Florida Bill Relaxes Ban on Political Parties Nominating Someone Who Had Switched Parties Recently

Two identical Florida bills, HB 25 and SB 388, relax the existing law that restricts whom political parties may nominate. Existing law, since 2011, has told parties that they can’t nominate anyone who was a member of some other party during the year before the candidate filing deadline. The bills change that to provide that parties can’t nominate someone who was a member of another party at any time during the period six months before the general election.

Because of the existing severe restriction, a former state legislator, Nancy Argenziano, was forced to run for a seat in the State House last year as the nominee of the Independent Party. She wanted to run as a Democrat, but she was not permitted to do so because she had unknowingly and accidentally registered as a member of the Independent Party during 2011. She still did well in the November 2012 election, polling 42.03% in a two-person race as the Independent Party nominee.

HB 25 and SB 388 have many other election law provisions as well, including a relaxation of the severe requirements placed on organizations that conduct voter registration drives. Some of those restrictions were enjoined by a federal court last year. The existing law requires voter registration organizations to be subject to severe fines if they don’t submit a voter registration form to election officials within 48 hours of the voter having filled out that form.


Florida Bill Relaxes Ban on Political Parties Nominating Someone Who Had Switched Parties Recently — No Comments

  1. The psychology of plurality elections and single winner districts which attract self-centered and dictatorial control freaks who can only see is their own belly button in elections year after year.

    Pretty much all political parties take this tack, it’s the nature of proclaiming you are “the” answer for solutions; my way or no way. There’s only one, and it’s NOT everyone else, and the candidate pretty much states this as a fact of life.

    It’s self-defeating when candidates and organizers appear arrogant and self-centered like that, and the Ls in particular take pride in their holier than thou position – as though they alone support liberty and so now they can be mean jerks since they alone know it all.

    It can be funny. But it can also be damaging and wasteful when there is no team psychology and no attempt to connect with all voters as a whole.

    What is particularly amusing is the way ideas of unity, conciliation and teamwork are arrogantly attacked with such speed. Then when the election is over, and your toes have been blown off by your own gun before you ever pulled it out of your holster, you ask; “why?”.

    If you promote conflict you’ll reap conflict. If you promote equality, unity, liberty, teamwork and fairness for all, you’ll see more of that.

    I thought I’d give you the answer to your riddle that you’ve posed. You’re welcome.

    This message brought to you by 1st Secretary of the 9th USA Parliament James Ogle [Free Parliamentary], innovator and promoter of ranked choice consensus voting, the eballot, the parliamentary go-ahead and the Kahm-Sheehan maneuver.


    “Why do you THINK they called it Google?”

Leave a Reply

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