On July 3, the 9th circuit issued an order in the lawsuit involving Washington state’s “top-two” primary system, called Washington State Republican Party v Logan, no. 05-35774 and 05-35780.
The Republican, Democratic and Libertarians Parties are invited to submit briefs on the ballot access issue, and the trademark issue, in the case. Each brief is due August 2, and cannot exceed 15 pages.
When the three political parties first filed their lawsuit against “top-two” back in 2005, the U.S. District Court, and the 9th circuit, both agreed that the law violated the associational rights of political parties. But earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court disagreed with that conclusion. The lower courts had not considered the other arguments against “top-two”, but now the 9th circuit seems ready to hear those other arguments for the first time. The Libertarian Party of Washington state is in the best position to raise these other two issues. The Libertarian Party is the only party in the case that has trademarked its name. The party thus has a plausible argument that the Washington system, which lets anyone appear on the ballot with the label “prefers Libertarian Party” (regardless of that individual’s relationship with the Libertarian Party), violates the party’s trademark of its name.
The ballot access issue is also one that the Libertarian Party can best raise. Data from primaries in Washington state during the blanket primary years (1936-2000), and Louisiana experience 1975-present, and California experience with the blanket primary (1998-2000), shows that virtually no minor party or independent candidate ever places first or second, unless there is only one major party member running. Even minor party candidates who won, such as Jesse Ventura (who only polled 3% in Minnesota’s open primary in September 1998) and Audie Bock (who only polled 8% in California’s blanket primary for a legislative seat in 1999), do badly in first rounds.
One more useless case by the party hacks.
The voters elect persons to public offices — NOT party hack parties.
What if the ballot said a candidate could list his/her preference for a car company — GM, Ford, etc. ???
Some magic trademark issue ???
NO need for any MORON primary.
P.R. and A.V. NOW to save Democracy from the EVIL party hacks — as EVIL as any past king, queen, duke, count, lord, etc.
Are the Democratic and Libertarian parties also plaintiffs in this suit?
Does the suit seek an injunction vis-a-vis the August 19 first round of the “top two”? Since the briefs are due August 2, that seems unlikely, as it would cause lots of confusion.
The US Supreme Court refused to hear the state’s appeal in regard to Washington’s blanket primary in February 2004, so it was last used in 2002 or 2003.
I’m still amazed that the Supreme Court apparently did not study Louisiana’s “top two” experience prior to issuing its ruling on Washington’s “top two.”
Apparently the 9th circuit thinks the trial court injunction is still in place, because it’s request for “additional briefing” relates to “the appeal” from the trial court ruling, which was a permanent injunction against the “top two” system.
WA top 2 primary court stuff —
http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/toptwo.aspx
So this is the same suit that the three political parties filed against the Washington “top two” in 2005.
Here’s a post on the “top two,” followed by some interesting comments.
Time to end the party hack junk. Abolish party hack caucuses, primaries and conventions — just like slavery was abolished by the 13th Amdt.
Make a copy. NO need to repeat the below too often.
Send any party hack MORON comments to Mars and beyond.
——–
Basic Democracy Election Reforms 1 July 2007
Sec. A. All candidates for the same office in the same area shall have the same nominating petition requirements to get on the [general] election ballots.
Sec. B. (1) The Electors shall elect the members of each legislative body (odd number at least 5) in each year for 1 year terms.
(2) Each legislative body district shall have between 5 and 10 times the total number of electors at the last [general] election in all districts divided by the total members in the body.
(3) As nearly as possible, each district shall consist of 1 or more local governments or part of 1 local government and be contiguous and square.
Sec. C. (1) Each legislative body candidate shall get a list of all candidates for the body in all districts at least [4] weeks before the [general] election.
(2) Each candidate shall rank the other candidates in all districts (using 1 (highest), 2, etc.) and file such list not later than [4] P.M. [3] weeks before the [general] election.
(3) The lists shall be made public immediately at such deadline.
(4) If a valid list is not filed, then the candidate’s name shall be removed from the ballots.
[Equal Votes per winner P.R.]
Sec. D. (1) Each Elector may vote for 1 candidate for each legislative body.
(2) The Average shall be the Total Votes for all candidates in all districts divided by the Total Members to be elected in all districts, dropping fractions. Ave = TV/TM.
(3) A candidate who gets the Average shall be elected.
(4) The most excess votes above the Average shall be repeatedly moved to 1 or more unelected candidates, using the elected candidate’s rank order list.
(5) Only the votes needed to get the Average shall be moved to any 1 unelected candidate.
(6) If all members are not elected, then the candidate with the least votes in all districts shall lose.
(7) The loser’s votes shall be moved to 1 or more unelected candidates, using the original losing candidate’s rank order list and subject to (5).
(8) Steps (6) and (7) shall repeat, if necessary.
(9) Example- 100 Votes, Elect 5, Average 20
A 26 – 6 = 20 Elected
B 20 Elected
C 18 + 2 = 20 Elected
D 16
E 9
F 7 + 4 = 11
G 4
Excess A votes moved.
—–
A 20 Elected
B 20 Elected
C 20 Elected
D 16
F 11 + 4 = 15
E 9
G 4 – 4 = 0 Loses
—–
A 20 Elected
B 20 Elected
C 20 Elected
D 16 + 4 = 20 Elected
F 15 + 5 = 20 Elected
E 9 – 9 = 0 Loses
Sec. E. (1) A legislative body candidate or member may file a written rank order list of persons to fill his/her vacancy, if any.
(2) The qualified person who is highest on the list shall fill the vacancy.
(3) If the preceding does not happen, then the legislative body shall fill the vacancy with a person of the same party (if any) immediately at its next meeting.
Sec. F. (1) All elected executive officers and all judges shall be nominated for and elected at nonpartisan [general] elections.
(2) Each elector may vote for 1 or more candidates for each elected executive office or judge (including 1 write-in for each position).
[This is the Approval Voting method]
(3) The candidate(s) getting the most votes shall be elected (for the longest terms respectively in the case of 2 or more positions with different terms).
Demo Rep (for the zillionth time) says: “Abolish party hack caucuses, primaries and conventions…”
Then you’ll have to abolish the First Amendment, since political parties have the right to associate for the purpose of nominating candidates. The big majority of the states recognize those nominations, but the “top two” system does not recognize them.
You have every right to be an independent, Demo Rep, but you have NO RIGHT to try to force everyone else to operate as an independent.
Some people actually enjoy being party hacks.
Independents and 3rd party candidates did not appear on the blanket primary ballot in Washington between 1936-1976. They only did so after the OWL party received more than a few percentage points in a general election – which suggests that 3rd parties and independents did not do so well in general elections either.
Louisiana elected two independents to its legislature in 2007.
Jesse Ventura would have received more votes in a Top 2 primary. Why would someone vote in an uncontested Reform primary when you had a Democratic Primary with Humphrey, Freeman, Mondale, and Dayton on the ballot? The GOP nomination was only marginally contested, and only had 22% of the vote, compared to 76% in the Democratic primary.
The same thing happened in Audie Bock’s race. The fact that she received 8% of the vote is remarkable given that the Green Party nomination was uncontested.
I don’t see how the Libertarian trademark claim gets you anything. The State could simply forbid use of trademarked names, or requires the owner’s permission to indicate a preference.
And even if the party’s win, Washington can simply remove party labels from the ballot, or devise something that is the equivalent of Oregon’s version.
It’s highly questionable whether Jesse Ventura would have even reached the runoff in a “top two” system– just as now-U. S. Sen. Mary Landrieu did not reach the “top two” runoff in Louisiana’s 1995 governor’s race, and the incumbent governor did not make the runoff in 1991.
In a partisan system– unlike the “top two”– small party nominees and all independents are guaranteed a place on the final election ballot, which gives the voters more choices.
When a small party’s message is kept out of the final, deciding election, the party loses its main reason for existing.
#7 Abolish all party hack caucuses, primaries and conventions — paid for by the taxpayers.
The party hacks can spend their own money for such stunt events.
Ballot access in PUBLIC elections ONLY by EQUAL nominating petitions.
Let the party hacks try to rig the nominating petitions.
P.R. and A.V. now.
—-
Waiting for the top 2 primary in WA State — the start of the END of the party hack regimes in the U.S.A. — the EVIL party hack regimes who caused the genocide of the old Indian tribes until about 1890, maintained slavery until 1865, have undeclared wars, economic depressions and inflations, etc.
There is ONLY MORE government or LESS government — nothing new in 7,000 plus years of mainly party hack regimes.
About 15 percent of the voters are in the New Age mindless middle — who do NOT have a clue about political and economic history — whose votes elect the various powermad gerrymander statist monarchs with their EVIL leftwing / rightwing *mandates*.
Demo Rep –
Have you ever tried to herd cats?
Has anyone actually done this and can provide some input?