OREGON VOTERS DEFEAT TOP-TWO 68%-32%
OPPONENTS WERE OUTSPENT FOUR TO ONE, BUT STILL PREVAILED

On November 4, Oregon voters defeated the top-two initiative by a margin of 68.2% "No" to 31.8% "Yes." This is the greatest margin of defeat for any top-two ballot measure in any state. In no county did it get as much as 38% of the vote. Among the seven statewide initiatives on the ballot, it polled the lowest share of the vote.

The ballot presented Measure 90 this way: "Changes general election nomination processes: provides for single primary ballot listing candidates; top two advance."

Then, in smaller print, "Result of ‘yes’ Vote: ‘Yes’ vote replaces general election nomination processes for most partisan offices; all candidates listed on one single primary ballot; two advance to general election ballot.

Result of ‘no’ vote: ‘No’ vote retains current general election nomination processes, including party primaries for major parties; separate primary ballots; multiple candidates can appear on general election ballots."

The other votes on top-two measures have had these results:

California 2004: "No" 54.0%.

Washington 2004: "Yes" 59.8%.

Oregon 2008: "No" 65.9%.

California 2010: "Yes" 53.7%.

Arizona 2012: "No" 66.9%.

More money was spent on the Oregon 2014 measure than in any past top-two measure in any state. Proponents spent $5,600,000. Opponents spent $1,500,000.

Former New York city Mayor Michael Bloomberg contributed $2,130,000. Texas billionaire John Arnold contributed $2,750,000. Various business corporations contributed $400,000.

Other large contributors to the "yes" side were: Oregon Assn. of Hospitals & Health Administrators $60,000; Nike, Inc. $50,000; Automobile Dealers Assn. of Portland $50,000; Oregon Restaurant & Lodging Assn. $25,000; Oregon Auto Dealers Services $25,000; Esco Corp. $20,000; Portland General Electric $15,000; Bank of America $10,000.

The "Yes" campaign ran 2,500 television ads at a cost of $1,200,000. It also sent two pieces of postal mail to every Oregon voter, ran many internet ads, radio ads, and made robocalls. One mailer said, "An Important Message from Independent Voters of Oregon. No one should have to join a political party in order to vote." The other said, "Measure 90 = More Democracy. Over 650,000 of us – independent voters – are shut out of our primary elections." (note: Oregon has 518,482 independent voters; the "Yes" campaign figure includes minor party members as well as independents).

The "Yes" campaign also rang doorbells, and used a billboard truck bearing the message, "Legalize Democracy; Yes on Measure 90."

The "Yes" campaign was endorsed by these newspapers: The Oregonian, the Daily Astorian, The Register-Guard, The Hillsdale News, Portland Tribune, Ashland Daily Tidings, The Bend Bulletin, Willamette Week, Yamhill Valley News-Register, Klamath Falls Herald & News, Medford Mail Tribune, Albany Democrat-Herald, Corvallis Gazette-Times.

"Yes" was also endorsed by both major party candidates for Governor, the Oregon Business Council, the Oregon Farm Bureau, the Oregon Chamber of Commerce, Associated Oregon Industries, and the Oregon Business Association.

The "Yes" campaign set up a phony web site, votenoon90.com, which carried the slogan "Keep the riffraff out of OUR elections". The campaign also placed phony "No" arguments in the State Voters Pamphlet.

The "No" Campaign

The opponents sent three mail pieces to every voter, and spent $230,000 on 414 television ads. Newspapers that endorsed the "no" side were the Salem Statesman-Journal, Portland Mercury, Coos Bay World, Grants Pass Daily Courier, The Skanner, and Eugene Weekly. The "No" side got most of its contributions from labor unions. The "No" web page was saveourdemocracy.org.

The Green, Progressive, Libertarian, and Constitution Parties were strongly against the measure, and much of the "no" campaign emphasized that Measure 90 would keep virtually all candidates from these parties off the general election ballot. The "no" campaign emphasized how top-two had worked in practice in California and Washington.

Activist Mark Frohnmayer, who supported Measure 90, wrote the day after the election, "Choice Should be Maximized in the November election, when the most voters participate. Currently (and under Measure 90), the field of candidates is narrowed in May – at an election when many fewer people are paying attention and in which many voters are currently not allowed to participate. This creates a non-representative ‘culling’, forces candidates to run two campaigns and raise two elections worth of cash, and increases the influence of money."

Frohnmayer’s statement, acknowledging flaws in the top-two concept, is a hopeful sign. Supporters and opponents will both gain if 2015 provides a chance for dialogue.

Preliminary turnout data for the November 2014 election shows that only 36.2% of the potential electorate cast a vote. "Potential electorate" means registered voters plus people who aren’t registered but who could register. This is the lowest turnout for a congressional election since 1942.

Many states set the ballot access requirements as a percentage of the last vote cast. Because turnout in most states in 2014 was unusually low, the petition requirements for 2016 are easier than they had been in 2012.

Here are some of the states in which the number of signatures for 2016 is significantly lower than in 2012.

~	2012	2016
Ala. party	44,829	35,413
Az. party	23,041	20,119
Indiana	34,195	26,654
Nevada	7,013	5,431
N.M. party	3,009	2,565
N.M. indp.	18,053	15,388
Okla. party	51,739	41,242
S.D. party	7,928	6,936
S.D. indp.	3,171	2,775
Tenn. party	40,042	33,816
Wyo.	3,740	3,302

On November 10, a U.S. District Court invalidated Nebraska’s county distribution requirement for statewide initiatives. Bernbeck v Gale, 8:13cv-228. The basis is the Equal Protection Clause of the 14^th amendment. Counties are very unequal in population. The law required signatures to be collected from 38 counties, which gives voters living in small counties more power to qualify an initiative than the voters in populous counties.

An initiative petition is circulating in Maine for ranked choice voting for all partisan federal and state office except President. The petition is already over halfway completed. If it is finished by mid-January, then the measure will receive a vote in November 2015. Otherwise it will be on the November 2016 ballot.

The Maine League of Women Voters supports the idea, and has the text of the measure on its web page. Most Maine gubernatorial elections in the past few decades have resulted in the election of someone who got less than 50% of the vote.

The last time a statewide initiative for ranked choice voting was on the ballot was in Alaska in 2002, but the measure was defeated, 36%-64%.

On November 7, the Tenth Circuit ruled 3-0 that Kansas and Arizona cannot require the U.S. Election Assistance Commission to modify the federal voter registration forms that are used in those two states. Kobach v U.S. Election Assistance Commission, 14-3062. The decision reverses the decision of the U.S. District Court in Kansas.

The federal voter registration forms, which have existed since 1993, ask applicants to sign under penalty of perjury that they are citizens. The two states felt that isn’t good enough, and wanted the federal forms altered to require applicants to attach proof of citizenship. The basis for the Tenth Circuit decision is that the U.S. Election Assistance Commission already held extensive hearings into whether or not the original federal form provides enough protection against fraud. The record amounts to thousands of pages of evidence. The three judges were Carlos Lucero, a Clinton appointee; Jerome Holmes, a Bush Jr. appointee; and Gregory Phillips, an Obama appointee.

Indiana: on November 20, election officials agreed that section 3-14-1-2(a) of the election code is unconstitutional. U.S. District Court Judge Sarah Evans Barker then issued a judgment that the law is void. The law makes it illegal for a candidate to show a picture or a name of a candidate in his or her campaign literature, without getting written permission from that individual and filing it with the local government. Mulholland v Marion Co. Election Board, s.d., 1:12cv-1502.

Kentucky: on October 29, U.S. District Court Judge Amol Thapar enjoined a state law that forbids judicial candidates from "campaigning as a member of a political organization." Winter v Wolnitzek, e.d., 2:14cv-119.

Missouri: on November 4, U.S. District Court Judge Rodney Sippel ordered St. Louis city election officials not to confiscate campaign literature of independent candidate Jennifer Florida. She was running for Recorder of Deeds and her literature described herself as an "independent Democrat." The officials felt it would deceive the voters for an independent candidate to describe herself as associated that way. Florida v Bd. of Election Commissioners, e.d., 4:14cv-1840.

Kentucky law does not permit anyone to run simultaneously for two offices. U.S. Senator Rand Paul is up for re-election in 2016, and he wants to run for President as well as for re-election to the Senate that year.

The Kentucky Senate has a Republican majority, and it passed a bill this year to permit individuals to run simultaneously for President (or Vice-President) and another office. But the House has a Democratic majority, and refused to pass the bill. At the November 4 election, Democrats kept their House majority, 53-47.

Alabama: on November 13, U.S. District Court Judge Myron Thompson heard Hall v Bennett, m.d., 2:13cv-663. The issue is whether the state must reduce the petition burden, or extend the deadline, in special elections for U.S. House. The state requires approximately 6,000 signatures for independents and minor party candidates, and in special elections there is little time to collect them. The hearing went fairly well.

Alabama (2): on November 22, the Eleventh Circuit heard Stein v Bennett, 13-15556, over the March petition deadline for newly-qualifying parties in presidential election years. The judges are Stanley Marcus, Joel Dubina, and Frank Hull. It is difficult to predict what the panel will do.

Arizona: the Ninth Circuit will hear Arizona Libertarian Party v Bennett on January 29, 2015, in Tucson. The issue is whether the state may continue to list only the two largest parties on the voter registration form, even though the Libertarian Party is also a qualified party. Voters who wish to register "Libertarian" must write that word in the "other" category, in a space that is less than one inch long. The Green Party is a plaintiff but is no longer on the ballot, but it hopes to be back soon.

California: the State Court of Appeals in San Francisco will hear Rubin v Bowen on January 15. This is the minor party lawsuit against the top-two system.

Nevada: the state and the Green Party have agreed to suspend the Green Party’s lawsuit against the April petition deadline for newly-qualifying parties until June. Between now and June, both sides hope the legislature will ease the deadline.

New York: on October 24, a mid-level state court reversed a lower court and put Libertarian State Senate nominee Gigi Bowman on the ballot. The issue was whether she had enough valid signatures or not. On October 27 the state’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, agreed that she should be on the ballot.

This case is noteworthy not so much over the issue itself (which is fairly mundane), but because the courts were willing to act so soon before the election. Suffolk County’s election authorities were forced to reprint the ballots for Bowman’s State Senate district. Wilson v Bowman, 2014-1108.

The Man Without a Face: the Unlikely Rise of Vladimir Putin, by Masha Gessen, hard cover, 314 pages, 2012.

Masha Gessen is a Russian journalist. This book tells how Russia was transformed from a shaky democracy into a dictatorship between 1999 and 2012. It is of special interest to those interested in ballot access law. It explains how the Russian government suppressed free elections by implementing severe ballot access laws, and those severe laws were based on ideas from the United States.

Chapter Eight, "The Dismantling of Democracy", describes the 2004 ballot access law for presidential elections. Parties could not nominate a presidential candidate unless they had a meeting of at least 500 people, who first had to go before a notary to verify who they were and that they were in attendance. All 500 people had to be in attendance simultaneously, for approximately eight hours.

This idea may have been based on Oregon’s law, requiring 1,000 people at a meeting simultaneously to nominate a presidential candidate. Officials from the Secretary of State office were present at such meetings to verify that all 1,000 people were there simultaneously, and that they all signed in, and were all registered voters. Ralph Nader in 2004 attempted this method, but because not everyone was there simultaneously, the meeting was deemed insufficient and he did not appear on the ballot. There were also instances when persons opposed to Nader attended the meeting in order to fill up seats.

Chapter Eight then explains that the successful presidential nomination process was just the beginning. Then the party had to obtain 2,000,000 signatures in a short period of time. The book says, "Hundreds of thousands of signatures were thrown out by the Central Election Commission because of violations such as the use of ‘St. Petersburg’ instead of ‘Saint Petersburg’ or the failure to write out the words ‘building’ or ‘apartment’ in the address line."

Nevertheless, Russian presidential elections have had more than one candidate on the ballot in the recent period. Chapter Eleven, "Back to the USSR" explains that Russia’s governing party always groomed particular "rival" parties to nominate someone who would not actively campaign. The government then helped these dummy parties get on the ballot. Chapter Eleven describes one of these dummy parties, which nominated Mikhail Prokhorov as its presidential candidate. The book says, "Prokhorov had been solicited on behalf of the president and the prime minister to take the reins of a foundering right-liberal political party."

Prokhorov, one of Russia’s richest men, then decided to do everything he could to strengthen his party and to make a real run for the presidency. The book describes how, on September 14, 2011, Prokhorov found himself locked out of his own party’s scheduled congress, along with the best activists he had recruited. He remained in the race as an independent candidate, but his campaign had been crippled.

The book tells of Putin’s rise to power and how he came to be worth $40 billion. It is a fascinating but depressing book, although the last chapter shows that many Russians are fighting the regime through massive street protests, being held just as the book was going to press in 2012.

Many Russian journalists who have tried to expose government wrong-doing in Russia were later murdered, or driven out of the country. Although Gessen was still living in Moscow when the book was published, she now lives in New York.

~	Dem.	Rep.	Indp, misc	Lib’t.	Green	Consti.	Wk Fam	Am. Elect	other
Alaska	70,528	136,131	276,731	7,182	1,785	212	?	?	17,276
Arizona	936,417	1,114,713	1,157,811	26,589	?	?	?	433	– –
Calif.	7,708,683	5,005,422	4,294,807	120,804	110,511	355	?	3,922	559,319
Colorado	913,246	966,082	1,063,724	26,746	9,073	7,349	?	?	142
Conn.	710,579	405,795	813,186	1,754	1,664	0	290	0	10
Delaware	305,264	179,970	150,205	1,116	669	366	519	0	3,913
Dt. Col.	347,639	27,785	76,140	401	3,633	?	?	?	– –
Florida	4,628,178	4,172,232	2,778,547	23,665	5,901	1,142	?	?	321,868
Idaho	64,492	288,674	394,896	3,856	?	1,922	?	?	– –
Iowa	602,048	620,353	703,298	4,632	1,517	0	0	0	– –
Kansas	426,970	777,771	527,132	12,993	0	0	0	0	0
Kentucky	1,682,517	1,219,002	239,845	4,418	925	287	?	?	160
Louis’na	1,373,150	812,678	733,622	10,478	2,033	185	0	593	2,234
Maine	307,567	261,624	356,597	?	38,180	?	?	?	– –
Maryland	2,047,381	956,951	700,610	14,771	8,541	?	?	?	– –
Mass.	1,518,791	469,264	2,293,637	10,920	6,727	96	8	?	1,675
Nebraska	357,899	559,494	235,984	5,708	?	?	?	?	– –
Nevada	482,198	420,162	230,931	9,739	2,314	56,628	?	?	– –
N. Hamp.	239,166	271,561	383,841	?	?	?	?	?	– –
N. Jersey	1,795,698	1,081,086	2,611,174	2,490	1,302	174	?	?	778
N. Mex.	600,540	401,337	275,912	3,129	4,807	150	?	0	1,895
N. York	5,839,259	2,773,210	2,476,428	5,376	25,212	?	48,678	?	638,685
No. Car.	2,767,454	2,012,548	1,821,595	25,651	?	?	?	?	– –
Okla.	884,150	881,253	257,045	?	?	?	?	8	– –
Oregon	825,778	653,507	539,759	17,126	10,270	3,519	9,262	330	106,519
Pennsyl.	4,088,149	3,030,017	1,085,108	47,501	15,242	1,422	?	?	– –
Rhode Is.	282,395	74,296	323,670	?	?	?	?	?	1,789
So. Dak.	175,998	240,403	102,342	1,373	?	589	?	8	– –
Utah	113,770	595,056	514,969	7,168	1,500	3,551	?	?	4,916
W. Va.	607,380	353,480	235,704	1,854	1,550	179	?	?	– –
Wyo.	52,341	176,819	33,600	1,862	?	308	?	?	– –
TOTAL	30,938,676	30,938,676	27,688,850	399,302	253,267	78,434	58,757	5,294	1,661,179
Percent	41.17%	29.79%	26.67	.38	.24%	.08%	.06%	.005%	1.60%

Totals March 2014 were: Dem. 42,468,708 (41.45%); Rep. 30,615,503 (29.88%); indp. & misc. 26,996,241 (26.35%); Libt. 368,561 (.36%); Green 248,189 (.24%); Consti. 76,425 (.07%); Wk. Fam. 54,014 (.05%); other parties 1,624,742 (1.59%).

Totals October 2012 were: Dem. 43,512,746 (41.85%), Rep. 31,298,863 (30.10%), indp. & misc. 26,808,810 (25.79%), Libt. 330,811 (.32%), Green 250,682 (.24%), Constitution 77,918 (.07%), Reform 22,880 (.02%), Americans Elect 6,408 (.01%), other parties 1,659,537 (1.60%).

Totals October 2008 were: Dem. 43,933,901 (43.62%), Rep. 30,944,590 (30.72%), indp. & misc. 24,157,259 (23.98%), AIP/Constitution 438,222 (.44%), Green 255,019 (.25%), Libt. 240,328 (.24%), Reform 32,961 (.03%), other parties 675,980 (.67%).

Totals October 2004 were: Dem. 37,301,951 (42.19%), Rep. 28,988,593 (32.79%), Indp. & misc. 20,471,250 (23.15%), Constitution 320,019 (.36%), Green 298,701 (.34%), Libt. 235,521 (.27%), Reform 63,729 (.07%), Natural Law 39,670 (.04%), other parties 695,639 (.79%).

Totals October 2000 were: Dem. 38,529,264 (43.84%), Rep. 28,813,511 (32.78%), indp. & misc. 18,999,126 (21.62%), Constitution 348,977 (.40%), Libt. 224,713 (.26%), Green 193,332 (.22%), Reform 99,408 (.11%), Natural Law 61,405 (.07%), other parties 620,668 (.71%).

Totals October 1992 were: Dem. 35,616,630 (47.76%), Rep. 24,590,383 (32.97%), indp. & misc. 13,617,167 (18.26%), Green 102,557 (.14%), Libertarian 100,394 (.13%), other parties 554,668 (.74%).

Breakdown of "Other Parties" in the October 2014 chart: Alaska: Alaskan Independence 16,153; Veterans 1,121; Twelve Visons 2. California: American Independent 480,677; Peace & Freedom 78,642. Colorado: Unity. Connecticut: Reform. Delaware: Independent Party 3,678; Socialist Workers 151; Reform 84. Florida: America’s Party 607; Ecology 191; Socialist Workers 100; Independence 49,112; Independent Party 268,358; Justice 86; Party of Socialism & Liberation 127; Peace & Freedom 306; Reform 1,717; Tea 1,264. Kentucky: Reform 89; Socialist Workers 71. Louisiana: Reform 1,436; Conservative 720; Socialist 78. Massachusetts: American Independent 802; Conservative 252; Pirate 129; Prohibition 10; Reform 153; Socialist 240; Twelve Visions 6; United Independent 83. New Jersey: Conservative 667; Reform 65; Natural Law 36; Socialist 10. New Mexico: Independent American. New York: Conservative 157,073; Independence 481,612. Oregon: Independent Party 104,477; Progressive 2,042. Rhode Island: Moderate. Utah: Independent American.

STATE	REQUIREMENTS		SIGNATURES OR REGIS. OBTAINED			DEADLINES
	FULL PARTY	CAND	LIB’T	GREEN	CONSTI	Full Party	Pres Party	Pres. Indp.
Ala.	35,413	5,000	0	0	0	Mar. 8	Mar. 8	Sep. 6
Alaska	(est) (reg) 8,400	#3,005	already on	1,785	212	May 2	Aug. 10	Aug. 10
Ariz.	20,119	(est) #36,000	already on	finished	0	March 3	Sep. 9	Sep. 9
Ark.	10,000	#1,000	0	0	0	Jan. 4	Aug. 1	Aug. 1
Calif.	(es) (reg) 61,000	178,039	already on	already on	355	Jan. 4	July 11	Aug. 12
Colo.	(reg) 1,000	#pay $500	already on	already on	already on	Jan. 8	Aug. 10	Aug. 10
Conn.	no procedure	#7,500	can’t start	can’t start	can’t start	– –	Aug. 10	Aug. 10
Del.	(est.) (reg) 650	(est.) 6,500	already on	already on	366	Aug. 23	Aug. 23	July 15
D.C.	no procedure	(est.) #4,600	can’t start	already on	can’t start	– –	Aug. 10	Aug. 10
Florida	be organized	119,316	already on	already on	already on	April 15	Sep. 3	July 15
Georgia	51,912	#49,336	already on	can’t start	can’t start	July 12	July 12	July 12
Hawaii	707	#4,347	already on	already on	0	Feb. 24	Aug. 10	Aug. 10
Idaho	13,047	1,000	already on	can’t start	already on	Aug. 30	Aug. 30	Aug. 24
Illinois	no procedure	#25,000	can’t start	can’t start	can’t start	– –	June 27	June 27
Indiana	no procedure	#26,654	already on	0	0	– –	July 1	July 1
Iowa	no procedure	#1,500	0	0	0	– –	Aug. 19	Aug. 19
Kansas	16,960	5,000	already on	0	0	June 1	June 1	Aug. 1
Ky.	no procedure	#5,000	can’t start	can’t start	can’t start	– –	Sep. 2	Sep. 2
La.	(reg) 1,000	#pay $500	already on	already on	185	May 21	Aug. 19	Aug. 19
Maine	(reg) 5,000	#4,000	0	already on	0	Dec 1 2015	Aug. 1	Aug. 1
Md.	10,000	(est.) 38,000	already on	15,000	0	Aug. 1	Aug. 1	Aug. 1
Mass.	(est) (reg) 45,000	#10,000	10,920	already on	96	Feb. 2	Aug. 2	Aug. 2
Mich.	31,519	30,000	already on	already on	already on	July 21	July 21	July 21
Minn.	98,770	#2,000	0	0	0	May 2	Aug. 23	Aug. 23
Miss.	be organized	1,000	already on	already on	already on	Feb. 1	Aug. 31	Sep. 9
Mo.	10,000	10,000	already on	0	already on	July 25	July 25	July 25
Mont.	5,000	#5,000	already on	0	0	Mar. 17	Aug. 17	Aug. 17
Nebr.	5,395	2,500	already on	0	0	Aug. 1	Aug. 1	Aug. 1
Nev.	5,431	5,431	already on	300	already on	in court	in court	July 8
N. Hamp.	14,556	#3,000	0	0	0	Aug. 10	Aug. 10	Aug. 10
N.J.	no procedure	#800	0	0	0	– –	Aug. 1	Aug. 1
N. M.	2,565	15,388	already on	already on	already on	June 27	June 27	June 27
N.Y.	no procedure	#15,000	can’t start	already on	can’t start	– –	Aug. 23	Aug. 23
No. Car.	89,366	89,366	already on	0	0	May 16	May 16	June 9
No. Dak.	7,000	#4,000	already on	0	0	Apr. 16	Sep. 5	Sep. 5
Ohio	(est) 31,000	5,000	in court	already on	0	July 6	July 6	Aug. 10
Okla.	41,242	40,047	0	0	0	March 1	July 15	July 15
Oregon	(est.) 22,300	17,893	already on	already on	already on	Aug. 30	Aug. 30	Aug. 30
Penn.	no procedure	(es) #25,000	can’t start	can’t start	can’t start	– –	Aug. 1	Aug. 1
R.I.	16,203	#1,000	0	0	0	Aug. 1	Sep. 9	Sep. 9
So. Car.	10,000	10,000	already on	already on	already on	May 8	May 8	July 15
So. Dak.	6,936	2,775	0	0	0	Mar. 29	Mar. 29	Aug. 2
Tenn.	33,816	275	0	0	0	Aug. 10	Aug. 10	Aug. 18
Texas	47,086	79,939	already on	already on	can’t start	May 16	May 16	June 24
Utah	2,000	#1,000	already on	0	already on	Feb. 15	Aug. 15	Aug. 15
Vermont	be organized	#1,000	already on	0	0	Dec 31 ‘15	Aug. 1	Aug. 1
Virginia	no procedure	#5,000	can’t start	can’t start	can’t start	– –	Aug. 26	Aug. 26
Wash.	no procedure	#1,000	can’t start	can’t start	can’t start	– –	July 23	July 23
West Va.	no procedure	#6,705	already on	already on	500	– –	Aug. 1	Aug. 1
Wisc.	10,000	#2,000	already on	already on	already on	April 1	Aug. 2	Aug. 2
Wyo.	3,302	3,302	already on	can’t start	already on	June 1	June 1	Aug. 30
TOTAL STATES ON			30	19	13	“	“	“

#partisan label is permitted on the ballot (other than "independent").
"LIB’T" = Libertarian Party
"CONSTI" = Constitution Party.
The number of signatures for new parties is in court in Ohio and Tennessee; for independents, in New Mexico.

On November 4, Bill Walker, independent candidate, was elected Governor of Alaska. He had been endorsed by former Governor Sarah Palin, and he defeated the incumbent Republican Governor, Sean Parnell.

It has become the norm that every two years, an independent wins either a U.S. Senate race or a gubernatorial race. In 2012, two independents were elected to the Senate, from Maine and Vermont. In 2010 an independent was elected Governor of Rhode Island. In 2006, two independents were elected to the Senate, from Connecticut and Vermont.

On November 4, fourteen independents were elected to state legislatures. In Alabama, Harri Anne Smith was re-elected to the Senate. In Alaska, Dan Ortiz to the House. In Georgia, Rusty Kidd to the House. In Maine, Joseph Brooks, James Campbell, Ben Chipman, and Jeffrey Evangelos were re-elected to the House. In Rhode Island, Edward O’Neill was re-elected to the Senate and Blake Filippi elected to the House. In Vermont, Alyson Eastman, Barbara S. Murphy, Paul Poirier, Adam Greshin, and Laura Sibilia were elected or re-elected to the House.

In Massachusetts, the United Independent Party polled 3.3% for Governor, above the 3% threshold for party status. In New York, two new parties that are actually controlled by the major parties met the 50,000 vote test and will be qualified for four years. They are the Women’s Equality Party, controlled by Democrats; and the Stop Common Core Party, controlled by Republicans. The Independent American Party of Utah polled over 2% for Attorney General, so will be on for four more years.

Progressive Party: elected eight state legislators: David Zuckerman and Anthony Pollina to the Senate; and Christopher Pearson, Diana Gonzalez, Susan Hatch Davis, Robin Chesnut-Tangerman, Mollie Burke, and Sandy Haas to the House. This doesn’t count two other legislators who chose to be listed on the ballot as "Democratic, Progressive." In Vermont, candidates generally list the party they consider themselves a member of first.

Constitution Party: re-elected Ronnie Broughton to the Webster Parish, Louisiana School Board. Also, Randy Fontenot will probably win for Police Chief of Eunice, Louisiana, at the December 6 run-off. He polled 40.8% on November 4, not enough to avoid a run-off, but he will be in the run-off with a Democrat who got 23% in November.

Libertarian Party: elected Jacob Faught Constable of Benton County, Ark., township 5; re-elected Cheryl Heacox to the Clay Township Board in Wayne County, Indiana; re-elected Stephen Coffman to the Liberty Township Board in Henry County, Indiana; elected Tracey Roberts Magistrate of Marshall County, Ky.; elected Shannon Denniston Magistrate of Montgomery County, Ky.; elected William McBride to the Washington, Louisiana town council; elected Henry Herford Constable in Justice of the Peace district one in Franklin Parish, La.; elected Justin Bonnette Justice of the Peace in ward six of Vernon Parish, La.

The last BAN listed states that held inclusive debates for Governor or U.S. Senate. It did not list the October 29 Delaware Senate debate that included the Green Party nominee, because it was held after the issue had been printed. Adding Delaware to the list means that 23 of the 38 states that held candidate debates for the offices mentioned above had inclusive debates. "Inclusive" means at least one minor party or independent participated. By contrast, in 2010 there were 25 states with inclusive debates.