Two Important Court Hearings on March 4

February 28th, 2010

On Thursday, March 4, two different courts will hear oral argument in two important election law cases:

1. The Indiana Supreme Court will hear League of Women Voters of Indiana v Rokita, the case that asks whether the law requiring photo voter-ID for almost all voters at the polls violates the State Constitution’s equal protection clause.

2. The 11th circuit, in Atlanta, Georgia, will hear Coffield v Handel, over whether the state’s requirement for independent and minor party candidates for U.S. House to get on the ballot violates the U.S. Constitution. The law is so strict, it has not been used since 1964, and it was actually considerably easier in 1964 than it is today. Since 1964, the petition deadline has been moved from October to July; notarization of each petition was not then required, but today it is; back in 1964 the petitions were not checked but were deemed to be valid, but today they are checked; back in 1964 no Georgia county was split by a congressional district boundary, but today many of the counties are split, making it tougher to know which voters on the street are eligible to sign.



COFOE Board Meets, Pledges Funds for Alabama Ballot Access Appeal

February 28th, 2010

On February 28, the Coalition for Free and Open Elections (COFOE) held its annual board meeting, in New York city. COFOE is a coalition of most of the nation’s nationally-organized minor parties, as well as certain other organizations that support their right to be on the ballot. COFOE was formed in 1985.

The board voted to spend $2,000 on a cert petition for the Alabama ballot access lawsuit, Shugart v Chapman. The issue is whether Alabama may require an independent candidate for U.S. House to submit more signatures that are required for an independent presidential candidate. Alabama has six U.S. House districts.

The 11th circuit had upheld the Alabama law on February 10, even though the U.S. Supreme Court has twice ruled that states cannot require more signatures for an independent candidate in just part of the state, than for a statewide office. The 11th circuit did not even mention Norman v Reed, one of those two U.S. Supreme Court precedents. Also, Norman v Reed said that when states have such laws, those laws are discriminatory, and can only be upheld if they are necessary for a compelling state interest. The 11th circuit did not apply strict scrutiny.

Two Law Professors Pinpoint Disadvantage of Non-Partisan Elections

February 28th, 2010

Law Professors Chris Elmendorf and David Schleicher have this op-ed in the San Francisco Chronicle of February 28. They present evidence that non-partisan elections are faulty, because many voters are so dependent on party labels, they simply won’t vote in elections without party labels. The op-ed focuses on elections for San Francisco city office.

The op-ed suggests that statewide political parties aren’t relevant to San Francisco politics, so they don’t recommend making San Francisco elections partisan. Instead, they suggest that the city amend its election ordinances to list on the ballot which candidates for city office, other than Mayor, are endorsed by the Mayor.

A better solution, which isn’t mentioned in the op-ed, is to make it possible for local political parties to be recognized. Many cities and counties in other parts of the United States have local political parties and partisan elections for local office. This is especially true in Connecticut, New York, and Illinois. California election law relating to political party qualification does not permit a party to be recognized in just part of the state.

Pennsylvania Greens Will Attempt Statewide Petition Drive in 2010

February 28th, 2010

The Pennsylvania Green Party held a state nominating convention February 20-21 near Pittsburgh, and nominated a candidate for U.S. Senate, one for U.S. House, and four state house candidates. The party will attempt to place all its nominees on the 2010 ballot.

The U.S. Senate candidate, Mel Packer, needs 19,056 valid signatures, due August 2. The petition may not circulate until March 10. If the Green Party statewide petition succeeds, this will be the first time the party has appeared on the statewide ballot in Pennsylvania since 2004. The U.S. House candidate, Ed Bortz, is running in the 14th district, in Pittsburgh. The state house candidates are Roy Farrington in the 76th district, Jay Sweeney in the 111st, Rex D’Agostino in the 183rd, and Hugh Giordano in the 194th.

Joe Schwarz, Former Michigan Congressman, Keeps State Guessing as on Possible Independent Gubernatorial Bid

February 27th, 2010

Joe Schwarz, a former Republican congressman from Michigan, will say on Monday, March 1, whether or not he will run for Governor as an independent. See this story. Michigan has never had an independent candidate for Governor on a government-printed ballot. Michigan didn’t permit independent candidates for any office, until courts forced the state to create such provisions in 1988.

Schwarz would need 30,000 valid signatures. If he runs, he would be at a disadvantage because independent candidates in Michigan get the lowest spot on the ballot. Also, parties have straight-ticket devices, but of course there is no such thing as a straight-ticket device for independent candidates.

Public Funding Bill in U.S. House Gains 5 Co-Sponsors in Last Week

February 27th, 2010

HR 1826, which provides for public funding for candidates for Congress, gained 5 co-sponsors in the last week, and now has 138. No other election-law bill in the House gained any co-sponsors in the last week, except for HR 3025. HR 3025, which requires states to use bipartisan redistricting commissions, gained one co-sponsor last week, and now has 27 co-sponsors.

Virginia Bill on Who can See List of who Voted Hits a Snag

February 26th, 2010

On February 25, a subcommittee of the Virginia House Privileges and Elections Committee completely altered SB 624. The bill, as passed unanimously by the Senate on February 1, expands the list of which groups can see the list of who voted in a recent past election. Currently political parties, candidates, and PACS can see the list. The bill, as originally introduced, said that non-partisan groups working to improve voter turnout may also see the list. The subcommittee altered the bill to provide that no one may see the list. This was a surprise. Campaigns find the list of who voted in the last election to be a very valuable list.

But, on February 26, the full committee voted to Table the bill. This may mean that the full Committee wants to think about the issue some more. The legislature will be in session another two weeks.

The motivation for the bill was that The Know Campaign had sued Virginia last December. The Know Campaign wants to obtain the list of who voted, so that it can send postal mail, telling voters in particular neighborhoods which of their neighbors voted in the last election. The Know Campaign has done this in other states, and research does show that when people know their neighbors may learn whether they vote or not, turnout does increase. The Virginia Attorney General asked the legislature to expand the list of groups that may see the list, in order to settle the lawsuit. In 1996, a U.S. District Court in Hawaii ruled that if a state lets candidates and parties see the list of who voted, then it cannot keep that information from newspapers.

Counterpunch Column Advising Progressive Democrats to “Go Green”

February 26th, 2010

Don Santina has this column in Counterpunch, arguing that progressive Democrats should leave the Democratic Party.

Colorado Supreme Court Upholds Injunction Against Ban on Campaign Contributions from Government Contractors

February 26th, 2010

On February 22, the Colorado Supreme Court struck down an initiative passed by the voters in 2008, Amendment 54. It made it illegal for companies or unions with a government contract of value greater than $100,000 to contribute to candidates for state or local office. Here is the decision. The case is Dallman v Ritter, 09SA224.

Alberta Will Let Prisoners Vote

February 26th, 2010

The Government of Alberta’s election law reform bill will include a provision letting prisoners cast votes. See this story.

« 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.