Which Minor Party Did Best in US House Races?

November 19th, 2006

Perhaps the fairest way to measure a minor party’s showing in U.S. House races, across the nation, is to calculate the median percentage for that party’s nominees.

In the 2006 election, the median percentage for Libertarian candidates for U.S. House was 2.04%, when all the races with only a single major party nominee have been eliminated. That contrasts with the same figure for the Libertarian Party in 2004 of 1.66%.

Also in the 2006 election, the median percentage for Green candidates for U.S. House was 1.41%, when all the races with only a single major party nominee have been eliminated. That contrasts with the Green 2004 figure of 2.41%.

Also in 2006, the median percentage for Constitution candidates for U.S. House was 1.43%, when all the races with only a single major party nominee are set aside. That contrasts with the Constitution 2004 figure of .90%.

And, in 2006, the median for Reform Party nominees was 2.25%.

“Median” means, when any particular party’s candidates are listed in order of what percentage of the vote they got, the median is the percentage in the middle of the list (or, if there is an even number of candidates listed, the median is the halfway point between the two candidates closed to the midpoint).

The number of races in 2006 that each party ran for US House (excluding the races with only one major party nominee) were: Libertarian 102, Green 40, Constitution 26, Reform 5.



Alaska Green Party Loses Lawsuit over Definition of “Party”

November 18th, 2006

On November 17, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the state’s old definition of “party” is constitutional. The case is Green Party of Alaska v State, no. S-11964.

The old definition of “party” existed between 1984 and 2004. It was either a group that had registration equal to 3% of the last gubernatorial vote, or which had polled 3% for Governor.

In 2004 the legislature made the definition more difficult, and a case is currently pending in lower state court against the new, more difficult, definition. The new ruling from the Alaska Supreme Court will make it more difficult to win the pending case against the new law.

The Alaska Supreme Court decision has factual errors. Footnotes 40 and 41 say that Colorado, Georgia, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico and North Dakota all require a party to poll a certain vote for either Governor, or for Governor and President, to remain on the ballot. The Alaska Supreme Court got the law of those seven states wrong. Either the Court citated to an outdated law which has since been changed (North Dakota), or it didn’t understand the difference between ballot-qualification and the separate issue of whether a party gets a primary (Kansas, Colorado, Georgia), or it just misread the laws (Nebraska, New Mexico, Montana). It is hoped that the attorney for the Green Party will write a letter to the Court and ask it to correct these errors.

Pennsylvania Will Hold a Statewide Judicial Election in November 2007

November 18th, 2006

On November 17, Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice Sandra Newman announced that she is quitting the court, to enter into private practice. This means that Pennsylvania voters will elect a replacement, in an actual partisan competitive election, in November 2007. This, in turn, means that even if no helpful changes are made to Pennsylvania ballot access law during 2007, the 2008 requirement will probably be no more than 28,000 signatures or so.

If no justice were quitting either the Supreme Court or the Commonwealth Court (and if the law doesn’t improve)approximately 50,000 signatures would be needed in 2008.

Justice Newman wrote the opinion In re Nader, which said that Nader must pay approximately $80,000 in court costs for the proceedings in 2004 that ruled him off the ballot. Nader is about to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse that decision.

Other Nationally-Organized Minor Parties in 2006 U.S. House Races

November 17th, 2006

The Reform Party only had six candidates for U.S. House, but they polled 51,877 votes. The total was boosted by the showing of the party’s nominee in Colorado’s 4th district, Eric Eidsness. He polled 11.33%, the best showing for any U.S. House nominee of a nationally-organized party, in a race with both a Democrat and a Republican. Eidsness was helped by the fact that so many Republicans dislike incumbent Marilyn Musgrave. However, she was re-elected, although she polled less than 50% of the vote.

The Socialist Workers Party only had three candidates for the U.S. House on ballots, but they polled 16,809. This is the highest SWP total for U.S. House since 1998. The Socialist Workers Party is the only nationally-organized minor party that polled more votes for U.S. House in 2006 than it had in 2004. Even the Democratic Party polled fewer votes in 2006 than in 2004 (despite its greater number of victories), because turnout in 2006 was only about two-thirds of 2004 turnout.

The only other nationally-organized minor party with U.S. House candidates this year, not mentioned so far during posts of the last two days, is the Socialist Equality Party. It had one candidate, who polled 1,863 votes.

A Closer Look at US House Results for Minor Parties

November 17th, 2006

If one desires to know if a party improved its performance compared to an election two years previous, U.S. House results are the best office to examine. This is because they are up every two years, nationwide.

Libertarians contested 73 particular U.S. House seats in both 2004 and 2006, and the competitive conditions for each of those 73 seats was the same. That is, in all 73 instances, there were the same number of major party candidates in the race both times (i.e., either both times there was both a Democrat and a Republican in the race, or else both times only one major party ran anyone).

In these 73 elections in which the conditions were roughly the same in both 2004 and 2006, Libertarian percentages increased in 42 districts and decreased in 31 districts.

The Constitution Party contested 12 such U.S. House elections in both 2004 and 2006. Constitution percentages were up in 8 of those districts, and down in 4 districts.

The Green Party contested 11 such districts in both 2004 and 2006. Green percentages were up in 4, and down in 7.

Virginia Republican Party Closed Primary Case Re-Argued in US District Court

November 17th, 2006

On November 16, the U.S. District Court in Richmond, Virginia, again heard Miller v Brown, 3:05cv-266. The issue is whether the First Amendment protects the Republican Party’s right to insist on a closed primary for itself. The case was originally rejected by U.S. District Court Judge Henry Hudson (a Bush Jr. appointee) on procedural issues, but the 4th circuit had said the case is procedurally sound, and should be heard on its merits. The state defended Virginia’s existing system by saying that if the Republican Party doesn’t like having an open primary, it is always free to hold a nominating convention instead. The state also complained that if the party wins the case, the state will be forced to institute registration by party. It was difficult to predict which way Judge Hudson will rule.

Green Party Gubernatorial Total

November 16th, 2006

With approximately 98% of the votes counted, the Green Party gubernatorial candidates polled 854,474 votes across the nation. This is the highest vote total for the gubernatorial candidates of any party (other than the Democratic and Republican Parties) since the Reform Party’s 1998 showing of 1,355,731.

The Libertarian gubernatorial total this year so far is 421,910.

For First Time Since 1998, Libertarians Fall Short of 1,000,000 Votes for US House

November 16th, 2006

Teddy Roosevelt’s Progressive Party polled 2,205,542 votes for its candidates for US House in 1912, and 1,117,939 votes for that office in 1914.

But after that, no party other than the Democratic and Republican Parties had ever polled as much as 1,000,000 votes for its candidates for US House, until the Libertarians did it in 2000, 2002, and 2004. The totals were: 2000 1,727,181; 2002 1,204,248; 2004 1,026,668.

But in 2006, the Libertarians have fallen short of that benchmark. With approximately 98% of the national vote now counted, the Libertarian total (not including the special election in the Texas 22nd district) stands at 608,308. The lower total is a consequence of fewer Libertarian candidates this year (for that office) than in any year since 1994.

The US Senate Libertarian total this year so far is 602,436.

This year, the 2nd highest total for US House was achieved by the Green Party, whose total now stands at 273,071. The Green US Senate total so far is 358,067.

Independent Out-Polls Republican in One US House Race

November 16th, 2006

At the November 7 election, there was one U.S. House race in which an independent candidate outpolled a major party nominee. Tennessee’s 9th district voted: Democrat Steve Cohen 59.9%; independent Jake Ford 22.2%; Republican Mark White 18.0%. Jake Ford was the younger brother of the Democratic U.S. Senate candidate this year, Harold Ford Jr. Jake Ford ran as an independent because he felt he had a better chance. The district is majority African-American, and Cohen is white.

National Popular Presidential Vote Plan Will Benefit from Democratic Gains in State Legislatures

November 15th, 2006

As a result of the November 7 election, Democrats control both houses of the legislature in 23 states, whereas Republicans control both houses in 15 states (the remainder are split between the two major parties, or are non-partisan).

The National Popular Vote Plan, the proposal for a compact of states to appoint only presidential electors who are pledged to the national popular vote winner, will probably get a boost from Democratic gains in state legislatures. Although proponents of the National Popular Vote Plan have worked very hard to present a non-partisan appeal, during 2006 it became very clear that Democratic state legislators virtually unanimously support the idea, whereas few Republican state legislators support it.

« Previous Page — « Previous Entries
Next Entries » — Next Page »

 

  

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.

Subscribe to Ballot Access News via PayPal.
If you use your credit card to pay via PayPal, use this button.

 

Search Ballot Access News

Loading

 
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:

2012:

2011:

2010:

2009:

2008:

2007:

2006:

2005:

2004:

2003:

2002:

2001:

2000:

1999:

1998:

1997:

1996:

1995:

1994:

1993:

1992:

1991:

1990:

1989:

1988:

1987:
   

Essays by Richard Winger:

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.