

can't start

canít start

can't start

can't start

can't start

July 20

So. Caro.

10,000

10,000

already on

already on

already on

0

already on

July 15

So. Dakota

8,364

#3,346

already on

0

already on

0

0

*June 6

Tennessee

41,314

25

0

0

0

0

0

April 6

Texas

45,253

45,253

already on

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

May 11

Utah

2,000

#1,000

already on

*1,800

already on

0

0

Mar. 17

Vermont

be organized

#1,000

already on

already on

0

0

0

Sep. 21

Virginia

no procedure

#10,000

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

June 13

Washington

no procedure

*in court

canít start

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

July 7

West Va.

no procedure

#8,724

0

0

0

0

0

May 8

Wisconsin

10,000

#2,000

already on

already on

already on

0

0

July 11

Wyoming

4,774

4,774

already on

0

0

0

0

Aug. 28

TOTAL STATES ON
*27
15
16
6
*5
-

3 states (Ky., La., N.C.) have no statewide race, so chart shows requirement for a party to run a full slate for U.S. House.
*change since the June 1 chart.
#partisan label is permitted (other than "indp.").
"Deadline" means the procedure with the latest deadline.


VIRGINIA 2005 STATE ELECTION

Virginia is one of two states that elects its governor and state legislature this year. Three candidates are on the ballot for Governor: independent H. Russell Potts, Jr. (a Republican State Senator), Republican nominee Jerry Kilgore, and Democratic nominee Tim Kaine. Kilgore has already announced that he will not participate in any debate if Potts is invited; by contrast, Kaine favors 3-person debates.

In legislative races, the only minor parties with any nominees are the Libertarian Party, which has five nominees, and the Constitution Party, which has one nominee.


NEW JERSEY 2005 STATE ELECTION

New Jersey, the other state electing a governor this year, has ten candidates on the ballot. They are the nominees of the Democratic, Republican, Green, Libertarian, Socialist, and Socialist Workers Parties, and four independents.

In legislative races, Greens have ten nominees, Libertarians have seven, and the Socialist Party has three. Also, each of these parties has one legislative nominee: Constitution, Conservative and Socialist Workers.


ADDITIONAL MINOR PARTY WINS

The June 1 Ballot Access News listed elections won by minor party members during May, but failed to include Libertarian Oregon results. On May 17, these Libertarians were elected: Charles Radley, Tigard Water Board; Marty Soehrman, Colton School Board; and these six to various School Committees in Beaverton: Christi Feldewerth, Inessa Hamilton-Lee, Christianna Mayer, Adam Mayer, Stephen Pearson, and Greg Rohde.


OHIO SPECIAL CONGRESS ELECTION

Ohio will hold a special congressional election in the 2nd district on August 2. The only candidates who will be on the ballot are Republican Jean Schmidt and Democrat Paul Hackett. The district comprises eastern Cincinnati.


REFORM PARTY IS DIVIDED

In April, members of the Reform Partyís national committee called a national convention, which was held June 3-5 in Tampa, Florida. Thirteen state parties sent delegates, and two other state parties sent observers. Forty-five persons attended. The convention adopted a new party constitution. Pursuant to the new constitution, the national committee elected new officers. They include chair Charles Foster of Texas, treasurer Beverly Kennedy of Texas, and assistant treasurer Sue Harris DeBauche of Virginia.

The old national party officers do not recognize the Tampa convention, and are planning their own national convention in October; the city has not yet been chosen. On June 23, the new party officers won control of the web page www.reformparty.org.


PROHIBITIONIST LIKELY TO WIN AGAIN

In November 2001, James Hedges of Fulton County, Pennsylvania became the first Prohibition Party candidate to win a partisan election since 1959. Hedges is running for a second term this year. Earlier this year he qualified by petition as the Prohibition nominee for Assessor of Thompson Township. Then on May 17, via write-ins, he won the Democratic and Republican primaries for the same office.


INDEPENDENCE PARTY RE-NOMINATES BLOOMBERG FOR N.Y. MAYOR

New York city Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who is running for re-election this year as a Republican, received the nomination of the Independence Party on May 28. Assuming he wins the Republican primary in September, he will then be listed on the November ballot as the nominee of each of those two parties. Bloomberg had also been the nominee of those two parties in November 2001.

The Liberal Party of New York was a ballot-qualified party 1946 through 2002. It is still organized, and it has indicated it intends to also nominate Bloomberg. However, in order for Bloomberg to appear on the ballot as the Liberal Party nominee, the Liberal Party must submit a petition of 7,500 names by August 23.


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 donít 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!


Go back to the index.
Copyright © 2005 Ballot Access News