Cathy Stewart, Coordinator of the New York City Independence Party, Responds to New York Daily News Criticism of the Party

On December 12, Cathy Stewart, coordinator of the New York City Independence Party, issued this detailed explanation of how the party goes about finding members for its local committees in New York city. The response is fascinating because it shows how much work is involved in maintaining an active party in New York and other states in which party members in each precinct have the right to elect party officers. Probably no party, other than the Democrats and Republicans, has such an extensive list of elected party officers.

The leading activists of the New York city Independence Party do this hard work because it is the only way they can maintain control over the New York city Independence Party, given that the state Independence Party officers are hostile to the New York city officers. The state officers of the party would dearly love to take control of the city party, but they can’t because the city party activists out-organize them.

Control of the New York city party is important because it determines who can run in the party’s primaries for the three citywide partisan offices, especially Mayor. New York city holds such elections this year.


Cathy Stewart, Coordinator of the New York City Independence Party, Responds to New York Daily News Criticism of the Party — 8 Comments

  1. NO need for ANY of the party hack stuff.

    P.R. and nonpartisan App.V. — especially in the New York state and city ANTI-Democracy gerrymander regimes.

  2. after years of litigating the IPNY, non-affiliated voters party, and the opportunity to ballot party in both state and federal courts, there is only one way under current NYS Election Law to cure this disease — “blanket primary party” combining most of the prior independent and eventual ballot access IPNY allowing non-enrolled voter participation.

    any enrolled voter will be allowed to fully participate in the new BPP which will only use OTB petitioning for candidate selection. The OTB primary victor will appear on the General Election Ballot —

    Cathy Stewart & Co. will be invited to attempt to crack this political safe along with the GOP and Dems was well as Conservative Party etc. But mostly the BPP will offer registered non-enrolleds the option to nominate for every office in every election — including federal offices representing NYS.

  3. The New York state Independence Party could theoretically file some constitutional lawsuits, which would probably win. If the state Independence Party wanted to nominate candidates for State Supreme Court Justice by direct primary, and passed a party bylaw saying so, and then if it were to sue, under the various US Supreme Court party rights precedents, New York state would probably lose the case. Unfortunately, the state leaders of the Independence Party, who have the power to do this, don’t seem interested. Under current law, all New York qualified parties elect delegates to conventions, and the conventions nominate party nominees for Supreme Court Justice. In New York, Supreme Court Justices are elected in partisan elections. The Working Families Party, and/or the Green Party, might also consider such a plan. Under existing practices, the New York state party nominating conventions for Supreme Court Justices are shams, because the ballot access requirements for candidates to get on the primary ballot for delegate to these judicial nominating conventions are so difficult, only party leaders can ever obtain the signatures.

  4. Speaking of top two, apparently a chunk of the leadership of this party is pushing this scheme, which results in Democrats and Republicans being the only candidates on the ballot in any actual election (that is one where someone can get elected) in almost every case.

  5. Perot wanted UWSA (United We Stand American) to be the universal candidate (non-party) picking place starting with the 1994 congress.

    Sotomayor and panel (USCA2C) refused to grant an injunction keeping the parties (enrolled members) out of the dual role in NYS independent nominating petitioning and ergo ballot fusion.

    Even in NYC — the Dems, especially in the election of delagates to NYS Supreme court judicial nominating conventions — Blank Primary Party would satisfactorily solve both the Rosario v Rockefeller
    lock box enrollment issue and the corruption of party executive committees.

    U.S. Supreme Court

    Rosario v. Rockefeller, 410 U.S. 752 (1973)

    Rosario v. Rockefeller

    No. 71-1371

    Argued December 13, 1972

    Decided March 21, 1973

    410 U.S. 752

Leave a Reply

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