New York Times Recommends Filing Fee In Place of Petitions for Candidate Ballot Access
August 8th, 2009The New York Times print edition of August 8 has an editorial “To Reform Albany State Here”. See it here. The editorial asks for ballot access reform, campaign finance reform, and redistricting reform. The first point in the editorial, on ballot access, suggests a filing fee instead of a petition, for candidates to get on the ballot.
The New York Times has been criticizing New York state ballot access laws for decades, but it is believed that this is the first time the Times has called for a filing fee alternative to a petition.
August 8th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
It is about ‘Times’ ………
—— Donald Raymond Lake
August 8th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
Wow! That would change the whole universe of third party politics in New York!
Wow!
If the filing fee was fair…that would make life so easy..
Hmmmm…I guess there is a value to collecting support from petitions. Maybe something like 20 voters should have to vouch for someone, and then the filing fee?
Just thinking…
August 9th, 2009 at 1:23 am
A (fair) filing fee is a great idea. I would also like to see a party’s permanent ballot status based on 50,000 votes or a lower number for any statewide office instead of just governor.
In other words if a candidate gets 50,000 votes for comptroller then his/her party would be on the ballot for the next four years.
August 9th, 2009 at 5:53 am
why not simply 50,000 (or whatever) enrollee such as many other states — something you would work on throughout the yeat and not just July-August independent nominating candidate petition period.
August 9th, 2009 at 9:25 am
Well, allowing a political group or party to have ballot access based on some “reasonable” registration number is probably a good idea — if the state does not have an open primary.
Paying a fee in lieu of petition signatures…might be fairer although how much money and would their be limits on when someone could have a fundraiser? Would some of it be refunded as is the case in the UK?