Minor Party and Independent Candidates Are Involved in Constitutional Election Law Cases in At Least 21 States

November 28th, 2009

Minor party and independent candidates are in at least 26 courts, in cases that challenge the constitutionality of various state election laws. A few new cases will probably be filed in December.

The issues in each state are:

1. Alabama: whether the state may require more signatures for an independent candidate for U.S. House than are required for an independent presidential candidate.
2. Arizona: whether the state may ban out-of-state circulators for petitions to put political parties on the ballot.
3. Arkansas: whether the state may remove a party from its position on the ballot because it failed to perform well for President, even though it performed very well for other office and elected a state legislator.
4. Colorado: whether a state may tell someone that she can’t be an independent candidate on the grounds that she was a member of a qualified party in the year before filing.
5. Connecticut: whether a state may give public funding to Democratic and Republican candidates with no petition needed, but require an independent candidate to collect signatures of 20% of the last vote cast to get equal public funding.
6. District of Columbia: whether the District must count the write-in candidates for president of declared write-in presidential candidates.
7. Georgia: whether the state may have procedures for independent candidates for U.S. House that are so difficult, they have not been used since 1964.
8. Hawaii: whether the state may require six times more signatures for an independent presidential candidate than for an entire new party with its own primary.
9. Idaho: whether the state may ban out-of-state circulators.
10. Louisiana: whether the state should have accepted presidential elector paperwork from a ballot-qualified party in 2008 by September 12.
11. Massachusetts: whether the state must let unqualified parties use a stand-in presidential candidate on its petition.
12. Montana: whether the state may require a candidate for office other than president to submit his or her petition by mid-March of an election year.
13. New Hampshire: whether the state must let unqualified parties use a stand-in presidential candidate on its petition.
14. New Jersey: whether the state can confine all non-Republican, non-Democratic candidates into a space on the ballot that is labeled “nomination by petition”.
15. New Mexico: whether the state may require a qualified party to submit separate petitions for all the candidates it has nominated via the convention process.
16. North Carolina: whether the state may require an independent candidate for U.S. House to submit 20,000 valid signatures, give the historical background that no independent has ever qualified for the government-printed ballot in that state. Another case on whether the state may require new or previously unqualified parties to submit approximately 85,000 valid signatures.
17. Pennsylvania: whether the state may force all parties to continually submit petitions for its nominees unless that party has registration membership of approximately 1,000,000 members; also whether the state can continue to enforce its petition deadline when the legislature has never enacted that deadline and the previous deadline was declared unconstitutional in 1984; also whether the state may threaten candidates with being charged for the expenses of disqualifying their petitions; also whether the state may continue to discard write-in votes without counting them.
18. Rhode Island: whether a city can limit voters to signing for only one candidate for the same office.
19. South Carolina: whether the state can disqualify a party’s nominee if that nominee, after obtaining one party’s nomination, tries to get another party’s nomination.
20. Tennessee: whether the state can require new or previously unqualified parties to submit a petition signed by 2.5% of the last vote for Governor, on a petition that says all the signers are members of that party.
21. Washington: whether the state can limit the general election ballot to the top-two vote-getters in the primary.

In addition to these lawsuits, a challenge is pending against a federal ruling that says individuals may not give more than $5,000 to a new political party that is not yet a “National Committee”. Also, cases involving petitioning for initiatives and referendums are pending in Maryland and Washington, and against the U.S. Postal Service regulation that bars petitioning on its sidewalks.



Rare Publicity for a State’s Loyalty Oath for Candidates

November 27th, 2009

National Public Radio has this short article about the Illinois election law that asks candidates for office to sign a loyalty oath. All such oaths were held unconstitutional by a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court in 1974, but they remain on the books in six states, including populous states like California, Pennsylvania, and Illinois. The California legislature repealed one of that state’s laws last year, but Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed it. It didn’t relate directly to elections, but rather to employment in public school systems.

Some New York Counties Have Problems Using Optical-Scan Ballots for First Time

November 27th, 2009

This article in the Gouverneur Times details the problems St. Lawrence County, New York, appears to be having, counting the votes in the special U.S. House election of November 3, 2009. There are still no official tallies for that election.

North Carolinan Hopes to Be First Independent Candidate on Ballot for U.S. House

November 27th, 2009

North Carolina has had government-printed ballots ever since 1901, and no independent candidate for either House of Congress has ever appeared on such a ballot. Independent candidates for U.S. House need signatures of 4% of the number of registered voters, which is as much as 20,000 in some districts. Here is a story about Brad Smith, who is attempting to obtain the needed 17,000 valid signatures to run in the 5th district in 2010. Here is his web page.

A lawsuit is currently pending against the independent requirement for U.S. House, called Greene v Bartlett, 5:08-cv-0088, U.S. District Court, western district. It was filed in 2008 and hasn’t had oral arguments yet. It is moving slowly because the attorney for the plaintiff, Law Professor Bob Bastress, is on a special assignment to redraft West Virginia sentencing laws, which is occupying all of his time. But he will be back working on the case next month.

Court Hearings Set for First Week in December

November 27th, 2009

Two lawsuits involving minor parties have oral arguments during the first week in December. One is Libertarian Party v Dardenne, 09-30307, being heard in the 5th circuit on December 3. This is the case on whether the Louisiana Secretary of State was correct last year when he refused to permit the ballot-qualified Libertarian Party to file its presidential elector paperwork on September 12. The panel will be Judges James Dennis, Catharine Haynes, and Carl Stewart. Judge Dennis was one of the judges who upheld the Texas ballot access law for independent presidential candidates in 2004. The other two judges have never had a ballot access case.

On December 4, a U.S. District Court in Long Island, New York, will hear oral arguments in MacKay v Crews, 2:09-cv-2218. This is another lawsuit to identify the actual national party officers of the Reform Party. The judge has promised a speedy decision. The first-named Defendant, Kay Crews, is not a member of the Reform Party. She was the court-appointed parliamentarian appointed by a Texas court to supervise the party’s national convention in Texas last year.

Also during the first week in December, Washington state will be filing its brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in John Doe v Sam Reed, the case over whether names and addresses of people who sign petitions should be made public. It will be interesting to see how the Washington Secretary of State defends his position. In the 9th circuit he argued that the petitions aren’t truly private in any event, because as petition sheets circulate, someone who is signing near the bottom of the sheet can see the names and addresses of people who signed the same sheet earlier. This is not a very convincing argument. Some of the referendum petition sheets at issue in this particular case were only circulated in churches, not in open public spaces, so only fellow church members would have seen the same sheets. Also, census data and income tax forms are considered private, but it is inevitable that some government employees see the information.

Hawaii Green Party Launches Petition to Get Back on Ballot

November 26th, 2009

The Hawaii Green Party recently obtained this newspaper publicity for its petition drive to re-qualify the party for the ballot for 2010.

The Green Party has placed candidates on the Hawaii ballot in every state/federal election, starting in 1992. The only other states about which that can be said are California, Maine, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin.

Two Libertarians Elected in Partisan Races in Pennsylvania Outpolled All Their Major Party Opponents

November 25th, 2009

Although it had already been reported that the Libertarian Party won ten partisan elections in Pennsylvania on November 3, 2009, it had not been previously reported that two of the wins were in a contest in which the Libertarians had ballot-listed major party opponents.

Many minor party victories in partisan races in Pennsylvania occur because the minor party nominees are the only candidates on the ballot. Many small townships in Pennsylvania have trouble finding individuals willing to serve.

However, in the recent election for Borough Council in Houston, Pennsylvania, the two Libertarians who were elected had Democratic Party opponents on the November 3, 2009 ballot. Houston is in Washington County, in the southwest part of the state. It has a population of 1,314. The voters were choosing three council members. The results were: Libertarian Paula Meddings 119 votes, Libertarian Chad Roberts 118 votes, Democrat James Stubenbordt 97 votes, Democrat David Schmalz 91 votes, Libertarian Seth Fosmire 57 votes. So, two Libertarians and one Democrat were elected.

Rasmussen Reports Conducts 2012 Poll Including Lou Dobbs as an Independent

November 25th, 2009

Rasmussen Reports released this poll on November 25, asking about a 2012 presidential line-up that includes Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, and Lou Dobbs as an independent. It shows 42% for Obama, 34% for Romney, 14% for Dobbs, and 11% don’t know or other.

Constitution Party Petition in Wyoming Is One-Third Complete

November 25th, 2009

Wyoming has very difficult ballot access for both new parties and independent candidates. The only party, other than the Democratic and Republican Parties, that has appeared on the Wyoming ballot since 2001 has been the Libertarian Party. The Constitution Party is working on an all-volunteer petition drive to obtain the 4,988 valid signatures needed for party status in 2010, and now has 2,400 signatures.

Although 4,988 signatures may not sound difficult, Wyoming is the nation’s least populous state. The law requires 2% of the last U.S. House vote. If the Constitution Party succeeds in 2010, this will be the first new party petition to succeed in Wyoming for a mid-term year election since the Libertarians last did it in 1994 (Libertarians have not needed to petition since 1994, because the party always meets the vote test to remain on the ballot). Neither the Green Party nor the Constitution Party has ever been on the Wyoming ballot. Wyoming was one of seven states in which Ralph Nader failed to get on the ballot in 2000.

U.S. News & World Report Suggests Strong Independent Candidates Seem Likely

November 25th, 2009

The U.S. News & World Report has this November 25 article, which suggests that candidates running for office outside the two major parties could be strong, in both 2010 and 2012.

« 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.