Idaho Secretary of State Says Darrell Castle Can’t be an Independent Presidential Candidate; Castle Asks for Reconsideration

On August 3, the Idaho Secretary of State wrote a letter to Darrell Castle, saying the office believes he is circulating an independent presidential petition, and warning him that if he submits the required 1,000 signatures by the August 24 deadline, the office will reject it because sec. 34-708A says that independent presidential candidates must declare that they have no political party affiliation. This law has existed since 1977, and yet always before it has been interpreted to refer to political party affiliation for Idaho parties, not national parties or parties in other states.

On August 10, Castle responded with this letter. Castle notes that John Anderson was permitted to be on the Idaho ballot as an independent in 1980, even though Anderson continued to list himself as a Republican in his Congressional Directory page all during 1980. Castle notes that Idaho let Jill Stein be an independent presidential candidate in 2012, even though at the time, and currently, she is a registered Green in Massachusetts. Castle noted that Idaho let Rocky Anderson be an independent presidential candidate while he was a registered Justice Party member in Utah.

Finally, Castle notes that he himself is not a registered member of the Constitution Party, because he lives in Tennessee, which does not have registration by party. Also the Constitution Party does not have dues-paying membership.

The reason Castle has been circulating an independent petition in Idaho is because the ballot-qualified Constitution Party in Idaho is lead by individuals who are angry with the national Constitution Party, so they won’t put Castle on as the party nominee.


Comments

Idaho Secretary of State Says Darrell Castle Can’t be an Independent Presidential Candidate; Castle Asks for Reconsideration — 5 Comments

  1. You know, kind of like this: http://www.wvgazettemail.com/article/20160810/GZ0101/160819979

    Kanawha County’s prosecuting attorney asked a circuit judge today to determine if former state senator Erik Wells can run as an independent candidate for Kanawha County clerk in November’s election.

    Wells’ application doesn’t meet the requirements of state law, Prosecuting Attorney Charles Miller wrote in the “quo warranto” petition filed Wednesday morning. The filing is a legal proceeding to determine if a person is eligible to run for or hold the public office in question.

    Miller argues that Wells cannot run for county clerk as a non-affiliated independent candidate while he is still a registered Democrat. The deadline for him to change affiliation and get on the ballot has passed.

  2. I think Mr. Castle makes a number of valid points. As I understand it, the issue with the Idaho CP is not that they are mad at Castle, but that he did not participate in their party’s primary and they feel compelled by state law to only nominate the primary winner, and not the party’s actual nominee. So I guess all the states where Bernie Sanders won should list him on their ballot instead of Hillary? Likewise for those won by Ted Cruz?

    When you really get down to it, it does not matter a hill of beans whose actual name is on the ballot because those names are just placeholders for the slate of presidential electors. Clearly, the presidential electors for the Copeland/Myers ticket would be aligned with the principles of Castle/Bradley. WE NEED TO RETURN TO listing the names of the actual Presidential Electors on the ballots. Single Elector Districts would go a long way to solving many of these problems.

  3. “I think Mr. Castle makes a number of valid points. As I understand it, the issue with the Idaho CP is not that they are mad at Castle, but that he did not participate in their party’s primary and they feel compelled by state law to only nominate the primary winner, and not the party’s actual nominee.”

    That’s one of the reasons, but not the only one.

  4. If I am reading this case correctly, the SOS does not have the authority to evaluate whether the declaration of non-affiliation is truthful or not. And it concerns an independent candidate for US senator, where the Idaho party affiliation might be relevant. At the time the law was passed, Idaho did not have party registration.

    http://caselaw.findlaw.com/id-supreme-court/1127838.html

    I suspect that 34-708A was just copy-pasted from 34-708.

  5. “lead by individuals who are angry with the national party”… has absolutely nothing to do with anything. I am surprised that Mr. Winger would publish something so inane and incompetent.

    Mr. Castle refused to stand at primary, and thereby declared he was not a candidate in Idaho (and he also, I remind, repeatedly declared on several formal occasions that he was not a candidate, and that was reported in Ballot Access News I seem to recall).

    The question has always been one of rules. Mr. Castle’s groupie junta seems to believe that the Constitution Party is one of personality cults. Only by such a credo can such nonsense as “mad at the national party” be squared up in their immature minds. Because they do it…personality cultism…ergo everybody does. That is a most childish understanding of the world at large, which apparently is their only way to bring round the fact that an Mr. Castle was not certified in Idaho. It is almost pathetic to watch. But we repeat, in Idaho, we are not a party of personalities. We are a party of process. We held Mr. Castle responsible for his own actions. He, not being a ward of the state, is accountable. Of course, we presume he is an adult. Maybe we suppose too much in that regard.

    The naked hubris of the gentleman’s presumption is palpable. Again in essence, he said: “I have no need to stand and compete at primary in Idaho because my groupie junta people hold the levers of internal power inside the national party.” And indeed, he did have that kind of control (albeit from a Pontius Pilot plausible deniability distance of washed hands..and fingerprints).

    This was evidenced when Murray, Peck and Gemma effected a blackout of any information on the Copeland campaign at all…until they were exposed. It was evidenced when Stufflebeam declared an endorsement of Castle (and then backtracked in a three page letter denying he did so, when called to task by Mr. Becker and others). All of these people were serving at the time of this clear corruption as national party officers, and all of them (in just this one small example) violated ethical conduct. Fluckiger was specifically asked to dismiss the bunch of these personality cultists…but refused. He is just as guilty…in fact more so.

    In my opinion, when the Democrats (e.g. Debbie Wassermuth Shultz) can recognize unethical conduct in THEIR national committee and act to relieve it, whereas the self professed righteous Constitution Party will not do so, you have nothing but rank and stinking hypocrisy. By way of another example: after denials of when and what a FEC penalty referred to, it was alleged that a “software” error was responsible for the itemization of a federally imposed civil penalty fine by the FEC upon this party for breaking the federal election laws…that fine had been itemized as a “business registration” expense…until that too was exposed. This kind of stuff would land a corporation in serious trouble. A “correction” was supposedly taken care at Albuquerque. But then again, under the current national chairman, what with secret operations of this party (in defiance of Idaho Sunshine Laws), the people of the party are left guessing as to where the truth lies. Every wind that passes carries the perfume of carrion upon it. This national party is the proverbial white washed tomb. America has enough of those already. We need no others, however they may be advertised.

    When you have a so-called secret executive “presidential selection committee” operating in secret, as does the Constitution Party, and when you willingly operate a personality cult program as the prime method of naming national candidates, you get the disgrace of someone like Dennis Michael Lynch coming to the national committee meeting in Pittsburgh and telling this party to its face from the very podium itself: “I wouldn’t run as a Constitution Party candidate if you gave me a Ferrari.”…and yes, good people, Mr. Lynch literally said that.

    Idaho has been the adult in the room in 2016. Throughout all of this, we have stood solidly upon the right of the people, the rank and file voters of this national party, to determine themselves who their candidate is to be. Show us that this was even considered in Salt Lake. Indeed, I would argue that this party’s executive stranglehold has fought tooth and nail to prevent that. As such, its advertisements of being “grassroots” are fraudulent. I stated in Albuquerque, this party is upside down…that is being euphemistic.

    Regardless, Mr. Castle and his supporters childishly seem to believe that rules do not apply to him/them. Only two things could explain this incapacity at this late hour to fathom the truth…either they are too ignorant to understand that he cannot insult an entire state’s electorate and then hope to get on that state’s ballot; or, more likely, he is too blinded by hubris and arrogance to care.

    Mr. Castle should have stood in the Idaho Primary. But he did not. And for that refusal he alone bears responsibility for non-certification.

    But in any case, if this ordeal is indeed evidence of gross ignorance or is evidence of malignant hubris, then the gentleman (in my personal view) in wholly unqualified for the office he seeks. To be honest, he should step down before he further embarrasses this so-called national party. This year, above all others on recent record! Citizens!…Surely there should be traction for any and all third party candidates! I leave to others to determine why it is the Constitution Party remains mired in its muddy rut. It was not Idaho who filled up that rut with…off color water and moans.

    All the national party needs to do is demonstrate that its respective state affiliates held verifiable preference ballots. Idaho has our people’s preference ballots, certified. So, show us the equivalent preference ballots in ALL other states allegedly put forth as representative ballots from the national convention floor. Show us that the constitution of this national party was followed. If you don’t have them, then you did not have a state affiliate nomination convention, as was advertised. You may have had perhaps a Jonestown audience slinging back cool-aid, or a pack of groupies fawning backstage in some secret “selection committee,” but you did not have real respective electorate voters deciding who the nominees would be. The process this national party has gotten away with for far too long is entirely corrupt. That is a fact. This national party can deny that fact until perdition itself freezes over and they labor to go out and skate upon it.

    In contrast, Idaho walked the walk. And we did so uprightly. The national party is still talking about doing so…still waiting apparently for the thermometer to drop, where they seem to be stuck. Maybe if it does freeze will provide enough solidity for traction to get out of its self made rut. And maybe that explains why the Castle campaign spent 47% or so of its first reported quarterly contributions on what seems to be for groceries in Utah…they apparently expect a long wait.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.