Home→General→Steve Rankin Dies, Was Expert on Constitutional Law Involving Closed and Open Primaries

Steve Rankin Dies, Was Expert on Constitutional Law Involving Closed and Open Primaries

Posted on October 6, 2011 by admin

On August 21, 2011, Steve Rankin of Jackson, Mississippi, died of cancer. He was an expert in major party primaries, especially on the details of which voters can participate in those primaries. He believed that parties should decide for themselves who should vote in their primaries. He kept in touch with all legal developments concerning this issue, and was a frequent source of news for this blog, and a frequent commenter for quite a few years.

Comments

Steve Rankin Dies, Was Expert on Constitutional Law Involving Closed and Open Primaries — No Comments

Brad M on October 6, 2011 at 12:11 pm said:

I’ll miss his banter and insight.

RIP
Citizens For A Better Veterans Home on October 6, 2011 at 1:03 pm said:

Steve and Richard, patriots with never ending shots for the establishment ……….
Demo Rep on October 6, 2011 at 1:12 pm said:

PUBLIC nominations of PUBLIC candidates for PUBLIC offices by

(1) ALL PUBLIC voters (as in top 2 primary areas) or

(2) SOME PUBLIC voters

— according to PUBLIC laws in either case.

NOT election law — atomic physics branch.
—-
Any living folks still loving *divine right of kings* ???
Brad on October 6, 2011 at 7:43 pm said:

Asinine = Demo Rep
Derek on October 6, 2011 at 8:28 pm said:

Super-duper election race!

a) Major parties nominate multiple candidates
b) Third parties can cross-endorse candidates
c) Small filing fee and petition request (1,000 signatures OK)
An Alabama Independent on October 7, 2011 at 9:20 am said:

Saddened to learn of this. I had exchanged a few emails with him over the years, but never had the pleasure of meeting or speaking with him. Our thoughts and prayers go out to his family.
Peter Gemma on October 7, 2011 at 9:22 am said:

I’ll miss Rankin’s thoughtful contributions – as opposed to kooks wearing tinfoil hats who appear here and there (er, like on this thread)
An Alabama Independent on October 7, 2011 at 9:36 am said:

To Derek Says: Yes, I am all for 3rd parties “co-nominating” major party nominees who share a phiolospohy close enough one can support them even if they have to “grit their teeth” to do so. When will the serious 3rd parties ever start realizing this is the only way they/we will have influence in the electoral process? Why won’t they take a little time and study how the ALP, the Liberal Party, the Conservative Pafty, and to a lesser extent the Independence Party has had influence in New York State?

Also agree with Filing Fees in lieu of Petition Signatures for ballot access. Gathering signatures is a throw back to a different time. A Filing Fee of no more than 2% of one year salary of the office sought – or $5000 – whichever is less, is a reasonable requirement to justify the seriousness of a 3rd party or independent candidate.
Demo Rep on October 7, 2011 at 9:15 pm said:

# 4 RIP for ALL folks who pass on.

However — judgment in the hereafter for some of such folks ??? — lovers of tyranny, slavery, divine right of kings, minority rule oligarchies, etc. ???

Think of folks like King George III, Napoleon, Jefferson Davis, Kaiser Bill, Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Saddam, etc.
Derek on October 7, 2011 at 10:41 pm said:

I would say that a vialbe threshold could be the one the FEC uses for Presidential candidates: if you get $5,000 in at least 20 states, you’re viable by the FEC standards.
Howard Hirsch on October 13, 2011 at 7:22 pm said:

He was the best friend I never met. Steve and I carried on a spirited multi-year e-mail correspondence on election law subjects, punctuated by the frequent NSFW attachments he always included.

RIP, Steve. All of us election law nerds and geeks will miss your contributions and your insights.

Howard Hirsch
Dayton, Nevada