New Presidential Totals Posted Sunday, Nov. 30

November 30th, 2008

The new totals for Nader, Barr, Baldwin and McKinney reflect changes (since the last totals were posted a week ago) in Alabama, California, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Utah, and Washington.

Special thanks to Michael Jose for getting the write-in votes for the declared write-in candidates in Maine. The only three declared write-ins in Maine were Bob Barr (251 write-ins), Chuck Baldwin (177 write-ins) and Jonathan Allen (3 write-ins). Maine totals these three numbers on its official election returns web page, yet refuses to break them down in those official returns. Yet Maine does know how many each of the three candidates got, and does send that information to the National Archives. Michael Jose discovered this “hidden” tabulation.

The biggest boost in votes yet to come will probably be in California,
Illinois, New York, and Pennsylvania, since those four populous states don’t have their official returns known yet. No write-ins from those four states are included so far. Some counties in California have reported write-ins, but those fragmentary returns are not included yet.

When all the states have their official totals, the results for all 23 presidential candidates who were on the ballot in at least one state will be posted.



Alabama Presidential Write-ins

November 30th, 2008

Alabama is a state that has write-in space on the November ballot for president, and which has no requirement that write-in presidential candidates who want their write-ins must file a declaration of write-in candidacy. However, traditionally, the Alabama Secretary of State has never included any write-ins in her official canvass of votes. But in 2006, for the first time, she included photocopies of all the write-ins certified to her office, for all office. Now, for the 2008 official canvass, she has again posted the copies of write-in tallies on her webpage.

Unfortunately, only 20 counties bothered to send her any data about write-ins. Alabama has 67 counties; the 20 counties that submitted write-in information comprise approximately half the population of the state.

In the 20 counties that reported write-ins, Ron Paul and Hillary Clinton were the clear winners. There seem to be 279 write-ins for Hillary Clinton for president, and 273 write-ins for Ron Paul for president.

Among presidential candidates who were actually running (yet who weren’t on the Alabama ballot), the write-ins are: Alan Keyes 14, Cynthia McKinney 6, Brian Moore 4, Ted Weill 1 (Ralph Nader, Bob Barr, and Chuck Baldwin were on the ballot).

If you live in Alabama, in one of the 47 counties that broke the law and did not tally any write-ins, you should consider making a complaint. Some years ago the Attorney General issued an opinion, saying that counties must tally all write-ins. The only 20 counties that submitted write-ins to the Secretary of State are Baldwin, Barbour, Calhoun, Cherokee, Clarke, Covington, Elmore, Etowah, Henry, Jefferson, Lawrence, Limestone, Marengo, Marion, Mobile, Montgomery, Russell, St. Clair, Walker, Washington.

The most populous counties that did NOT report their write-ins are Madison (which has Huntsville), Lee, Morgan, Shelby, and Tuscaloosa.

Christian Science Monitor Covers Controversy Over Obama Qualifications

November 29th, 2008

The November 26 Christian Science Monitor has this article about the efforts of some to question Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president. Thanks to Bill Van Allen for the link.

Lawsuit over Timing of Florida Presidential Primary May Become Class Action

November 29th, 2008

Jon Ausman, the Florida Democratic state official who sued his own state in 2007 over its January presidential primary date, has asked the Court to transform his lawsuit into a class action. The class would be composed of all Democratic and Republican registered voters in Florida. The theory is that they are being injured by Florida’s law requiring presidential primaries to be held in January. Both national committees forbid such early presidential primaries, except for a handful of states. In 2008, for a while it seemed that no Florida Democratic delegates would be seated in Denver, and that the Florida Republican delegation would lose half its strength in St. Paul. In the end the national parties relented, but Ausman argues that the problem will recur in the future. See this story. If Ausman wins this case, the outcome will represent a stunning advance in legal rights for political parties.

Virginia Will Broadcast Meeting of its Presidential Electors

November 29th, 2008

Virginia presidential electors, like all presidential electors, will meet in the State Capitol on Monday, December 15, to choose the president. This year Virginia will broadcast their meeting, and send a tape of the meeting to public schools. Also the meeting will be in a large room, so that some interested members of the public may watch from the gallery. See this story.

Ancient U.S. Supreme Court Opinion Seems to Say Congress May Give D.C. a Voting Representative

November 28th, 2008

In 1820, the U.S. Supreme Court issued Loughborough v Blake, 18 U.S. 317. It seems to suggest that the Court believed Congress is free to provide for a voting member for the District of Columbia in the U.S. House of Representatives.

The case concerned whether Congress could tax residents of the District of Columbia. But it also says this: “Although in theory it might be more congenial to the spirit of our institutions to admit a representative from the District, it may be doubted whether, in fact, its interests would be rendered thereby the more secure.” Thanks to Michael Warnken for this. Here is a link to the opinion.

Idaho Republican Party Case Set for February 17 Argument

November 28th, 2008

The oral argument in Idaho Republican Party v Ysursa will be held February 17, 2009, in U.S. District Court in Boise. The issue is whether the Constitution protects the right of the Republican Party to exclude outsiders from its primary. All the briefs should be submitted by mid-December. Thanks to Steve Rankin for this news.

Faye Coffield Files Brief in Georgia Ballot Access Case

November 27th, 2008

On November 26, independent U.S. House candidate Faye Coffield filed her brief in U.S. District Court in Georgia, asking that the Georgia ballot access law for independent candidates for U.S. House be declared unconstitutional. Coffield v Williams, 1:08-cv-2755. The state does not dispute the evidence. No independent candidate for U.S. House has overcome the 5% (of the number of registered voters) petition requirement since 1964. No independent candidate for U.S. House, anywhere in the nation, has ever overcome a petition requirement greater than 12,919 signatures. Yet Georgia law required Coffield to submit almost 15,000 valid signatures.

On the one hand, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Georgia’s 5% petition requirement in 1971, noting that the 5% petition requirement had been used successfully in both 1966 and 1968 (for the Republican candidate for Governor in 1966, and by George Wallace for president in 1968). On the other hand, in 1974 the U.S. Supreme Court said, “There is no litmus test” to determine if a ballot access law is constitutional or not, but that courts should determine how often a ballot access law is used, to know if it is constitutional. In 2008, three justices of the U.S. Supreme Court again reiterated that old test from 1974, which seems to show the Court still means what it had said in 1974.

The Coffield case is financed by donations to the Coalition for Free & Open Elections (COFOE). COFOE is also helping with challenges to other independent candidate petition requirements for U.S. House, in Illinois, Alabama, and North Carolina. COFOE greatly appreciates donations for these cases. If you wish to join COFOE ($25 minimum annual membership) your dues money is spent entirely on these and similar lawsuits. Also you receive a free subscription to the printed Ballot Access News. The December 1 issue, now in the postal mail to subscribers, has the number of registered voters in each party in each state. It has the presidential vote, by state, for the 9 presidential candidates who were on the ballot in more than three states. It has the 2010 petitioning requirements and deadlines, and shows which parties are ballot-qualified in each state. Please consider joining COFOE. Send a check made out to COFOE, to PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147.

U.S. Supreme Court Receives a 3rd Case on Obama Eligibility

November 27th, 2008

Cort Wrotnowski, one of the voters who filed a lawsuit on the matter of Barack Obama’s eligibility to be President, has filed for injunctive relief from the U.S. Supreme Court. The Wrotnowski case had been refused by the Connecticut Supreme Court. The case in the U.S. Supreme Court is Wrotnowski v Bysiewicz, 08A469. The defendant is the Secretary of State of Connecticut.

Somewhat similar cases in the U.S. Supreme Court are the Berg and Donofrio cases. Thanks to Bill Van Allen for this news. MSNBC on November 26 mentioned those two cases; see here. UPDATE: this application for a stay was denied by Justice Ruth Ginsburg on November 26. Thanks to Bill Van Allen for this news.

6th Circuit Issues Excellent Opinion on Need to Treat All Voters Equally

November 26th, 2008

On November 26, the 6th circuit issued an opinion in League of Women Voters v Brunner, no. 06-3335, which has excellent philosophy about the protection given to each voter by the U.S. Constitution. This specific case was filed in 2005, alleging that election administration in Ohio is so flawed, all voters are at risk of being deprived of the right to vote. Problems with inaccurate voter registration rolls, misinformation about where the voter should vote, problems with absentee voting, problems with the vote-counting equipment, all added up to a consistent pattern of failure, according to the plaintiffs. The state had moved to get the case dismissed without a trial. The U.S. District Court had said a trial is warrented. Now the 6th circuit has agreed with the U.S. District Court, and the case will proceed to trial.

The 6th circuit said, “The right to vote is a fundamental right, preservative of all rights. The right to vote includes the right to have one’s vote counted on equal terms with others…The idea that every voter is equal to every other voter in his State, when he casts his ballot in favor of one of several competing candidates, underlies many of our decisions…Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person’s vote over that of another…” These are all quotes from past U.S. Supreme Court decisions, including the December 12, 2000 opinion Bush v Gore. The 6th circuit here says that Bush v Gore can be applied generally.

This year, Washington, Alaska, Oregon, Maine, and the District of Columbia, are all refusing to count valid write-in votes cast for presidential candidates who filed declarations of candidacy. Lawsuits ought to be filed against these jurisdictions. If such lawsuits are filed, decisions like this one will be helpful. Read the opinion here; it is only 14 pages long and the important parts start on page eleven.

« Previous 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.