| This issue was originally printed on white paper. |
(See also this update.)
For the first time in U.S. history, a major political party is in full revolt against state election laws which tell it how to nominate. On May 24, the Alaska Republican Party announced that it will hold its own vote-by-mail primary in August, to emphasize that it will not tolerate state law which mandates that Democrats and members of other parties are allowed to help choose Republican nominees.
If there is any divergence in the results of the Republican Party's own primary, versus the results of the state-provided primary, then a court must decide which nominee will be placed on the November ballot.
In August, the party will mail a primary ballot to all registered Republican, and all registered independents. The primary will cost the party $150,000. The party may offset some of the costs by enclosing brochures for those Republican candidates who contribute.
The Alaska Supreme Court ruled on March 20 that the party must permit voters who are registered in other parties, to help choose Republican nominees (see April 3 B.A.N.). The party hopes the U.S. Supreme Court will reverse the State Supreme Court. The party's U.S. Supreme Court appeal, Republican Party of Alaska v Ulmer, was filed May 28.
If the U.S. Supreme Court accepts the case before it goes on summer recess, it could be argued in early October 1996. The party would like the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the State Supreme Court decision before there is a hearing, but it is always difficult to get the U.S. Supreme Court to issue orders, before it has heard a case.
The party is hoping to persuade many other organizations to file amici curiae briefs in its support. Such briefs, asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case, will be due on or about June 28.
Experience shows that courts generally rule against minor parties, in party rights cases. Only the major parties have the clout to win constitutional party rights cases.
During the 1970's and early 1980's, it was the Democratic Party which pursued and won party rights cases. However, during the 1990's, the Republican Party has been the chief force in favor of extending the constitutional rights of political parties, although the Democratic Party of California has also continued to be very active.
On May 3, the Florida Supreme Court announced that it will hear the Libertarian Party's appeal in Libertarian Party of Florida v Smith, no. 87,342. The issue is a law which provides that elections officials rebate over half of the filing fees paid by Democratic and Republican candidates, back to those political parties; but the government keeps all of the filing fees paid by candidates of other parties.
The vote on whether to hear the case was 5-2. This is the first time since 1978 that the Florida Supreme Court has heard a ballot access appeal filed by a third political party.
Mississippi Secretary of State Eric Clark recently ruled that the 1,000-signature independent presidential candidate procedure, may be used by unqualified parties as well as by true independent candidates. This means that the petition may be circulated with the name of an unqualified political party, and that party name will be printed on the November ballot, next to the name of its presidential candidate (assuming the party name doesn't mimic the name of a qualified party, of course).
On May 28, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that it will hear Minnesota's appeal in Twin Cities Area New Party v McKenna, no. 95-1608. This is the 8th circuit opinion which said that the U.S. Constitution protects the right of two political parties, to jointly run the same candidate, if they wish to. It will probably be argued in October or November 1996.
The May 3 B.A.N. said that Florida had just redrawn its congressional district boundaries, and that the Secretary of State had refused to let third parties, who are trying to get congressional candidates on the ballot, use procedures in the law, which making petitioning easier when the district boundaries change.
As it turns out, the bill passed by the Legislature on May 4, drawing new boundaries, mandates that the easier procedures will be used. This is a victory for third parties who wish to run candidates for the U.S. House this year. Now they can circulate petitions for that office, anywhere in the state. Such petitions need not carry the name of any candidates. For every 5,600 valid signatures collected, the party is free to nominate one candidate for the U.S. House, anywhere in Florida.
But, the bill (HB 2745) also changed the petition deadline for third party petitions for the U.S. House, from July 16, to June 10! There is no election-administration reason for making the deadline earlier, and the deadline change will probably be overturned in court, if anyone sues. The Natural Law Party has six candidates for the U.S. House from Florida, and will sue, if it can't collect the signatures by June 10.
On May 23, the First Circuit upheld a New Hampshire law which provides that only members of the two largest parties may serve as polling place officials. Werme v Merrill, no. 95-1982. The decision was written by Judge Bruce Selya, a Reagan appointee, and signed by Judges Frank Coffin and Walter J. Cummings, Johnson appointees.
The Libertarian Party of New Hampshire was a co-plaintiff. Even though it is a qualified party in New Hampshire and elected state legislators in both 1992 and 1994, no Libertarian may serve as an election inspector or ballot clerk. The law says that these positions must be filled equally from the ranks of the two largest parties.
The decision scoffs at the idea that Democratic and Republican polling place officials might ever perform their duties in a manner which disadvantages other parties. It says, "We refuse to indulge so cynical a view of the electoral process." But the decision refuses to grapple with the reality of the law itself. If the idea that polling place officials might ever behave in a partisan manner is so preposterous, why does the law mandate that the number of officials must be balanced equally between the two largest parties?
The decision is written in a somewhat mocking, sardonic style. On the one hand, it uses an overblown vocabulary, e.g., "anodyne", "tamisage", "palsgrave", "apodictic"; on the other, it sometimes uses oddly informal language: "New Hampshire's electoral machinery is pretty standard stuff"; "one should keep no more cats than will catch mice". No appeal is planned. The First Circuit is the only Circuit which has never ruled in favor of any third political party, in an election law case.
On May 21, Michigan Governor John Engler signed HB 4443, which restores the ability of members of third parties to serve as polling place officials. Another bill signed earlier this year had said only members of the two largest parties could serve.
As parties and candidates struggle with ballot access, a large number of constitutional cases have recently been filed, or are about to be filed:
1. Alabama: the Natural Law Party is about to sue the Secretary of State, who is enforcing a 36,060-signature requirement against the party, even though the requirement was only 11,020 signatures when the party first submitted signatures.
2. Arizona: the U.S. Taxpayers Party filed a lawsuit against the May 18 deadline for a new party to submit its petition, on May 22. A hearing has been set for June 3 in federal court. The party expects to have turned in all of its signatures by that date, and argues that the May 18 deadline is unnecessarily early. National Committee of US Taxpayers Party v Hull, 96-1240 PHX-RCB. The case was assigned to Judge Robert Broomfield, a Reagan appointee.
3. Florida: the Libertarian Party is about to file a lawsuit against the Secretary of State, who refuses to let the party substitute its actual presidential candidate (who will be chosen in early July) for the stand-in who is listed on the party's petition.
4. Georgia: the Libertarian Party is about to file a lawsuit against state law which forces it to submit petitions signed by 5% of the number of registered voters, if it wishes to run candidates for the U.S. House. A similar lawsuit was filed by the party in 1994 but never pursued. This case will depend not only on the arguments cited in the 1994 case, but also on the 1995 U.S. Supreme Court decision on congressional term limits.
Georgia (2): the U.S. Taxpayers Party is about to sue against the statewide petition, on the basis of arguments the party is also making in Oklahoma and North Carolina: that the state lacks authority to keep it off the ballot for federal elections, since it is a recognized national political party in the eyes of the Federal Election Commission; and also that the states lack authority to impose severe ballot access requirements for federal office.
5. North Carolina: On April 24, the U.S. Taxpayers Party filed a lawsuit against the state's ballot access requirements, using arguments similar to those made against Oklahoma and Georgia (see paragraph above). National Committee of U.S. Taxpayers Party v State Bd. of Elections, e.d., 5:96cv341-BRI. The case was assigned to Judge Earl Britt, who has a good ballot access record.
The Federal Communications Commission plans to rule soon on whether commercial television networks may give free time to the major party presidential candidates, and no other presidential candidates. All of the major networks have now expressed interest in granting free time to the Democratic and Republican nominees. The question is whether the "Equal Time" rule will interfere.
The FCC has previously ruled that the "Equal Time" rule does not bar commercial networks from hosting only the major party candidates, in an interview setting. The "Equal Time" rule makes an exception for "bona fide news programs", and a program in which only one major party presidential candidate appears, falls under that exception. However, the new proposal isn't even an interview; it simply gives the candidate air time, to use as he or she wishes.
The FCC invites public comment. Write Jonathan Cohen, Assistant Chief, Mass Media Bureau, Room 314, 1919 M St. NW, Washington DC 20554, preferably by June 3. For more information, call Bobby Baker at (202) 418-1440 or Jonathan Cohen at (202) 418-2607.
On May 17, Missouri legislature passed HB 1557, which, among other things, changes the petition deadline for new parties and independents from the first Monday in August, to the last Monday in July. The Secretary of State says she needs the additional time, since she is now required to certify the contents of ballots sooner than in the past.
The April 3 B.A.N. carried presidential primary results for most March primaries. Below are March results which weren't available then, plus results for April and some May primaries. Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Kentucky, Idaho, West Virginia, are still unavailable.
See this note about tables.
| California (write-ins): | ||
|---|---|---|
| Ralph Nader | 1,441 | .06 |
(California results for candidates who were on the ballot were in April 3 B.A.N.).
| Washington: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bob Dole | 76,155 | 63.10 |
| Pat Buchanan | 25,247 | 20.92 |
| Steve Forbes | 10,339 | 8.57 |
| Alan Keyes | 5,610 | 4.65 |
| Lamar Alexander | 1,600 | 1.33 |
| Phil Gramm | 630 | .52 |
| Richard Lugar | 587 | .49 |
| Robert Dornan | 516 | .43 |
| North Carolina: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bob Dole | 202,863 | 74.23 |
| Pat Buchanan | 37,127 | 13.58 |
| Alan Keyes | 11,759 | 4.30 |
| Steve Forbes | 11,588 | 4.24 |
| Lamar Alexander | 7,400 | 2.71 |
| Richard Lugar | 2,558 | .94 |
| Indiana: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bob Dole | 366,375 | 70.64 |
| Pat Buchanan | 100,334 | 19.34 |
| Steve Forbes | 51,953 | 10.02 |
| District of Columbia: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bob Dole | 2,221 | 75.52 |
| uncommitted | 375 | 12.75 |
| Pat Buchanan | 279 | 9.49 |
| write-ins | 66 | 2.24 |
| Nebraska: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bob Dole | 129,766 | 76.39 |
| Pat Buchanan | 17,867 | 10.52 |
| Steve Forbes | 10,626 | 6.26 |
| Alan Keyes | 5,065 | 2.98 |
| Lamar Alexander | 4,113 | 2.42 |
| Richard Lugar | 1,121 | .66 |
| Robert Dornan | 850 | .50 |
| Morry Taylor | 454 | .27 |
See this note about tables.
| California (all votes are write-ins): | ||
|---|---|---|
| Ralph Nader | 575 | 93.19 |
| Diane Templin | 42 | 6.81 |
See this note about tables.
| California (also see April 3
B.A.N.): | ||
|---|---|---|
| Ralph Nader w-ins | 187 | 2.94 |
See this note about tables.
No Democratic results are available yet for Indiana, Arkansas, Idaho or Kentucky.
| Michigan (no one was on ballot): | ||
|---|---|---|
| total write-ins | 19,110 | 100.00 |
(the state didn't provide any detail)
| California (write-ins): | ||
|---|---|---|
| Ralph Nader | 6,599 | .26 |
(California results for candidates who were on the ballot were in April 3 B.A.N.).
| Oregon: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bill Clinton | 349,871 | 94.77 |
| write-ins | 19,307 | 5.23 |
| Washington: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bill Clinton | 97,495 | 98.53 |
| Lyndn LaRouche | 1,451 | 1.47 |
| Wisconsin: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bill Clinton | 347,629 | 98.02 |
| uninstructed | 7,005 | 1.98 |
| Pennsylvania: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bill Clinton | 659,611 | 88.86 |
| Lyndn LaRouche | 58,761 | 8.18 |
| North Carolina: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bill Clinton | 461,434 | 91.85 |
| Lyndn LaRouche | 40,936 | 8.15 |
| District of Columbia: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bill Clinton | 20,067 | 98.17 |
| Lyndon LaRouche | 374 | 1.83 |
| Nebraska: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bill Clinton | 81,848 | 88.86 |
| Lyndn LaRouche | 10,264 | 11.14 |
| West Virginia: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Bill Clinton | 256,978 | 86.17 |
| Lyndn LaRouche | 41,240 | 13.83 |
See this note about tables.
| California (also see April 3
B.A.N.) | ||
|---|---|---|
| Ralph Nader w-ins | 115 | .79 |
| Nebraska: | ||
|---|---|---|
| Harry Browne | 28 | 100.00 |
On April 23, State Senator Dwight Adams, an Alabama Republican, introduced SB 719, which would let independent presidential candidates qualify for the ballot by paying $500, in lieu of submitting 5,000 signatures. The bill was introduced too late to be considered (the legislature has now adjourned), but Adams is willing to re-introduce it next year.
On May 20, the U.S. Supreme Court released Romer v Evans, striking down a Colorado law which forbade cities from passing ordinances to outlaw discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The decision was by Justice Anthony Kennedy.
The decision may help fight election laws which discriminate against voters who support third party and independent candidates. Unlike most Equal Protection decisions, this decision did not analyze whether the targets of discrimination are part of a "suspect class". It simply found that the 14th amendment protects any group from being treated unequally by government, if the reason for the treatment is hostility, rather than necessity.
"'The Constitution neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.' ...Central both to the idea of the rule of law and to our own Constitution's guarantee of equal protection is the principle that government and each of its parts must remain open on impartial terms to all...'Equal protection of the laws is not achieved through indiscriminate imposition of inequalities.' Respect for this principle explains why laws singling out a certain class of citizens for disfavored legal status or general hardships are rare. A law declaring that in general it shall be more difficult for one group of citizens than for all others to seek aid from the government is itself a denial of equal protection of the laws...'If the constitutional conception of equal protection of the laws means anything, it must at the very least mean that a bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group cannot constitute a legitimate governmental interest.'"
In 1995 the Alabama legislature tripled the number of signatures needed for new parties to get on the ballot, even though the old requirement was so severe that Alabama was one of only 8 states in 1994 with no statewide third party or independent candidates on the ballot. The motive was animus, not a desire to improve election administration. Romer v Evans ought to be relevant.
See this note about tables.
| STATE | REQUIREMENTS | SIGNATURES COLLECTED | DEADLINES | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FULL PARTY | CAND. | LIBT | REFORM | NATL LAW | TAXPAYR | PARTY | CAND. | |
| Alabama | 36,060 | 5,000 | already on | 6,000 | *finished | fin. (indp) | Jul 1 | Aug 30 |
| Alaska | 2,586 | 2,586 | already on | maybe on | finished | already on | in doubt | in doubt |
| Arizona | 15,062 | *7,813 | already on | *finished | *9,000 | *19,000 | May 18 | *Jun 27 |
| Arkansas | 21,506 | 0 | 0 | in court | already on | already on | Jan 2 | Sep 15 |
| California | (reg) 89,007 | 147,238 | already on | already on | already on | already on | Oct 24 95 | Aug 9 |
| Colorado | no procedure | 0 | 0 | 0 | already on | *already on | -- | Jul 16 |
| Connecticut | no procedure | 7,500 | *1,200 | *5,000 | *800 | *3,200 | -- | Aug 7 |
| Delaware | (reg.) 191 | 3,828 | already on | (reg) 30 | (reg) *150 | (reg) 180 | Aug 17 | Jul 15 |
| D.C. | no procedure | (es) 3,500 | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | -- | Aug 20 |
| Florida | 196,788 | 65,596 | *86,000 | *65,000 | *2,000 | 0 | Jul 16 | Jul 15 |
| Georgia | 30,036 | 30,036 | already on | *10,000 | *200 | 0 | Jul 9 | Jul 9 |
| Hawaii | 4,889 | 3,829 | already on | *500 | already on | 0 | Apr 24 | Sep 6 |
| Idaho | 9,644 | 4,822 | already on | *2,000 | *2,400 | 600 | Aug 31 | Aug 26 |
| Illinois | no procedure | 25,000 | already on | *2,000 | *0 | *1,800 | -- | Aug 5 |
| Indiana | no procedure | 29,822 | already on | *6,000 | 0 | 0 | -- | Jul 15 |
| Iowa | no procedure | 1,500 | *100 | *600 | *1,700 | *1,900 | -- | Aug 16 |
| Kansas | 16,418 | 5,000 | already on | *21,000 | *1,000 | *finished | Jun 1 | Aug 5 |
| Kentucky | no procedure | 5,000 | *5,000 | *2,000 | *3,500 | *4,000 | -- | Aug 29 |
| Louisiana | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Jun 30 | Aug 29 |
| Maine | (reg) 25,565 | 4,000 | *already on | already on | *finished | *finished | De 14 95 | May 24 |
| Maryland | 10,000 | 72,785 | already on | *8,000 | 8,000 | *already on | Aug 5 | Aug 5 |
| Massachsts. | *(reg) 31,661 | 10,000 | already on | *800 | *3,000 | *2,300 | Feb 14 | Jul 30 |
| Michigan | 30,891 | 30,891 | already on | *20,000 | *1,500 | *200 | Jul 18 | Jul 18 |
| Minnesota | 89,731 | 2,000 | can't start | already on | can't start | can't start | May 1 | Sep 10 |
| Mississippi | *1,000 | 1,000 | already on | maybe on | already on | already on | Sep 6 | Sep 6 |
| Missouri | 10,000 | 10,000 | already on | *1,500 | *3,000 | *4,500 | *Jul 29 | *Jul 29 |
| Montana | 10,471 | 10,471 | already on | already on | already on | 50 | Mar 14 | Jul 31 |
| Nebraska | 5,773 | 2,500 | already on | *5,000 | finished | 0 | Aug 1 | Aug 27 |
| Nevada | 3,761 | 3,761 | already on | *3,500 | already on | already on | Jul 11 | Jul 11 |
| New Hampshire | 9,584 | 3,000 | already on | *300 | 0 | *3,100 | Aug 9 | Aug 7 |
| New Jersey | no procedure | 800 | 0 | finished | finished | finished | -- | Jul 29 |
| New Mexico | 2,339 | 14,029 | already on | already on | already on | already on | Apr 2 | Sep 10 |
| New York | no procedure | 15,000 | can't start | probably on | can't start | can't start | -- | Aug 20 |
| North Carolina | 51,904 | 80,684 | *finished | *finished | *finished | 1,700 | May 16 | Jun 28 |
| North Dakota | 7,000 | 4,000 | already on | already on | already on | *already on | De 29 95 | Sep 6 |
| Ohio | 33,463 | 5,000 | 400 | already on | already on | finished | Aug 22 | Aug 22 |
| Oklahoma | 49,751 | 41,711 | *finished | *finished | 0 | *finished | May 31 | Jul 15 |
| Oregon | 18,316 | 14,601 | already on | maybe on | *1,100 | 0 | Aug 27 | Aug 27 |
| Pennsylvania | no procedure | 24,425 | *5,000 | *7,000 | *900 | *4,000 | -- | Aug 1 |
| Rhode Island | 18,069 | 1,000 | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | Aug 1 | Sep 6 |
| South Carolina | 10,000 | 10,000 | already on | already on | finished | already on | May 5 | Aug 1 |
| South Dakota | 7,792 | 3,117 | already on | *already on (indp) | 200 | *already on | Apr 2 | Aug 6 |
| Tennessee | 37,179 | 25 | *finished | *already on (indp) | *finished | 0 | Apr 3 | Aug 20 |
| Texas | 43,963 | 61,541 | already on | *finished (indp) | *finished | *finished | May 27 | May 13 |
| Utah | 500 | 300 | already on | already on | already on | already on | Mar 1 | Sep 1 |
| Vermont | just be org. | 1,000 | already on | *200 | already on | *1,100 | Sep 19 | Sep 19 |
| Virginia | no procedure | 15,168 | *1,800 | already on | *1,700 | *2,300 | -- | Aug 23 |
| Washington | no procedure | 200 | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | -- | Jul 6 |
| West Virginia | no procedure | 6,837 | *finished | *2,500 | 0 | 0 | -- | Aug 1 |
| Wisconsin | 10,000 | 2,000 | already on | *finished | 0 | already on | Jun 1 | Sep 3 |
| Wyoming | 8,000 | 9,810 | already on | 3,500 | *already on | 0 | May 1 | Aug 25 |
| TOTAL STATES ON FOR PRESIDENT | 31 | 12 | 13 | 13 | ||||
"FULL PARTY REQ." is a procedure by which a new party can qualify before it chooses candidates; not every state has such a procedure. "Maybe On" for Reform means there is a qualified party which may affiliate itself with the Reform Party. * -- entry changed since last issue.
See this note about tables.
| STATE | SIGNATURES COLLECTED | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GREEN | WKR WRLD | COLLINS | SOCIALIST | SOC WKR | AIDS CURE | GRASSR | SOC EQUAL | |
| Alabama | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | *200 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Alaska | already on | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Arizona | *300 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | *250 | 0 |
| Arkansas | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| California | already on | maybe on | *4,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Colorado | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Connecticut | *200 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Delaware | (reg.) 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | (reg) 3 | *(reg) 5 | 0 | 0 |
| D.C. | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start |
| Florida | *3,000 | 0 | *7,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Georgia | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Hawaii | already on | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Idaho | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Illinois | *100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Indiana | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Iowa | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kansas | 0 | 0 | *500 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kentucky | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Louisiana | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Maine | already on | *too late | *too late | *too late | *too late | *too late | *too late | *too late |
| Maryland | *500 | *6,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Massachsts. | *100 | 13,000 | 0 | *100 | 0 | 0 | *100 | 0 |
| Michigan | 300 | already on | 0 | already on | 0 | 0 | 0 | *36,000 |
| Minnesota | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start |
| Mississippi | 0 | 0 | *50 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Missouri | *50 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Montana | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nebraska | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Nevada | 500 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| New Hampshire | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| New Jersey | *200 | *finished | 0 | *400 | *400 | 0 | 0 | *300 |
| New Mexico | already on | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| New York | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start |
| North Carolina | 200 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| North Dakota | 50 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ohio | 0 | *3,500 | 0 | 0 | 0 | *500 | 0 | 0 |
| Oklahoma | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Oregon | already on | 0 | 0 | already on | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Pennsylvania | *2,200 | 0 | *100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Rhode Island | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start |
| South Carolina | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| South Dakota | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Tennessee | 30 | 0 | 0 | *20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Texas | *too late | *too late | *too late | *too late | *too late | *too late | *too late | *too late |
| Utah | 150 | 0 | 0 | 0 | *300 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Vermont | 0 | 0 | 0 | already on | 0 | 0 | already on | 0 |
| Virginia | *1,500 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Washington | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start |
| West Virginia | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Wisconsin | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start | can't start |
| Wyoming | 800 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| STATES ON | 6 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
American is on in Utah. Prohibition is on in Tennessee and has *200 in Utah. * -- entry changed since last issue. Green column includes all parties which support Ralph Nader, including Pacific in Oregon and Labor in Wyoming. "Can't start" entry in Minnesota & Wisconsin in this table refers to the candidate method, not the party method. "Collins" is independent candidate Charles Collins of Georgia.
The Best Party, which has been qualified since 1994, has told Hawaii state elections officials that it has dissolved itself. The party had been formed by former Honolulu Mayor Frank Fasi, as a vehicle for him to run for Governor. Since he polled over 10% of the vote in 1994, his party remained qualified; but Fasi didn't wish the party to continue to exist. Hawaii law lets parties dissolve themselves if they wish.
Several months ago, several ACT UP organizers formed the Aids Cure Party, and announced that it will run Steve Michaels for president and Anne Northrop for vice-president. Michaels is 40, a full-time political activist who lives in Washington, DC. Northrop, 48, is a television and print journalist, and lives in New York city.
On May 4, the Grassroots Party held a national convention by teleconference, and nominated Dennis Peron for president and Arlin Troutt for vice-president. Peron, 49, of San Francisco, is a full-time activist for the medical marijuana movement. Troutt, 40, of Arizona, is currently in federal prison for marijuana-related offenses.
The Workers World Party, which appeared on the New Mexico ballot in 1988 and 1992, would like to place its presidential candidate there in 1996. However, in 1995 the legislature moved the petition deadline from July to April, and the party wasn't able to petition by the new deadline. It has obtained an attorney to file a lawsuit against the deadline, and the lawsuit is likely to win. New parties in New Mexico nominate by convention, not primary; so there is no good reason for the new deadline.
However, the party lacks funds to circulate the petition. Anyone who would like to donate to a fund for that petition, which would make the lawsuit possible, is welcome to do so. Write Workers World Campaign, 55 W. 17th St, New York NY 10011.
On April 30, attorneys for the Reform Party asked the FEC whether the party may receive general election funding for the 1996 election (over $25,000,000) if it nominates someone other than Ross Perot for president in 1996. Under a 1984 FEC ruling, the party may receive such funding in 1996 if it nominates Perot.
The party turned in 154,538 signatures to qualify in North Carolina, triple the requirement. It also turned in about 170,000 signatures on an independent candidate petition for Perot in Texas. It didn't submit a party petition in Texas. The party will go to court, to force Texas let it substitute a new nominee for Perot, if the party nominates someone other than Perot. The party says it didn't qualify as a party in Texas because it perceived the rules for new party conventions to be so complicated, that it worried that its ballot status could have been jeopardized.
Former Colorado Governor Richard Lamm has said he is not interested in the party's presidential nomination, although he is friendly to the party and will speak at the California state convention of the party on June 1.
COFOE is the Coalition for Free & Open Elections. It is a coalition of most of the nation's nationally-organized third political parties. Parties which join COFOE pay dues of $100 per year, and may place a representative on the COFOE board, which meets in New York city. Individuals are urged to become COFOE members. COFOE coordinates lobbying and has filed lawsuits to assist voters to be able to vote for third party and independent candidates. Members of COFOE automatically receive Ballot Access News.
Anyone who seeks information about changes in the initiative process, and about statewide initiative petitions in circulation, should consider subscribing to TIPS, a monthly newsletter which costs $36 per year. "TIPS" stands for "The Initiative Press and Seminars". Write Box 1100, Carson City NV 89702-1100.