U.S. Senator Robert Bennett of Utah has been running for re-election this year. However, no one may get on a primary ballot in that state if the person does not show 35% support at a party endorsements convention. Bennett failed to get that much support at last week’s Republican convention, and thus he cannot get on the June 22 primary ballot.
On May 16, CNN’s “State of the Union” public affairs TV show interviewed Bennett. Hostess Candy Crowley asked him, “When can we call you up and get an answer to the question of whether you’re going to run as an independent?” Bennett’s answer was, “As soon as I make up my mind, you will be the second to know.” Here is the transcript. Bennett was on in the second half of the show.
Utah requires an independent (for office other than President) to submit a petition by March 15. If Bennett decided to run for re-election as an independent, he would need to win a lawsuit against that deadline. Getting the signatures would be no problem if it weren’t for the deadline, because only 1,000 are needed. As noted in earlier posts about Bennett, five circuits have invalidated deadlines for non-presidential independents that are as early as the deadline for candidates filing in a primary, and only one circuit has upheld such a deadline. Also the U.S. Supreme Court summarily affirmed a 3-judge district court against an Arkansas deadline in April, when the Arkansas primary at the time was in May.
Utah also has a “sore loser” law (for office other than President), and Bennett would need to overcome that law also. Although “sore loser” laws are constitutional for people who have lost a primary, there is no precedent on Utah’s type of sore loser law, which even applies to someone who has not run in a primary, but merely failed to get enough support at a preliminary party meeting.
Bennett is also free to be a declared write-in candidate in November. Elections officials would be horrified at the thought, however; write-in votes cost far more time and money to count than votes cast for someone on the ballot. Someone as popular as Bennett would, if he campaigned hard, undoubtedly receive tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of write-in votes. Thanks to Eric Garris for the link.
Please add the link to the transcript.
I’m still trying to figure out the 35% requirement. Do you mean that at least 35% is necessary to advance from the second round to the third round at the convention? (In the second round, one candidate had 37%, the other had 36%, and Bennett had 27%.)
Of course, there are two candidates in the third round. If one of those candidates got exactly the 60% needed to be nominated outright, the runner-up, to be sure, would have 40%.
Sounds like write-ins are the way to go then!
Bennett won’t run as an independent, I just can’t see that. The sore loser laws, the loss at the convention, the fact that he may STILL lose in the general if he wins these lawsuits.
I think he should run as an independent. He has a very good chance of getting substantial support from average republicans and moderate democrats in Utah. It will be an awakening against extremists on both sides.
I hope he (Bennett) goes for it, take Dem votes away from Obama supported candidate) and then loses very badly — but remembering watching Golisano, Pataki, Cuomo, (and LPNY Stern/Schulz 1994 NYS-Gov race I believe Bennett would probably set up a real opportunity for an independent wanna-be party to gain ballot access (although I certainly do not know Utah ballot access laws/rules) — LPUT
I really don’t care what happens to Bennett… he is just another turd politician. But if his running as an independent create an opportunity for another party to emerge then Run, Bob, Run!
While I probably am in disagreement with MOST of his votes he cast during his Senate career, I still would like to see him run as Independent or even write-in if he thought he might win.
I am for anything and anybody that will weaken if not destroy the 2 party monopoly we have in the United States. That system is the major cause of our financial, social, and political problems we face today.
Our Founding Fathers – and especially George Washington – cautioned us about the formation of political parties. They knew what would happen if groups of citizens became more interested in promoting the interests of the group rather than the needs of the citizenry as a whole. While it might take temporary coalitions in Congress or in the Legislatures to pass necessary legislation, such coalitions should not demand permanent loyalty for other issues.
Non-partisan government works well in many cities and it could work nationally and in the states. If coalitions become necessary for getting a majority vote, they should not be limited to just 2 parties. Proportional representation certainly has merit and instant runoff voting would make the electoral process more efficient.
But whatever, a 2 party domination of government needs to go.
Bennett could say the same thing that Joe Lieberman said in 2006: he wants to run as an independent because he wants to give ALL of the voters the opportunity to judge his ideas and his record.
Unlike Bennett, Lieberman actually got to run in a party primary.
Judging from what I’ve heard on talk radio, some people don’t know the difference between a convention and a primary.
Sorry, but a independent run would be stupid for him; unlike Crist, he’s way too Establishment to be seen as a genuine political rebel.
Bennett may be seen as “way too Establishment” as Cody Quirk thinks, but it is the fact that he would be running Independent is what is important. I would like to see more Establishment Democrats and Republicans break “party loyalty” and run Independent. This would be the best thing that could happen to our present political system.
#9: Sen. Joe Lieberman was re-elected in 2006 as an independent.
Was he NOT “way too Establishment”?
As for Crist, he’s the elected Republican governor who played up to President Obama when he thought it would help his popularity. If memory serves, Crist also ran a previous losing race for US senator as a Republican. The only reason he’s now running as an independent is because he knew he would lose the Republican primary.
What anti-establishment credentials does Crist have?
Steve:
I’m not as concerned right now about any “anti-establishment” credentials of Crist or anyone else leaving the Democratic or Republican party and running “Independent” as I am “anti-two party system” which has caused our problems in this nation.
You’re going to have an “establishment” of some sort in a multiple party sytem as you do in a two party system. But with a multiple party system, it’s not as entrenched and the people have a better chance to “throw the bums” out when it become necessary. Our two-party system protects the “bums.”