Los Angeles Times Poll Shows Proposition 14 Supported by 52% of Voters

May 30th, 2010

A poll conducted for the Los Angeles Times and for the University of Southern California shows that California’s Proposition 14 has the support of 52% of the voters. 28% oppose it. The other 20% is undecided. See this story. The poll was conducted May 19-26.

The previous poll, by the PPIC, showed support at 60% and opposition at 27%.



Party of National Social Unity Outpolls Green Party in Colombia’s Presidential Election

May 30th, 2010

With 86% of the vote counted, the presidential candidate of Colombia’s Party of National Social Unity is far outpacing the presidential candidate of the Green Party. Juan Manuel Santos has 46.5%, and the Green Party’s nominee, Antanas Mockus, has 21.7%.

The Party of National Social Unity was formed in 2006. If no one gets 50%, there will be a run-off on June 20.

Washington State Trial Over Constitutionality of Top-Two Moved from October to November

May 30th, 2010

On May 25, a U.S. District Court in Washington state moved the date for the opening of the trial in Washington State Republican Party v Washington State Grange from October 4 to November 15. This case concerns the constitutionality of Washington state’s top-two election system.

Iceland Party Founded by Comedian Wins Largest Share of Seats on Reykjavik City Council

May 30th, 2010

Reykjavik, capital city of Iceland, held city council elections on May 29-30. Fifteen seats were up. Six of those seats have been filled by members of the Best Party, a new party founded by a comedian to make a satiric point. See this story. Thanks to Eric Garris for the link.

Mark Hinkle is New National Chair of Libertarian Party

May 30th, 2010

On May 30, the Libertarian Party national convention elected Mark Hinkle as the new national chair. He replaces Bill Redpath, who has been chair for the past two terms.

Mark Rutherford is the new vice-chair; Alicia Mattson is the new secretary; James Oaksun is the new treasurer.

Vallejo Times-Herald Asks for a “No” Vote on Proposition 14

May 30th, 2010

The Vallejo Times-Herald of May 30 has this editorial, recommending a “No” vote on California’s Proposition 14, the top-two ballot measure on the June 8 ballot.

Several Existing California Ballot Access Laws are Vulnerable to Legal Challenge

May 30th, 2010

Some well-meaning electoral reformers support California’s Proposition 14, the top-two measure on the June 8, 2010, ballot, because they are very dissatisfied with the status quo, and they feel that anything that changes the election system must be beneficial.

However, if Proposition 14 is defeated, there is substantial reason to believe that some of California’s ballot access laws can and will be altered in court.

1. The California deadline for qualifying a new party, which is in the first week of January. No reported court decision since 1972 has upheld any deadline for a new party to qualify for the ballot if that deadline was earlier than May. States in which early deadlines for qualifying a new party, or a new party’s nominees, have been invalidated since 1972 are Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and South Dakota.

2. The California restriction that does not permit anyone to be nominated by write-ins at a party primary, unless that write-in candidate receives a number of votes equal to 1% of the last general election. The write-in route to a party nomination is potentially very powerful, because anyone can be a write-in candidate in a party primary in California, regardless of that person’s current or prior registration status. Fusion is technically legal in California via write-ins at party primaries. But small qualified parties, and even the two major parties, find it virtually impossible to nominate anyone by write-ins because of the 1% rule. But the 1% rule violates the California Constitution, which says, “A political party that participated in a primary election for a partisan office hs the right to participate in the general election for that office and shall not be denied the ability to place on the general election ballot the candidate who received, at the primary election, the highest vote among that party’s candidates.” That was added to the California Constitution in 2004, and ought to be a means to overturn the 1% test.

3. The California restriction that says no one can be on the primary ballot of a party if that person was a member of another qualified party in the entire year before filing. That law is vulnerable because the U.S. Supreme Court in 2008 in New York State Board of Elections v Lopez-Torres said, “A political party has a First Amendment right to choose a candidate-selection process that will in its view produce the nominee who best represents its political platform.” Also, the Court in 1986 in Tashjian v Republican Party of Connecticut said, “Were the state to restrict by statute that only party members might be selected as the Party’s chosen nominees for public office, such a prohibition would clearly infringe upon the right of the Party’s members under the First Amendment.”

Unfortunately, if Proposition 14 passes and is implemented, none of these three hopeful court challenges to existing ballot access laws can be filed.

Two New York Parties with “Libertarian” in Names Likely to Appear on Ballot This Year

May 30th, 2010

Kristin Davis plans to appear on the ballot in November 2010 as the gubernatorial nominee of the Free Libertarian Party. Warren Redlich plans to appear on that same ballot as the gubernatorial nominee of the Libertarian Party.

New York law permits two different parties to each use the same word in their names. For example, during the 1960′s and 1970′s, both the Socialist Labor Party, and the Socialist Workers Party, regularly appeared on the New York statewide ballot.

Davis has received extra publicity recently because she appears in the new film, “Sex and the City 2.”

California Senate Passes Bill to Require Circulators to Wear Badges

May 30th, 2010

On May 28, the California State Senate passed SB 1203, which requires paid initiative circulators to wear a badge. The badge must say in 30-point font, “Paid Signature Gatherer”. The badge must also say the name of the county in California in which the petitioner is registered to vote, and if the circulator is not registered, it must say, “Not Registered to Vote.” The vote in the Senate was 22-5.

The bill, if enacted, would probably be held unconstitutional. The 9th circuit ruled in WIN v Warheit, 213 F 3d. 1132 (2000), that a Washington state law, requiring the address of each paid circulator to be listed in periodic reports to a public agency, is unconstitutional. The Court noted the evidence that some circulators refused to work, rather than have their addresses be made available to the public.

The bill also seems to assume that all circulators are California residents. But the 9th circuit ruled in 2008 that requiring circulators to live in the state in which they are working is also unconstitutional. Nader v Brewer, 531 F.3d 1028. Arizona asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overrule that ruling, but the Court declined. Thanks to Jack Dean for this news.

Colombia Presidential Election Today

May 30th, 2010

Colombia’s presidential election is May 30. Polls indicate that no one will receive a majority. In that case, a run-off will be held on June 20. Polls also show that one of the two strongest candidates is the Green Party’s nominee, Antanas Mockus.

« 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.