December 1, 2003 – Volume 19, Number 8

This issue was originally printed on blue paper.

Table of Contents

  1. COURT PUTS ALASKA GREEN PARTY ON 2004 BALLOT
  2. REPUBLICAN ILLINOIS BILL FAILS
  3. TWO NEW ALLIES
  4. WEST VIRGINIA
  5. RARE DIALOGUE AT DEMOCRACY MEETING
  6. NEW JERSEY GREENS LOSE LEGISLATOR
  7. INSTANT-RUNOFF GAINS
  8. PRES. PRIMARIES
  9. NEW YORK NEWS
  10. PENNSYLVANIA NEWS
  11. 2003 STATE ELECTIONS
  12. 2004 PETITIONING FOR PRESIDENT
  13. FOUR MINOR PARTIES WIN ELECTIONS
  14. NATURAL LAW CONVENTION
  15. CONSTITUTION PARTY LIKELY TO CHOOSE MICHAEL PEROUTKA
  16. SOCIALIST LABOR PARTY
  17. AMERICAN PARTY

COURT PUTS ALASKA GREEN PARTY ON 2004 BALLOT

On November 3, Alaska Superior Court Judge John Reese ordered the state to put the Green Party back on the ballot. Green Party of Alaska v Alaska Division of Elections, 3AN 03-9936.

Alaska defines "party" as a group that either polled 3% for Governor at the last election, or which has registered members equal to 3% of the last gubernatorial vote. In the 2002 election, the Green Party got over 3% for U.S. Senate and U.S. House, but it didn’t get as much as 3% for Governor. Nor does it have enough registrations to qualify that way (the party has 4,769 registrations, and needs 6,937). The party sued, claiming that it is irrational to use only the gubernatorial vote. A slight majority of the states let any statewide candidate meet the vote test.

The Alaska definition of "party" has not yet been held unconstitutional, but it probably will be. The judge wouldn’t have issued the injunction if he hadn’t believed the law is likely to be held unconstitutional. There will be a trial on November 25, 2004, an entire year away, so the Green Party is safely on the ballot until then. The state did not ask the State Supreme Court to countermand the injunction.

Assuming the court does rule the law unconstitutional, the precedent will help persuade state legislatures in other states to provide that the vote test is satisfied, if a party meets it for any statewide office. When states limit the vote test to just a single statewide office, parties are forced to run for that particular office, whether they want to or not.

States that limit the vote test to just a single office per election year, besides Alaska, are Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, and West Virginia.


REPUBLICAN ILLINOIS BILL FAILS

On November 21, the Illinois Senate defeated SB 82, which would have relaxed the deadline for a qualified party to certify the names of its presidential and vice-presidential nominees. The current deadline is 67 days before the election. The Republicans won’t nominate until September 2, which is only 61 days before the November 2, 2004 election.

The bill failed because it had other provisions that were unacceptable to Republicans and some Democrats. The chief provision would have canceled an $800,000 fine that had been levied on the Democratic Secretary of State for breaking various campaign finance laws. Also the bill would have provided that dimpled chads on punchcard ballots should be counted. The bill lost 23-27. It needed 36 votes (60%) because this was a special "veto" session.

Probably the Republican problem will be fixed in the legislative session that starts in January. Illinois is the only state where Republicans haven’t yet managed to alter the deadlines to accommodate their late convention.

If the problem doesn’t get solved in the legislature, the Republican Party would probably file a lawsuit, asserting that the 67-day deadline is unconstitutionally early. If the case were to win, it would be an excellent precedent. Currently, minor party or independent candidates for president must submit petitions in May in Texas, and June in Arizona, Illinois, Indiana, and North Carolina. If late August is unconstitutional for the qualified parties, surely May and June are unconstitutional for others.

The last time a major party presidential nominee failed to appear on the November ballot of any state was 1964, when Alabama kept Lyndon Johnson off its ballot.


TWO NEW ALLIES

Recently, two influential political organizations declared themselves in favor of easier ballot access for minor party and independent candidates, at least for president.

1. The Reform Institute is about to publish a 61-page analysis of state ballot access laws for presidential candidates. The Introduction makes it clear that the Reform Institute will be working to ease ballot access laws. U.S. Senator John McCain created the Institute earlier this year. 211 N. Union St., #250, Alexandria Va 22314. www.reforminstitute.org. (703) 535-6897.

2. Marian Viray, Managing Director of The Campaign Legal Center, recently co-authored an article that condemns severe ballot access laws. Therefore, one may conclude that The Campaign Legal Center itself is an ally. The article is "Barriers to Participation," in the University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, spring 2003.

The Campaign Legal Center, 1101 Connecticut Av. NW #330, Washington DC 20036. (202) 736-2200. www.campaignlegalcenter.org.


WEST VIRGINIA

On December 5, a hearing will be held in U.S. District Court in McClure v Manchin, 1:3cv205, northern district, Clarksburg. This very important case challenges a law that requires circulators to tell potential signers that if they sign a minor party petition, they can’t vote in the primary. Ironically, voters can do both! The case also challenges a law that circulators cannot work unless they first get "credentialed". These two laws have been handicapping minor parties for decades. The Libertarian Party hopes that Judge Irene Keeley will issue an injunction against both laws.


RARE DIALOGUE AT DEMOCRACY MEETING

The Center for Voting & Democracy held its "Democracy Conference" in Washington, D.C., Nov. 21-23. Conferences like this are always useful, but this one was extraordinary.

Most such conferences consist of attendees who are of like mind. But this conference consisted of two camps of opposing views about the wisdom of engaging in minor party and independent political action, at least in the 2004 presidential election.

Leaders of labor, feminist, ethnic minority, campaign finance reform, and environmental advocacy groups attended. These groups are non-partisan but their leaders generally support Democrats. They include Common Cause, the Fannie Lou Hamer Project, Friends of the Earth, Greenlining Institute, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, Mexican American Legal Defense & Educational Fund, NAACP National Voter Fund, National Coalition of Black Civic Participation, National Council of La Raza, National Organization for Women, People for the American Way, Project Vote, Public Campaign, Public Citizen, Rainbow Coalition/PUSH, Urban League, and US Public Interest Research Group.

The above groups were motivated to attend a conference on voting rights, partly because they are convinced that removing barriers to voting would have helped the Democratic Party win the presidency in 2000. They are correct. Specifically, if Florida had not imposed discriminatory barriers to Black voters in 2000, Gore would have carried Florida.

Also attending the conference were many leaders of the Green Party, and leaders of other groups that support independent electoral activity, generally to the left of the Democratic Party. Of course people of all political persuasions were present; but the conference fundamentally was composed of two camps. Crudely, they can be characterized as people who supported Gore in 2000 and people who supported Nader in 2000.

Conference organizers did not try to disguise this tension, and held a well-attended debate between the team of Ralph Nader and his campaign manager Theresa Amato, versus Professor John White and Robert Borosage of the Campaign for America’s Future. The subject: "Is it Time for Multi-Party Democracy?"

The participant at the Conference who was most forthright in setting forth the idea that everyone ought to participate in the Democratic and Republican Parties, however, was not in that debate. That participant was Hendrik Hertzberg. He made his views clear during the question-and-answer session after the debate, and also informally at the dinner hour.

Hertzberg said, "There are only two teams in the (baseball) World Series." Hertzberg is an influential journalist. He is a former editor of The New Republic and currently a senior editor at The New Yorker. The entire case in favor of repressive ballot access laws for minor parties and independent candidates rests on the point of view that all politically active individuals ought to carry on activism within the Democratic or Republican Parties.

The case against this view is simple. The text of the U.S. Constitution, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of the United Nations, and the Helsinki Accords, all guarantee individuals and groups the freedom to decide for themselves which political party to join.

The 1st Amendment says, "Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble". The 14th Amendment applies this to the states. The right to assemble together into a political party is meaningless, if such party is barred from the ballot, according to the Supreme Court in Williams v Rhodes.

The Helsinki Accords require the U.S. to "respect the right of individuals and groups to establish, in full freedom, their own political parties and provide them with legal guarantees to enable them to compete on a basis of equal treatment." Also to "respect the right of citizens to seek public office without discrimination".

Articles 25 of the U.N.’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights says "Every citizen shall have the right…to vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall…guarantee the free expression of the will of the electors." Article 26 says, "The law shall prohibit any discrimination on any ground such as…political or other opinion."

State laws, and court decisions, in the U.S. make it clear that some citizens are not free to participate in the Democratic and Republican Parties. The 11th circuit has held that the major parties may exclude candidates with divergent political views from entering their primaries. State courts and state laws in Hawaii, New York and Connecticut give political parties the right to expel members who have shown disloyalty to those parties. A 3-judge U.S. District Court in D.C. has upheld the right of the Democratic Party to refuse to count votes cast for delegates to the national convention who support Lyndon LaRouche. The idea that anyone, regardless of views, is free to participate in the Democratic and Republican Parties is factually incorrect. The cases referred to in this paragraph are consistent with freedom of association for the Democratic and Republican Parties. They are buttressed by the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2000 decision Democratic Party of California v Jones, which said that parties need not tolerate letting their nominees be chosen by outsiders.

Therefore, because the Democratic and Republican Parties enjoy freedom of association, and because they can exclude outsiders, it follows logically that the government must permit the people to form other political parties, and must not discriminate against any political party.

Hertzberg is to be commended for bringing the argument into the open.

The Conference accomplished a great many goals. Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr., called for a constitutional amendment to guarantee the right to vote, and that effort, someday in the future, will probably mark its birthplace at the November 2003 conference.


NEW JERSEY GREENS LOSE LEGISLATOR

In November, New Jersey Assemblyman Matt Ahearn, one of two Green legislators in the U.S., was defeated. He had been elected as a Democrat in 2001, but had switched to the Greens early this year. Polls had shown him in a 3-way tie with his Democratic and Republican opponents, but he only got 10.81%.

Part of the reason for his defeat lies with the unfair ballot format used in his county (Bergen County) and certain other New Jersey counties. See the ballot in this Adobe Acrobat .pdf format.. Note that the words "Republican" and "Democratic" are prominently displayed in large type, whereas the "Green" label is so tiny, it is virtually invisible.


INSTANT-RUNOFF GAINS

On November 25, the Berkeley, California city council voted to put a ballot measure on the March 2004 ballot. It will decide if the city should use Instant-Runoff Voting.

Also, California Secretary of State Kevin Shelley met with San Francisco city elections last month, and pledged to do everything in his power to see that San Francisco can use Instant-Runoff in its 2004 city elections.


PRES. PRIMARIES

New Hampshire: has the only presidential primary in which the list of candidates has already closed. 14 Republicans and 23 Democrats are running. None of the Republicans except President Bush is well known. See www.state.nh.us/sos for the list.

California: names can be added or deleted until December 24. So far, the candidates are--

Republican: President Bush.

Democratic: the nine "recognized" candidates, plus Lyndon LaRouche.

Green: David Cobb, Kent Mesplay and Lorna Salzman.

Libertarian: Gary Nolan, Michael Badnarik.

Peace & Freedom: Mumia Abu-Jamal, Leonard Peltier, and Walt Brown.

Amer. Indp: Michael Peroutka.

District of Columbia: is holding Democratic and Green primaries. The Green ballot has David Cobb. The Democratic ballot now has Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich, Al Sharpton, Lyndon LaRouche and Carol Braun. The other leading Democrats withdrew. However, the city council is mulling over a bill to print the names of the withdrawn candidates, notwithstanding their desire not to be listed.


NEW YORK NEWS

The Independence Party will ask the legislature to amend the law, to set up a type of presidential primary the party wants for itself. The party feels that neither of the two existing plans for presidential primaries fit the party (one plan is for Democrats; the other for Republicans). If the legislature won’t act, the party will sue.

On November 4, the voters of New York city rejected a charter amendment, to switch the city to non-partisan elections, by 30%-70%.


PENNSYLVANIA NEWS

On October 29, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court refused to hear the Reform Party’s appeal In re Zulick (see Sep. & Oct. BAN for information on this case). www.ballot-access.org.


2003 STATE ELECTIONS

The only minor party candidates for statewide office in the 2003 elections were in Mississippi. Unofficial totals for Governor: Republican 53.01%; Democratic 45.41%; Constitution .71%; Green .44%; Reform .44%. The combined minor party vote for Governor, 1.6%, though modest, is the highest for that office since 1919.

MINOR PARTY STATE LEGISLATIVE VOTE, Oct. & Nov. 2003

a
Green
Libertarian
Soc. Worker
Socialist
Conservative
Reform
Georgia House
117
a
a
a
a
a
Louisiana Senate
1,528
1,366
a
a
a
a
Louisiana House
1,152
2,336
a
a
a
a
New Jersey Senate
13,767
2,055
460
a
651
a
New Jersey Assem.
31,130
637
a
770
a
a
Pennsylvania Sen.
a
a
a
a
a
2,813

MINOR PARTY STATE LEGISLATIVE PERCENTAGES

a
Green
Libertarian
Soc. Worker
Socialist
Conservative
Reform
Georgia House
1.30%
a
a
a
a
a
Louisiana Senate
6.05%
5.13%
a
a
a
a
Louisiana House
7.81%
19.39%
a
a
a
a
New Jersey Senate
5.37%
2.30%
4.96%
a
1.50%
a
New Jersey Assem.
4.73%
2.56%
a
1.64%
a
a
Pennsylvania Sen.
a
a
a
a
a
5.79%


2004 PETITIONING FOR PRESIDENT

STATE
REQUIREMENTS
SIGNATURES COLLECTED
DEADLINE
later method
FULL PARTY
CAND.
LIB'T
GREEN
NAT LAW
CONSTI.
REFORM

Alabama

41,012

5,000

300

0

0

0

0

Aug 31

Alaska

(reg) 6,937

#2,845

already on

*already on

0

0

0

Aug 4

Arizona

16,348

est #10,000

already on

*3,200

0

0

0

Jun 9

Arkansas

10,000

1,000

*500

0

0

0

0

Aug 2

California

(reg) 77,389

153,035

already on

already on

already on

already on

50,536

Aug 6

Colorado

(reg) 1,000

pay fee

already on

already on

already on

already on

already on

July 5

Connecticut

no procedure

#7,500

can't start

already on

can't start

can't start

can't start

Aug 7

Delaware

est. (reg) 270

est. 5,400

already on

already on

already on

*234

233

Aug 21

D.C.

no procedure

est. #3,600

can't start

already on

can't start

can't start

can't start

Aug 17

Florida

be organized

93,024

already on

already on

already on

already on

already on

Sep 1

Georgia

37,153

#37,153

already on

*2,500

0

0

0

July 13

Hawaii

677

3,711

already on

already on

already on

0

0

Sep 3

Idaho

10,033

5,017

already on

*1,300

already on

already on

0

Aug 31

Illinois

no procedure

#25,000

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

Jun 21

Indiana

no procedure

#29,553

already on

0

0

0

0

Jul 1

Iowa

no procedure

#1,500

*350

0

0

0

0

Aug 13

Kansas

16,714

5,000

already on

*1,500

0

0

already on

Aug 2

Kentucky

no procedure

#5,000

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

Aug 26

Louisiana

est. (reg) 140,000

pay fee

1,170

667

22

37

2,806

Sep 7

Maine

25,260

#4,000

0

already on

0

0

0

Aug 9

Maryland

10,000

est. 28,000

*14,000

already on

0

*19,000

0

Aug 2

Mass.

est. (reg) 38,000

#10,000

already on

already on

0

0

0

July 27

Michigan

31,776

31,776

already on

already on

already on

already on

already on

July 15

Minnesota

112,557

#2,000

0

already on

0

0

0

Sep 14

Mississippi

be organized

#1,000

already on

already on

already on

already on

already on

Sep 3

Missouri

10,000

10,000

already on

0

0

0

0

July 26

Montana

5,000

#5,000

already on

already on

already on

*800

already on

July 28

Nebraska

4,810

2,500

already on

*4,350

0

0

0

Aug 24

Nevada

4,805

4,805

already on

already on

already on

already on

0

July 9

New Hamp.

13,260

#3,000

0

0

0

0

0

Aug 11

New Jersey

no procedure

#800

0

0

0

0

0

July 26

New Mexico

2,422

14,527

already on

already on

0

0

0

Sep 7

New York

no procedure

#15,000

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

Aug 17

No. Carolina

58,842

est 100,000

already on

*9,700

0

100

0

Jun 25

North Dakota

7,000

#4,000

0

0

0

0

0

Sep 3

Ohio

32,290

5,000

finished

*0

0

0

0

Aug 19

Oklahoma

51,781

37,027

*3,500

0

0

0

0

Jul 15

Oregon

18,864

15,306

already on

already on

0

already on

0

Aug 24

Penn.

no procedure

*est 26,000

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

Aug 2

Rhode Island

16,592

#1,000

can't start

already on

can't start

can't start

can't start

Sep 3

So. Carolina

10,000

10,000

already on

*2,500

already on

already on

already on

Jul 15

South Dakota

8,364

#3,346

*1,400

0

0

*7,000

0

Aug 3

Tennessee

41,322

25

0

0

0

2,200

0

Aug 19

Texas

45,540

64,077

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

May 24

Utah

2,000

#1,000

already on

already on

already on

*2,050

0

Sep 3

Vermont

be organized

#1,000

already on

0

0

0

0

Sep 16

Virginia

no procedure

#10,000

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

Aug 20

Washington

no procedure

#200

already on

can't start

can't start

can't start

can't start

Aug 25

West Va.

no procedure

#12,963

*1,500

0

0

0

0

Aug 2

Wisconsin

10,000

#2,000

already on

already on

0

already on

can't start

Sep 14

Wyoming

3,644

3,644

already on

0

0

0

0

Aug 17

TOTAL STATES ON
27
*21
12
10
7

# allows partisan label.
* means entry changed since the last issue of B.A.N.
"(reg.)" means a party must have a certain number of registered voters.
All dates in "deadline" column are 2004.
The Independent American Party has 500 in Utah.


FOUR MINOR PARTIES WIN ELECTIONS

The Green, Libertarian, Working Families and Reform Parties all won at least one election on November 4, 2003, in city, township, and special district elections:

GREEN elected 41 candidates, as follows: California 6; Connecticut 3; Iowa 2; Maine 3; Michigan 2; Minnesota 1; Pennsylvania 19; Virginia 2; Washington 3. The victories in Connecticut and Pennsylvania were partisan.

In addition, in San Francisco’s mayoral race, Matt Gonzalez polled 19.59% of the total, enough for a 2nd place finish and entry into the December 9 run-off. The race is non-partisan but voters are well aware of the party membership of each candidate. Gonzalez’ opponent is a Democrat; polls show that the race is close.

LIBERTARIAN elected 20 candidates: Idaho 1; Indiana 6; Iowa 2; Michigan 5; North Carolina 3; Pennsylvania 1; Virginia 1; Washington 1. The victories in Indiana and Pennsylvania were partisan.

Also, the Libertarian write-in candidate for Mayor of Macon, Georgia, polled 25%.

WORKING FAMILIES elected 3 candidates: 2 to the city council of Willimantic, Connecticut; and 1 to the New York city council. All were partisan.

REFORM elected a candidate to the Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania School Board, a partisan race. In addition, the party’s candidate for County Judge in Monroe County, Pennsylvania, Art Zulick, polled 21.76% of the vote as a write-in candidate against Republican and Democratic opponents.

CONSTITUTION didn’t win any elections, but it came close to electing a Lancaster County, Pennsylvania Commissioner. The party’s national chairman, Jim Clymer, polled 17,850 votes, 25.47%, in a three-party race. If he had polled 19,659 votes, he would have been elected. Parties can only run two candidates, and voters can only vote for two, but the top three candidates are elected.


NATURAL LAW CONVENTION

The Natural Law Party held a national meeting on November 1 in Columbus, Ohio, but did not nominate anyone. The Ohio branch of the party endorsed Dennis Kucinich for the Democratic nomination, and the national party informally supports him. Kucinich spoke at the meeting.


CONSTITUTION PARTY LIKELY TO CHOOSE MICHAEL PEROUTKA

On November 7, Michael A. Peroutka announced that he is seeking the presidential nomination of the Constitution Party. The party’s national committee, meeting that same day in Detroit, Michigan, then chose Peroutka as its stand-in presidential candidate. The final decision will be made in late June at the party’s Valley Forge, Pennsylvania national convention.

Peroutka is an attorney who lives in Millersville, Maryland. He worked for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under President Reagan, and has established an Institute on the Constitution. If nominated by the Constitution Party next year, he will be that party’s second presidential candidate. The only presidential candidate the party has had previously has been Howard Phillips.


SOCIALIST LABOR PARTY

The Socialist Labor Party ran candidates from 1877 through 1985, and then stopped. However, it planned to run a candidate for Houston, Texas city council this year. But the candidate failed to get on the ballot, because he waited until the last day to file, and appeared at the office after it had closed.


AMERICAN PARTY

The American Party nominated presidential and vice-presidential candidates last June, but those candidates have since withdrawn. The party will hold a new convention January 12-13, 2004, in New Orleans, Louisiana.


Ballot Access News. is published by and copyright by Richard Winger. Note: subscriptions are available!
Go back to the index.
Copyright © 2003 Ballot Access News