Fort Wayne, Indiana Newspaper Condemns Indiana Ballot Access Law

This editorial from the Fort Wayne, Indiana, News-Sentinel, is a remarkably well-informed attack on Indiana’s ballot access laws. One point the editorial could have made, and didn’t, is that no one has successfully completed a statewide independent or minor petition in Indiana since 2000. Indiana is one of only five states in which Ralph Nader has never appeared on the ballot. Thanks to Mitch Harper for the link.


Fort Wayne, Indiana Newspaper Condemns Indiana Ballot Access Law — No Comments

  1. I’m from Indiana and the state increased the percentage from one-half of one percent to two percent because the American Party made it twice in a row, and got automatic ballot access for the next four years, and the Libertarian Party was getting ready to join them. P.S. Mitch Harper is with the local GOP.

  2. I had been told that the bill to quadruple the number of signatures (which passed in 1980, but wasn’t effective until 1983) was because some independent candidate got on the ballot for Mayor of Gary in 1979, and that offended some powerful state legislator. In fact I think it was Mitch Harper who told me that.

  3. Not surprising Richard since that appears to be the mindset of so many of our state legislators. That was the reason HB1310 was introduced in the previous legislative session in Missouri as SB409. A former Republican and Ashcroft appointee ran for the State Senate causing them to attack Indies with this nonsense bill.

    With assurances gathered from supportive legislators this year, Missouri may not have to face such a petty and vindictive bill again. We will see.

  4. The mayoral race that sparked the increase in the ballot access requirements was in Michigan City, Indiana.

    A member of the legislature and former Sheriff was running for the Democratic nomination for mayor of Michigan City and had to contend with a strong – but ultimately unsuccessful – primary challenger.

    The primary challenger’s campaign manager then became an independent candidate for mayor in the fall.

    In the following session, the other legislator from Michigan City introduced the bill to raise the signature level.

    Fellow state representative Jim Jontz and myself were the most vocal opponents of the change.

    You may read more at:

  5. Ironic that, at the end of the article, they reference the singularly bizarre gubernatorial recall election in California in 2003 as an example of what a ballot shouldn’t look like. Ordinary gubernatorial races there don’t resemble that circus in the slightest, and Californians don’t seem to have any trouble dealing with six parties statewide (Republican, Democratic, Green, Libertarian, Peace & Freedom, American Independent) on a regular basis. I grew up near New York State and, even as a child, was quite accustomed to seing sample ballots in the New York Times listing one party after another year after year….Republican, Democratic, Liberal, Conservative, Free Libertarian, Communist, Socialist Workers, Right To Life, and on and on.

    These arguments are all obviously hogwash and it’s offensive that state legislators can actually state them with a straight face.

  6. It would be good for us to come to a consesus and then communicate with the legislature our desires. I think that 5,000 signatures for a Presidential/Senate candidate would be fair and 1,000 signatures for the House of Reps. If they need it to be more complicated, then perhaps we could condescend to making sure at least 400 sigs came from each of the 9 districts (in the statewide races). Lastly, why do we seek to make sure all nations are democratic (when we are a Republic) and have free people and free elections when we do not seek that in our own nation?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *