December 1, 2006 Ė Volume 22, Number 8


Table of Contents

  1. MINOR PARTY AND INDEPENDENT VOTE FOR TOP OFFICES IS 2nd BEST MID-TERM RESULT SINCE 1934
  2. 2006 VOTE FOR OFFICE AT TOP OF BALLOT
  3. RARE DEBATE VICTORY
  4. VOTERS APPROVE ALL BALLOT QUESTIONS ON INSTANT-RUNOFF
  5. 3rd CIRCUIT ADMITS FACTUAL ERROR
  6. NEW HAMPSHIRE LOSS
  7. NADER APPEALS PENNSYLVANIA CASE
  8. ALASKA LOSS
  9. BALLOT ORDER
  10. SIGNATURES FOR 2008
  11. NOW IS THE TIME TO FIND SPONSORS FOR 2007
  12. 2008 PETITIONING FOR PRESIDENT
  13. MINOR PARTY LEGISLATIVE VICTORIES
  14. MINOR PARTIES IN LOCAL ELECTIONS
  15. TWO INDEPENDENTS WIN FOR SENATE
  16. DOUG FRIEDLINE DIES
  17. WRITE-IN CANDIDATE ELECTED SHERIFF
  18. WORKERS WORLD PARTY WIN
  19. VOTER REGISTRATION CHART
  20. SUBSCRIBING TO BAN WITH PAYPAL


MINOR PARTY AND INDEPENDENT VOTE FOR TOP OFFICES IS 2nd BEST MID-TERM RESULT SINCE 1934

In November 2006, 5.0% of the vote for the top office on the ballot went to minor party and independent candidates. This is the second-best showing in a mid-term election for "other" since 1934. The "other" vote was 5.3% in 2002.

"Top office" is Governor, in the 36 states that elected a Governor. In the others, it is U.S. Senate. In Kentucky, Louisiana, and North Carolina, which had no partisan statewide elections, it is U.S. House. "Other" does not include votes cast for minor party nominees who were also major party nominees. "Other" also does not include "None of the Above" in Nevada, nor does it include write-ins.

Using the same rules for previous mid-term years gives these results:

1998

4.9%

1994

4.5%

1990

4.6%

1986

3.6%

1982

1.8%

1978

2.4%

1974

2.4%

1970

3.4%

1966

3.2%

1962

1.1%

1958

.9%

1954

.6%

1950

1.1%

1946

1.4%

1942

4.8%

1938

3.8%

1934

5.6%

1930

6.1%

1926

4.5%

1922

4.2%

1918

6.8%

1914

16.3%

The "other" vote in 1914 was high because there were three strong minor parties that year. The Progressive Party received 10%, the Socialist Party 4%, and the Prohibition Party 2%. They each elected at least one member to Congress that year.

Many states still havenít released official vote tallies. Using a combination of official and unofficial tallies from all states, these are the totals so far for each party for the "top" office: Democratic 40,264,560 (49.28%); Republican 37,379,872 (45.75%); independent 1,797,050 (2.20%); Green 949,185 (1.16%); Libertarian 778,395 (.95%); Constitution 193,063 (.24%); Reform 97,677 (.12%), other parties 245,289 (.30%). See the vote by state and the breakdown of the other parties below.


2006 VOTE FOR OFFICE AT TOP OF BALLOT

Dem.

Repub.

Green

Libít.

Constit.

Reform

oth(1)

oth(2)

Independent

Alab.

518,750

717,287

`

?

`

`

`

`

`

Alas.

96,824

114,204

586

680

`

`

1,265

`

22,418

Ariz.

959,830

543,528

`

30,268

`

`

`

`

`

Ark.

421,051

309,996

13,068

`

`

`

`

`

15,913

Cal.

3,223,705

4,640,102

192,997

109,293

58,692

`

65,912

`

`

Colo.

779,741

566,303

`

20,527

8,705

`

`

`

9,629

Conn.

398,220

709,849

9,583

5,560

Del

170,567

69,734

`

2,671

`

`

`

`

`

Fla.

2,178,289

2,519,845

`

15,987

`

92,595

`

`

22,407

Ga.

811,049

1,229,724

`

81,412

`

`

`

`

`

Hi.

121,709

215,280

5,433

1,849

`

`

`

`

`

Ida.

198,845

237,437

`

7,241

7,309

`

`

`

`

Ill.

1,677,497

1,332,755

349,128

?

?

`

`

`

`

Ind.

`

1,171,596

`

168,828

`

`

`

`

`

Iowa

565,657

466,757

7,722

5,621

`

`

1,957

`

`

Kan.

480,532

336,583

`

8,652

`

5,082

`

`

`

Ky.

597,572

606,307

`

39,256

774

`

`

`

`

La.

295,762

579,702

`

25,772

1,262

`

`

`

`

Me.

206,753

164,514

52,059

`

`

`

`

`

120,422

Md.

942,374

825,634

15,554

`

`

`

3,481

`

`

Mass.

1,230,065

779,807

43,032

`

`

`

`

`

154,012

Mich.

2,142,589

1,609,182

20,016

23,508

7,084

`

`

`

`

Minn.

1,007,461

1,028,568

10,850

`

`

`

141,735

`

13,425

Miss.

205,786

375,836

`

9,106

`

`

`

`

`

Mo.

1,048,301

1,002,007

18,292

48,133

`

`

`

`

`

Mont.

198,897

196,061

10,367

`

`

`

`

`

`

Nebr.

144,624

434,802

`

`

8,894

`

`

`

3,740

Nev.

255,684

279,003

6,753

`

20,019

`

`

`

`

N.H

298,677

104,223

`

116

`

`

`

`

`

N.J.

1,163,381

974,525

`

14,340

`

`

3,348

2,452

29,943

N.M.

384,516

174,253

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

N.Y.

2,856,027

1,200,226

40,346

14,799

`

`

7,062

`

13,712

No.C.

1,026,915

913,893

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

No.D.

150,146

64,417

`

2,194

`

`

`

`

1,395

Ohio

2,312,735

1,411,678

38,771

68,163

`

`

`

`

`

Okla.

616,135

310,327

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

Ore.

698,561

588,155

19,978

16,751

50,103

`

`

`

`

Pa.

2,345,082

1,652,486

?

?

?

`

`

`

`

R.I.

182,350

188,773

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

So.C.

489,084

601,871

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

So.D.

121,242

207,000

`

3,286

4,006

`

`

`

`

Tenn.

1,241,606

538,508

2,681

`

`

`

`

`

27,345

Tex.

1,309,774

1,714,618

`

26,726

`

`

`

`

1,342,759

Utah

169,421

344,541

2,374

4,210

20,655

`

8,965

`

Vt.

108,090

148,014

1,936

638

3,693

Va.

1,175,606

1,166,277

26,102

`

`

`

`

`

`

Wa.

1,170,988

826,296

20,699

29,006

`

`

`

`

16,237

W.V.

293,848

153,013

`

`

`

`

8,474

`

`

Wis.

1,136,726

976,275

40,858

`

`

`

`

`

`

Wyo.

135,516

58,100

`

`

`

`

`

`

`

Parties in the "Other (1)" column are: Alaskan Independence; Peace & Freedom (Ca.); Socialist Workers (Iowa, N.J, N.Y.); Populist (Md.); Independence (Mn.); Personal Choice (Ut.); Liberty Union (Vt.); Mountain (W.V.). The party in the "Other(2)" column is Socialist.


RARE DEBATE VICTORY

On October 30, U.S. District Court Judge James Whittemore, a Clinton appointee, issued an order requiring that WFLA-TV (sponsor of the Florida gubernatorial debate set for that night) admit Max Linn, the Reform Party nominee. Linn v Media Group Corp., 8:06-cv-2005. The court convened at 4:30 p.m., and the judge issued his ruling at 5 p.m. The debate started at 7 p.m. Chris Matthews was the debate moderator, and he seemed to take the transformation of the debate from a 2-way to a 3-way event with equanimity.

The basis for the order was that WFLA-TV had said it would admit anyone who was at 7% in polls. Linn had 8.7% in one poll, so this case was about forcing the sponsor to honor a commitment. This case is not a precedent that certain poll thresholds are too high.

This case was in federal court because WFLA-TV lawyers had transferred it there. The original case had been filed in state court. This case should not be confused with a similar Max Linn lawsuit filed to get into the debate of October 24. In that earlier case, Linn won in lower court but the next day a State Appeals Court had reversed his victory.


VOTERS APPROVE ALL BALLOT QUESTIONS ON INSTANT-RUNOFF

On November 7, voters passed Instant-Runoff in all four jurisdictions that were voting on it. Oakland, California, passed it with 69%. Minneapolis passed it by 65%.

In Davis, California, voters passed Measure L, which provides for Single Transferable Vote for multi-winner elections such as City Council at-large. This is the system used in Cambridge, Massachusetts and the system used in New York city council elections between 1937 and 1949. It is like Instant-Runoff Voting, but since it applies to multi-winner office, it is possible for a group to elect one candidate even if the group is a minority of the electorate.

In Pierce County, Washington, the voters passed IRV for partisan county elections.

In both California and Minnesota, the voters elected a new Secretary of State. In each case, the new Secretary of State had endorsed IRV, wheras the old one had not done so.

Other election reforms were defeated by the voters. Oregon voters refused to amend their Constitution to make campaign contribution limits possible. California voters defeated public funding. Massachusetts voters defeated fusion. Oregon voters defeated legislative term limits. Florida voters weakened the initiative process, by passing a measure that will require all ballot measures in the future to pass with 60% of the vote (ironically, this measure itself received less than 60% of the vote, but since it hadnít gone into effect yet, it passed). However, Rhode Island voters passed a measure to let ex-felons vote, even if they are still on probation or parole.


3rd CIRCUIT ADMITS FACTUAL ERROR

On November 3, the three judges in the 3rd circuit who had upheld Pennsylvania ballot access law retracted their August 23 opinion. They then re-issued the same opinion, with several paragraphs missing. Rogers v Corbett, 06-2241.

The case attacks a law that says even if a party polls enough votes to meet the definition of "party", that it cannot be on the ballot unless it submits 67,070 signatures. The August decision had upheld that law. It said the reward for a group meeting the 2% vote test is that it may show all its nominees on a single petition. By contrast, it said, an unqualified party needs a separate petition for each nominee.

But, the 3rd circuit was wrong. Pennsylvania also lets unqualified parties list multiple nominees on a single petition. The Constitution, Green and Libertarian Parties had pointed out the error, after the decision had been issued.

The three judges responded by correcting their error, and now the new decision is awaiting a request to all ten full-time judges of the 3rd circuit to rehear the big issues in the case.


NEW HAMPSHIRE LOSS

On November 21, the New Hampshire Supreme Court upheld New Hampshire ballot access laws that effect minor parties. Libertarian Party of New Hampshire v State, 2005-606. The Supreme Court also said it had been proper for the lower court to refuse to permit evidence to be submitted in this case.

New Hampshire requires 3,000 signatures for a statewide minor party or independent candidate to appear on the November ballot, 1,500 for U.S. House, 750 for State Senator, and 150 for State House. By contrast, Democrats and Republicans need no signatures to get on primary ballots if they pay a filing fee ranging from $100 to $2. The New Hampshire Constitution says everyone has "an equal right to be elected into office."

The Court said that the "equal right" provision is not violated, because it is as difficult for a major party member to win a primary as it is for the nominee of an unqualified party to submit a petition. This is logically faulty. It fails to consider that it is also difficult for a minor party member to win a minor party convention nomination. Pat Buchanan spent over $1,000,000 to win the Reform Partyís presidential nomination in 2000. It was a difficult struggle for him, since he faced opposition from Ross Perot, who was backing John Hagelin for that nomination.

Also, in New Hampshire this year, there was a 3-way battle for the Libertarian Partyís gubernatorial nomination, and the bitterness from that fight was partly responsible for the partyís failure to obtain the needed 3,000 signatures for its nominee, Richard Kahn.

Since members of all parties (qualified and unqualified alike) face a struggle to win their own partyís nomination, the state is not giving all nominees an "equal right to be elected", since the nominees of the Democratic and Republican Parties are automatically placed on the ballot, but the nominees of other parties are not. The New Hampshire definition of "political party" is so restrictive, it was not met by any party other than the Democratic and Republican Parties during the entire period 1916 to the present, except it was met by the Libertarian Party in 1990, 1992 and 1994.

The New Hampshire Court cited the unfavorable U.S. Supreme Court decisions, but it didnít mention the favorable ones. Most of the U.S. Supreme Courtís ballot access decisions have been victories for minor parties and independents.

Similarly, there have been reported ballot access wins during the past four months from the 2nd circuit, the 6th circuit, the 7th circuit, and a U.S. District Court in Arkansas. There has also been one reported loss, the 3rd circuit decision mentioned above. The New Hampshire Court mentioned the 3rd circuit decision, but did not mention the other four cases.

Worst of all, the New Hampshire Supreme Court mentioned Clingman v Beaver, the latest U.S. Supreme Court opinion to discuss minor parties, but did not mention the language supported by five justices that "there is increasing cause for concern that those in power may be using electoral rules to erect barriers to electoral competition. In such cases, applying heightened scrutiny helps to ensure that such limitations are truly justified." The New Hampshire Court refused to apply heightened scrutiny.

The New Hampshire decision did not mention any state interest in the petitions, except to quote one sentence from Jenness v Fortson saying the state interest is "avoiding confusion, deception, and even frustration of the democratic process."

As documented in a 2002 article by Richard Winger in the Election Law Journal, the reference to "deception" was a factual error in Jenness. Chief Justice Burger had asserted during oral argument that opponents of U.S. Senator George Norris of Nebraska had qualified an independent candidate also named George Norris. Actually, that dirty trick had been done in a Republican primary, in 1930.

As for "confusion", this is a reference to having too many names on a ballot. But New Hampshire is one of only four states in 2006 that had no minor party or independent candidates on the statewide ballot. Also, New Hampshireís Secretary of State has said that voters are not confused by the stateís lengthy presidential primary ballots.


NADER APPEALS PENNSYLVANIA CASE

On November 22, Ralph Nader asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear his appeal, against a Pennsylvania State Supreme Court order that he must pay court costs for the challenge procedure in 2004 that took him off the ballot. In Pennsylvania, when a petition is challenged, only state judges can decide whether the challenge is valid. Nader was billed $82,102 in fees for court reporters and handwriting experts. Nader v Serody, 06-696.


ALASKA LOSS

On November 17, the Alaska Supreme Court upheld the old definition of "political party". Green Party of Alaska v State, S-11964. The old definition said a party is either a group with registration equal to 3% of the last gubernatorial vote, or which polled 3% for Governor. Greens had argued that the vote for any statewide office, not just Governor, should count. The only statewide races are President, Governor, U.S. Senate, and U.S. House.

It has been common for Alaska Greens to poll over 3% for Congress. In 1996 the Green candidate for U.S. Senate, Jed Whittaker, outpolled the Democratic nominee, 29,037 votes to 23,977 votes. The party has been less successful in gubernatorial races.

In 2004, the legislature made the "party" definition even harder, and the Green Party has another case pending in lower state court against the new definition. The new definition says a party is either a group with registration equal to 3% of the last vote cast, or which polled 3% for one particular statewide race every two years. The particular race in gubernatorial years is Governor; in presidential years, it is U.S. Senate. If no U.S. Senate seat is up in a presidential year, then it is U.S. House.

The Alaska Supreme Court implicitly accepted the stateís argument that the minor party vote is less meaningful in races that are easy wins for the Republican Party over the Democratic Party. It says, "Because the gubernatorial term (unlike federal offices) is limited, there will be non-incumbents running at regular intervals. Consequently, the governorís race is the only statewide election in which a competitive race may be predicted with some confidence."

Ironically, though, the new law (still under attack in court) contradicts the stateís theory that only the gubernatorial vote is meaningful. This is because, as noted above, the new law requires a party to poll a certain vote for the so-called "less meaningful" races (but only in presidential years).

The decision also said that 20 other states use only the gubernatorial vote, or else use only the gubernatorial and presidential votes. The decision said that these states include Colorado, Georgia, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, and North Dakota. The Court was factually wrong for all seven of those states (except that one could argue that they were halfway right about Georgia, and that New Mexico is ambiguous). The Court made these factual errors because it relied in inaccurate evidence submitted by the state. Steps are being taken to correct these errors.


BALLOT ORDER

On August 17, 2006, the New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled that the state Constitution requires that all parties, and all candidates, have an equal chance to get the best spot on ballots (see the September 1 B.A.N. for more detail). This decision (Akins v Sec. of State, 904 A.2d 702) has triggered a new interest in this issue, nationwide.

On November 4, the New York Times carried an op-ed, "In the Voting Booth, Bias Starts at the Top." The author, Jon Krosnick, is a professor of communication and political science at Stanford. He argues that candidates and parties listed on the top line get a significant, if small, advantage, and that fairness demands that all candidates and all parties enjoy an equal opportunity to appear first.

Since then, several other major newspapers have written articles on this subject. For example, The Courier-Journal of Louisville, Kentucky, carried a lengthy article on November 18 titled, "Being First on Ballot Has Advantages."

In 1978, the 7th circuit ruled that the U.S. Constitution requires that all parties have an equal chance for the best spot on the ballot, but in 1979 that circuit said that principle only applies to qualified parties. In 1980 the 8th circuit also ruled that the Constitution requires that all parties have an equal chance for the top line, and made no exceptions.

This area of the law has long been dormant, but is about to revive. A lawsuit is currently pending in federal court against Marylandís law mandating alphabetical order of candidates (Schaefer v Lamone). Another lawsuit is pending in state court against Massachusettsí policy of listing incumbents first (White v Galvin).


SIGNATURES FOR 2008

Voter turnout in November 2006 was 39.7% of the eligible electorate ("eligible electorate" means registered voters plus people eligible to register). Although low, this was significantly higher than in 2002, when turnout was only 36%. Since ballot access requirements (in many states) for 2008 are calculated as a percentage of the number of votes cast in 2006, the higher turnout means more signatures will be needed in 2008.

Although it is not possible to know exactly how many signatures will be needed in 2008 for a new party or independent presidential candidate, the number will be close to 690,000. This assumes that the candidate is pragmatic, and uses the easier method (either new party or independent candidate) in each state. That compares to 634,727 in 2004. "Easier" means the method used most often, not necessarily the method with the lowest number. Thus, the "easier" method in California is the independent petition of 158,372 signatures, not the new party method of approximately 85,000 registrations.


NOW IS THE TIME TO FIND SPONSORS FOR 2007

This month is an ideal time to find a legislator to introduce bills in 2007 sessions of the legislature. Many legislatures restrict the number of bills that any legislator may introduce. If one waits, one is likely to be told, "Sorry, I already have as many bills as I am able to introduce." Even though state legislatures wonít come into session until early January, bills are often filed before the session begins. Hundreds of bills have already been filed in Texas.


2008 PETITIONING FOR PRESIDENT

STATE
REQUIREMENTS
SIGNATURES COLLECTED
DEADLINE
FULL PARTY
CAND
LIB'T
GREEN
CONSTI
WK FAM
REFORM

Alabama

est. 38,000

5,000

0

0

0

0

0

Sep. 8

Alaska

(reg) 7,080

#3,128

already on

3,620

0

0

0

Aug. 6

Ariz.

20,449

est. #21,500

already on

500

0

0

0

June 11

Arkansas

10,000

#1,000

0

0

0

0

0

Aug. 4

Calif.

est. (reg) 85,000

158,372

already on

already on

already on

0

31,897

Aug. 8

Colorado

(reg) 1,000

#1,000

already on

already on

already on

0

273

June 17

Conn.

no procedure

#7,500

canít start

canít start

canít start

canít start

canít start

Aug. 6

Delaware

est. (reg) 290

est. 5,800

already on

already on

already on

already on

182

July 15

D.C.

no procedure

est. #3,900

canít start

already on

canít start

canít start

canít start

Aug. 19

Florida

be organized

104,334

already on

already on

already on

0

already on

Sep. 2

Georgia

44,089

#42,489

already on

canít start

canít start

canít start

canít start

July 8

Hawaii

663

4,291

already on

already on

0

0

0

Sep. 5

Idaho

11,968

5,984

already on

canít start

already on

canít start

canít start

Aug. 29

Illinois

no procedure

#25,000

canít start

already on

canít start

canít start

canít start

June 26

Indiana

no procedure

est. #32,200

already on

0

0

0

0

June 23

Iowa

no procedure

#1,500

0

0

0

0

0

Aug. 15

Kansas

est. 16,900

5,000

already on

0

0

0

already on

Aug. 4

Kentucky

no procedure

#5,000

canít start

canít start

canít start

canít start

canít start

Sep. 2

La.

(reg) 1,000

pay fee

already on

already on

47

0

already on

Sep. 2

Maine

est. 27,300

#4,000

0

already on

0

0

0

Aug 15

Maryland

10,000

est. 32,500

3,000

finished

0

0

0

Aug. 4

Mass.

est. (reg) 40,500

#10,000

19,253

already on

65

already on

745

July 29

Michigan

38,024

38,024

already on

already on

already on

0

0

July 17

Minnesota

110,150

#2,000

0

0

0

0

0

Sep. 9

Mississippi

be organized

1,000

already on

already on

already on

0

already on

Sep. 5

Missouri

10,000

10,000

already on

0

0

0

0

July 29

Montana

5,000

#5,000

already on

0

already on

0

0

July 30

Nebraska

5,921

2,500

6,700

already on

already on

0

0

Aug. 26

Nevada

5,746

5,746

already on

already on

already on

0

0

July 3

New Hamp

12,106

#3,000

0

0

0

0

0

Aug. 6

New Jersey

no procedure

#800

0

0

0

0

0

July 28

New Mex.

2,794

16,764

already on

already on

unclear

0

0

June 4

New York

no procedure

#15,000

can't start

can't start

can't start

already on

can't start

Aug. 19

No. Car.

69,734

69,734

in court

0

0

0

0

June 12

No. Dakota

7,000

#4,000

finished

0

finished

0

0

Sep. 5

Ohio

law is void

5,000

0

0

0

0

0

Aug. 21

Oklahoma

46,324

43,913

in court

0

0

0

0

July 15

Oregon

20,640

18,356

already on

already on

already on

already on

0

Aug. 26

Penn.

no procedure

est. #27,000

in court

in court

in court

canít start

canít start

Aug. 1

Rhode Isl.

18,557

#1,000

canít start

canít start

canít start

canít start

canít start

Sep. 5

So. Caro.

10,000

10,000

already on

already on

already on

already on

0

July 15

So. Dakota

8,389

#3,356

0

0

0

0

0

Aug. 5

Tennessee

45,254

25

0

0

0

0

0

Aug. 21

Texas

est. 44,000

74,108

already on

canít start

canít start

canít start

canít start

May 27

Utah

2,000

#1,000

0

0

already on

0

0

Sep. 2

Vermont

be organized

#1,000

already on

already on

0

0

0

Sep. 12

Virginia

no procedure

#10,000

canít start

canít start

canít start

canít start

canít start

Aug. 22

Wash.

no procedure

#1,000

canít start

canít start

canít start

canít start

canít start

July 26

West Va.

no procedure

#15,118

0

0

0

0

0

Aug. 1

Wisconsin

10,000

#2,000

already on

already on

canít start

canít start

canít start

Sep. 2

Wyoming

3,868

3,868

already on

canít start

canít start

canít start

canít start

Aug. 25

TOTAL STATES
24
19
13
5
4
`

#Partisan label is permitted (other than "indp.").
"Deadline" is procedure with latest deadline.
"Wk Fam" = "Working Families Party".
"Consti" = Constitution Party.
"Libít" = Libertarian Party.


MINOR PARTY LEGISLATIVE VICTORIES

Seven minor party nominees were elected to state legislatures on November 7, 2006: the Vermont Progressive Party elected six, and the Constitution Party elected one in Montana. No Greens or Libertarians were elected, although in Maine, three Greens were within a few hundred votes of winning. John Eder (who had been elected as a Green in 2002 and 2004) was defeated for re-election in a two-person race with 48.5% of the vote. Also in Maine, two Greens outpolled Republican nominees, but lost to Democrats. In Vermont, one Libertarian who also had the Republican nomination polled 43.6% of the vote.


MINOR PARTIES IN LOCAL ELECTIONS

The Indiana Libertarian Party won two partisan elections for Township Supervisors (one in Henry County and one in Wayne County). The Nevada Constitution Party won a two-party race for Eureka County Clerk-Treasurer, as well as a two-party race for Constable in Searchlight.

The New Mexico Libertarian Party had hoped to re-elect its County Commissioner, Paul Trujillo, in Valencia County. However, he placed second in a three-party race, outpolling the Republican nominee but losing to the Democratic nominee. Some observers believe that Trujillo would have won, if it had not been for the straight-ticket device. In New Mexico, 50% of the voters usually use it. No party other than the Democratic or Republican Parties has ever won a partisan election in New Mexico.

In non-partisan elections, Greens elected two members to the Portland, Maine city council. A Green was elected Mayor of Richmond, California.


TWO INDEPENDENTS WIN FOR SENATE

Two independent candidates were elected to the Senate, Joseph Lieberman and Bernie Sanders. This is the first time since 1970 that two candidates who were not major party nominees were elected to the U.S. Senate. Harry F. Byrd was elected as an independent from Virginia in 1970, and James Buckley was elected as a Conservative from New York that year.

The Vermont Senate race was the first U.S. Senate election in U.S. history at which the major party combined vote was less than one-third of the total vote cast for that office.


DOUG FRIEDLINE DIES

Doug Friedline died on November 10, at the age of 49, from a heart attack. He had been perhaps the only campaign manager in the nation who made a living representing independent and minor party nominees. He had been manager for Jesse Ventura in 1998, and for Max Linn in Florida this year. He was a much-loved figure.


WRITE-IN CANDIDATE ELECTED SHERIFF

On November 7, the voters of Greene County, Alabama, elected Ison Thomas sheriff, by write-in votes. He defeated the only ballot-listed candidate by 100 votes.


WORKERS WORLD PARTY WIN

On September 26, a New York state court dismissed a libel lawsuit that had been filed against the Workers World Partyís newspaper. The paper had published a story alleging that the WCI Steel had underfunded pensions. Renco Group, Inc. v Workers World Party, 102875-06, Manhatten. Justice Edward Lehrner said the article expressed opinion, and is therefore immune from such lawsuits.


VOTER REGISTRATION CHART

The next B.A.N. will have a chart for voter registration in each party in each state, and more election returns.


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 richardwinger@yahoo.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 © 2006 Ballot Access News