|
|
| |
|
|
September 30th, 2006
On September 30, California Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed AB 2948. See 3 posts down for a description of the bill.
September 30th, 2006
Connecticut, like most states, does not treat all candidates equally, on the matter of ballot position. Major party nominees are automatically placed in the best spots on the ballot; then come previously qualified minor parties; then new parties; then independent candidates.
A minority of states, including all states in the 8th circuit, do give each party and each candidate an equal opportunity to appear on the best spot on the ballot. Courts outside the 8th circuit, for the most part, have refused to rule discriminatory ballot placement laws unconstitutonal, on the absurd grounds that it doesn’t make any difference.
News reports from the Connecticut U.S. Senate race make it clear that everyone in Connecticut who follows this issue does believe that ballot placement makes a difference in that race. There is speculation that the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate, who will enjoy the best spot on the ballot (because the Republican Party won the 2002 gubernatorial election) will get an advantage from his ballot position. There is also consensus that Senator Lieberman will suffer from appearing 6th on the ballot, behind the lines reserved for the Democratic, Republican, Green, Constitution and Libertarian Parties (there is no Libertarian on the ballot for US Senate, but there are Libertarians on the ballot for certain other statewide offices, so in towns using the party-column style, a blank Libertarian square will appear above Lieberman).
Also, in certain legislative districts in Connecticut, as well as one congressional district, the Working Families Party is a ballot-qualified party for those district offices, and it will also appear above Lieberman, even though it also lacks a U.S. Senate candidate.
September 29th, 2006
On September 28, a lower New Hampshire state court invalidated the Secretary of State’s plan for a fairer order of candidates on the ballot. Back in August, the State Supreme Court had ruled that all candidates must have an equal chance for the best spot on the ballot. This affected the order of party columns, and it also affected the order of candidates’ names, in multi-winner districts (some New Hampshire state house districts elect as many as 9 representatives).
Since the New Hampshire legislature did not pass any new law on the subject of ballot order, the Secretary of State had proposed that the old alphabetical listing should be altered, in this fashion: he would randomly choose a letter of the alphabet. For this year’s general election, he chose “k”. Then, he proposed that all candidates with a surname starting with “k” should be listed first, but after that, the normal alphabet would again prevail, so that candidates with surnames starting with “a” would follow the candidates whose surnames start with “k”.
The lower state court ruling said that plan isn’t good enough, because it still leaves candidates with surnames at the beginning of the alphabet better off than candidates with surnames at the end.
September 29th, 2006
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed AB 2948 on Saturday, September 30. This is the bill that would have authorized California to join a compact with other willing states. Once states containing a majority of electoral votes had signed the compact, these states would pledge to appoint presidential electors pledged to the national popular vote winner.
September 29th, 2006
On September 29, Florida Congressman Mark Foley resigned his seat and withdrew as a candidate for re-election, even though he had won the Florida Republican primary on September 5. Under Florida law, his name will remain on the November ballot. However, if the voters elect him, the actual winner will be the individual (whose name was not on the ballot) chosen by the Republican Party’s district 16 committee. A Republican state legislator, Joe Negron, has already declared he wants that nomination.
September 29th, 2006
On September 29, 2006, Ralph Nader filed a lawsuit against Ohio’s law that requires circulators to be registered voters. The Ohio law on this subject is clearly unconstitutional, because in 1999 the U.S. Supreme Court had ruled that states cannot require initiative circulators to be registered voters. Nader v Blackwell, 2:06cv821. The case is not moot because Nader (who was injured by this law in 2004) is suing for damages (of $1).
An earlier lawsuit filed by Nader supporters in 2004 did not ever get a substantive ruling, because the judge refused to rule, on the grounds that some of Nader’s circulators had been deceptive about their domicile.
September 29th, 2006
Pennsylvania courts are mulling over three issues, all related to whether the Green Party statewide nominees will be on this year’s ballot: (1) the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will soon decide how many valid signatures are needed this year for statewide office; (2) the Pennsylvania Supreme Court was asked to decide (on September 29) whether the petition-checking process this year was valid, and whether costs should be assessed against the Greens if they were; (3) the US Court of Appeals is still considering whether to rehear the constitutional ballot access case; that rehearing has been pending since Sep. 5.
September 29th, 2006
Three Arizona Libertarian candidates, and the party, sued in state court on September 28, over Maricopa County’s failure to tally all write-ins at the party’s primary on September 12. Two State Senate candidates are each short two write-ins in order to be nominated, and a candidate for Justice of the Peace is short one write-in. Unopposed write-in candidates at party primaries must not only outpoll any opponents, they must receive a certain number of write-ins, to be considered nominated.
Maricopa County already found some more write-ins to enable one of the party’s congressional candidates to be nominated. The case is Arizona Libertarian Party v Brewer, Superior Ct., Maricopa Co., cv-2006-14637. A hearing is set for 10 am, Oct. 2.
September 29th, 2006
All briefs have now been submitted in the Alabama ballot access case, Swanson v State. The 11th circuit case number is 06-13643. The case challenges the number of signatures required for minor party and non-presidential independent candidates, and the early June petition deadline. The case took 4 years to get through the U.S. District Court.
September 28th, 2006
The Republican Party’s national convention in 2008 will be in Minneapolis and St. Paul. The party announced this decision on September 27. Democrats haven’t chosen their city yet. This is only the 2nd time Minnesota will have hosted a major party presidential convention. See the June 1, 2006 Ballot Access News for a chart showing the locations and dates of post-Civil War major party national conventions.
|
|
|
Paper
Issues:
Blog Archives
Syndication

Subscribe to Ballot Access
News via PayPal. Subscriptions are $15 for 12 issues a year ($20 foreign). Additional
donations are welcome.
New
Feature:
Search Ballot Access News
|
|
|
Access to
this site is free. Your donations support this site and the
activities of Richard Winger in lobbying for free and open elections.
To
subscribe via mail, click here and
print out the form to mail. Welcome
to the OFFICIAL online home of Ballot Access News,
a non-partisan newsletter reporting on the trials and tribulations
of folks trying to put candidates on the ballot in the United
States of America. There are many surprisingly restrictive
ballot access laws in this country, which the average voter
has no knowledge or conception of; part of our purpose here
(besides reporting on progress made) is to report on these
restrictive ballot access laws so that more people are aware
of them. I hope you find these materials interesting and exciting;
if you do, you can support the newsletter by subscribing!
Ballot
Access News is edited and published by Richard Winger,
the nation's leading expert on ballot access legal issues.
|
|
Issues
available: |
|
2008:
|
2007:
|
|
2006:
|
2005:
|
|
2004:
|
2003:
|
2002:
- December
2002 Issue
(V:18 N:8)
- November
2002 Issue
(V:18 N:7)
- October
1, 2002 Issue (V:18 N:6)
- September
1, 2002 Issue
(V:18 N:5)
- August
1, 2002 issue (V:18 N:4)
- July
1, 2002 issue (V:18 N:3)
- June
1, 2002 issue (V:18 N:2)
- May
1, 2002 issue (V:18 N:1)
- April
1, 2002 issue (V:17 N:13)
- March
1, 2002 issue (V:17 N:12)
- February
1, 2002 issue (V:17 N:11)
- January
1, 2002 issue (V:17 N:10)
|
2001:
- December
1, 2001 issue (V:17 N:9)
- November
1, 2001 issue (V:17 N:8)
- October
1, 2001 issue (V:17 N:7)
- September
1, 2001 issue (V:17 N:6)
- August
1, 2001 issue (V:17 N:5)
- July
1, 2001 issue (V:17 N:4)
- June
1, 2001 issue (V:17 N:3)
- May
1, 2001 issue (V:17 N:2)
- April
1, 2001 issue (V:17 N:1)
- March
1, 2001 issue (V:16 N:12)
- February
1, 2001 issue (V:16 N:11)
- January
1, 2001 issue (V:16 N:10)
|
2000:
- December
5, 2000 issue (V:16 N:9)
- November
16, 2000 issue (V:16 N:8)
- October
1, 2000 issue (V:16 N:7)
- September
1, 2000 issue (V:16 N:6)
- August
1, 2000 issue (V:16 N:5)
- July
1, 2000 issue (V:16 N:4)
- June
1, 2000 issue (V:16 N:3)
- May
1, 2000 issue (V:16 N:2)
- April
1, 2000 issue (V:16 N:1)
- March
1, 2000 issue (V:15 N:12)
- February
1, 2000 issue (V:15 N:11)
- January
1, 2000 issue (V:15 N:10)
|
1999:
- December
1, 1999 issue (V:15 N:9)
- November
1, 1999 issue (V:15 N:8)
- October
1, 1999 issue (V:15 N:7)
- September
1, 1999 issue (V:15 N:6)
- August
3, 1999 issue (V:15 N:5)
- July
3, 1999 issue (V:15 N:4)
- June
1, 1999 issue (V:15 N:3)
- May
3, 1999 issue (V:15 N:2)
- April
3, 1999 issue (V:15 N:1)
- March
6, 1999 issue (V:14 N:12)
- February
6, 1999 issue (V:14 N:11)
- January
6, 1999 issue (V:14 N:10)
|
1998:
- December
8, 1998 issue (V:14 N:9)
- November
8, 1998 issue (V:14 N:8)
- October
4, 1998 issue (V:14 N:7)
- September
4, 1998 issue (V:14 N:6)
- August
3, 1998 issue (V:14 N:5)
- July
3, 1998 issue (V:14 N:4)
- June
3, 1998 issue (V:14 N:3)
- May
7, 1998 issue (V:14 N:2)
- April
5, 1998 issue (V:14 N:1)
- March
8, 1998 issue (V:13 N:12)
- February
8, 1998 issue (V:13 N:11)
- January
5, 1998 issue (V:13 N:10)
|
1997:
- December
5, 1997 issue (V:13 N:9)
- November
1, 1997 issue (V:13 N:8)
- October
6, 1997 issue (V:13 N:7)
- September
6, 1997 issue (V:13 N:6)
- August
4, 1997 issue (V:13 N:5)
- July
2, 1997 issue (V:13 N:4)
BAN.
changed to a 12 issue per year schedule.
- June
2, 1997 issue (V:13 N:3)
- May
5, 1997 issue (V:13 N:2)
- April
7, 1997 issue (V:13 N:1)
- March
10, 1997 issue (V:12 N:13)
- February
10, 1997 issue (V:12 N:12)
- January
12, 1997 issue (V:12 N:11)
|
1996:
- December
12, 1996 issue (V:12 N:10)
- November
12, 1996 issue (V:12 N:9)
- October
12, 1996 issue (V:12 N:8)
- September
9, 1996 issue (V:12 N:7)
- August
12, 1996 issue (V:12 N:6)
- July
20, 1996 issue (V:12 N:5)
- June
26, 1996 issue (V:12 N:4)
- May
28, 1996 issue (V:12 N:3)
- May
3, 1996 issue (V:12 N:2)
- April
3, 1996 issue (V:12 N:1)
- March
6, 1996 issue (V:11 N:13)
- February
7, 1996 issue (V:11 N:12)
- January
14, 1996 issue (V:11 N:11)
|
1995:
|
1994:
|
1993:
- 1993 Issues
not yet available online
|
|
|
Additional
articles/essays:
- Politics,
Soviet-style by S. Philip Gordon, regarding recent ballot
access issues in Georgia the US state, not the Russian
territority!
Extra
Features:
Other
information:
- Here's how to subscribe
to Ballot Access News!
- Here's information
on Presidential Ballot Access as well as the
vote totals of recent Presidential elections.
- Here are some other
sites which may also be of interest:
Project
Vote-Smart
-
Project Vote
Smart is a citizens' organization dedicated to serving all Americans
with accurate and unbiased information for electoral decision-making.
It was inaugerated in 1992 by former US Presidents Jimmy Carter,
Gerald Ford, and other leaders. Its webpage offers information
about all ballot-listed candidates for all federal and state office.
[Added:040729]
- The
ACE Project
- An interesting
site concerning itself with the "Administration and Cost of Elections",
including issues of fairness and regulatory approaches in various
countries. They seem to be almost blind to the ways that third parties
in the USA are harmed by campaign finance rules crafted for the
problems characteristic of the larger parties, or the ways that
third parties would be disenfranchised by various proposed rules,
but this is nevertheless a useful resource, particularly for the
international comparisons it makes.
[Added:001206]
- "Unofficial"
B.A.N. Page
-
At first,
it looks like there's not much here. But then you follow the "Charts"
link, and click on one of the listed candidates, and you'll get
some truly wonderful nationwide maps of voting patterns.
[Checked:991014]
- ThirdPartyNews.net
-
A site that
covers news about minor parties.
[Checked:060414]
- Third
Party Central
-
Collects lots
of good information and links relating to various third parties
into one convenient location. Nice set of writings on why one
should vote third-party.
[Checked:991014]
- Atlas
of U.S. Presidential Elections
-
A surprisingly
complete listing of votes cast in Presidential elections, including
numerous third-party candidates and nice maps of vote distribution
by state and (on the individual state pages) by county.
[New-URL:010309]
- D.C.'s
Political Report
-
Very good
presentation of candidate and party information, including virtually
every known third-party group in the USA. Election results, candidate
information, etc.
[Updated:991214]
- Initiative
For Texas
-
A group trying
to establish the right to Initiative and Referendum in Texas.
Their work has intriguing parallels and overlaps with ballot access
work. Every page at the site seems to have some music on it, which
can get annoying after awhile, but otherwise it's an interesting
site.
[Checked:991014]
- Center
for Voting and Democracy
-
Folks concerned
with alternative voting systems, and related issues, from a moderately
leftist perspective. Useful articles describing how better systems
of voting and electing actually work.
[Added:000823]
The newsletter
is published by and copyright by Richard
Winger. |
| |
|
|