December 2016 Ballot Access News Print Edition

Ballot Access News
December 1, 2016 – Volume 32, Number 7

This issue was printed on tan paper.


Table of Contents

  1. MAINE VOTERS PASS INITIATIVE TO USE INSTANT RUNOFF VOTING FOR CONGRESS AND ALL STATE OFFICE
  2. SOUTH DAKOTA VOTERS REJECT NON-PARTISAN ELECTIONS
  3. COLORADO VOTERS PASS THREE ELECTION LAW MEASURES
  4. BENTON COUNTY, OREGON, PASSES INSTANT RUNOFF VOTING
  5. COURT INVALIDATES WISCONSIN GERRYMANDER
  6. TWO DE LA FUENTE BALLOT ACCESS CASES SURVIVE MOTIONS TO DISMISS
  7. OCTOBER 2016 REGISTRATION TOTALS
  8. 2016 PRESIDENTIAL VOTE (NOT FINAL!)
  9. 2018 PETITIONING FOR STATEWIDE OFFICE
  10. VERMONT PROGRESSIVE PARTY ELECTS LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR
  11. GUAM PRESIDENTIAL VOTE
  12. OTHER MINOR PARTY WINS IN PARTISAN ELECTIONS
  13. NEW YORK REFORM PARTY BREAKS FREE FROM REPUBLICAN CONTROL
  14. SUBSCRIBING TO BAN WITH PAYPAL

MAINE VOTERS PASS INITIATIVE TO USE INSTANT RUNOFF VOTING FOR CONGRESS AND ALL STATE OFFICE

On November 8, Maine voters passed Question Five, the initiative to use instant runoff voting for congress and all state office. This is the first time any state will have implemented IRV for federal or state office. People who support IRV have been working for 20 years to win a state, and have finally succeeded.

The system does not disturb the Maine nomination process for political parties. It applies to primaries and to general elections alike. Parties will still have nominees, determined by their primaries. It is just that those primaries will use IRV. The general elections will also use it.

The margin was 52% – 48%. The ballot said, "Do you want to allow voters to rank their choices of candidates in elections for U.S. Senate, Congress, Governor, State Senate, and State Representative, and to have ballots counted at the state level in multiple rounds in which last-place candidates are eliminated until a candidate wins by majority?"

Past Attempts in Other States

New Mexico: vigorous attempts had been made to pass IRV in the 1990’s. In 1998 New Mexico Senator Cisco McSorley, a Democrat, introduced SJR 8, a constitutional amendment to use IRV for all statewide state office. It failed in the State Senate Rules Committee on a tie vote. But in 1999, SJR 12, with the same provisions, passed the State Senate, but it didn’t pass the House.

Vermont: in 1998, Representative Terry Bouricius, a Progressive, introduced H 665, but it didn’t pass. Over the years similar bills were introduced. Finally in 2008, S270 passed, to use IRV in all congressional elections. But Republican Governor James Douglas vetoed the bill.

Alaska: in 2002, the Alaska Republicn Party sponsored Question One, an initiative to implement IRV for all federal and state office except Governor. It was on the ballot in the August 27, 2002 primary, but it lost 36.1% to 63.9%.

In all four states, the impetus for IRV came from the fact that there were strong minor parties, or strong independent candidates, so that the winner of important elections took office even though a large majority of the voters had voted against them. In New Mexico the strong third force was the Green Party, which had polled over 10% for Governor in 1994. In Vermont it was the Progressive Party. In Alaska it was the Alaskan Independence Party, and in Maine it was strong Green Party gubernatorial nominees and, later, even stronger independent candidates.


SOUTH DAKOTA VOTERS REJECT NON-PARTISAN ELECTIONS

On November 8, South Dakota voters rejected Constitutional Amendment V, which would have changed elections for Congress and all state and county partisan office to non-partisan elections. Every candidate would have run in the June primary, and then only the top-two candidates could run in November. Party labels for these offices would be removed from the ballot. The margin was 44.5%-55.5%. It carried only three counties.

Supporters of top-two poured resources into South Dakota in support of the measure. The group Open Primaries, formerly the New Alliance Party, contributed $1,356,720, which was 78% of the total raised for the initiative.

According to a news story in the Argus Leader of October 26, Open Primaries is funded by billionaires Laura and John Arnold, of Houston, Texas. The Arnolds also spent lavishly in 2014 for a top-two initiative in Oregon.

The money was used to get the initiative on the ballot, and for advertising on TV, direct mail, and telephone calls to voters.

Californians who support top-two also intervened in South Dakota. Former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger wrote an op-ed in favor of the measure, which was in the RapidCity Journal of June 12. California billionaire Bill Bloomfield contributed $12,500.

Ironically, all that spending may have helped defeat the measure. Just before election day there was much publicity about all the out-of-state money supporting the measure. The spending for the measure vastly dwarfed spending on any of the other nine statewide measures on the ballot.

The "no" side raised $300,745. The dollar amounts in this article include in-kind contributions. Almost half of that money came from the state Republican Party, which opposed the measure. The state Democratic Party was neutral, but the two most recent Democratic U.S. Senators from South Dakota supported the measure. The state League of Women Voters also supported it.

Ballot measures to limit the November ballot to only two candidates have passed twice: Washington in 2004 and California in 2010. They have been defeated five times: California 2004, Oregon 2008 and 2014, Arizona 2012, and South Dakota 2016.


SOUTH DAKOTA VOTERS REPEAL RESTRICTIVE BALLOT ACCESS LAW

On November 8, South Dakota voters soundly rejected the ballot access bill that the Republican-majority legislature had passed last year. The bill made many restrictive changes to ballot access laws for all kinds of candidates.

The voters weighed in because opponents of the 2015 law had gathered signatures to force a referendum on the law. Most of the signatures were collected by Democratic Party activists and labor activists.

The vote was 28.9% – 71.1%. The law, which will not go into effect, set an earlier petition deadline for petitions to qualify a party; earlier petition deadlines for candidates running in a primary; and said only registered independents could sign a petition for an independent candidate.


COLORADO VOTERS PASS THREE ELECTION LAW MEASURES

On November 8, Colorado voters passed Initiative 108 by 53.3% -46.7%. It changes primaries from closed to semi-closed. Under the old system, only registered party members could vote in party primaries. Under the new law, registered independents can choose any party primary ballot and vote in that primary.

Colorado voters also passed Initiative 107, by 64.1% – 35.9%. It sets up presidential primaries for large qualified parties. In the recent past, Colorado has not had presidential primaries, and has used caucuses.

Finally, Colorado voters passed Amendment 71, which changes the State Constitution and makes it more difficult for initiatives that amend the Constitution to get on the ballot, and to pass. They will now need signatures from every state senate district in the state, and if they get on the ballot, they won’t pass unless they get a 55% "yes" vote. The margin was 55.7% – 44.3%.


BENTON COUNTY, OREGON, PASSES INSTANT RUNOFF VOTING

On November 8, voters in Benton County, Oregon, voted to use instant runoff voting to elect countywide partisan executive posts. The vote was 54.3% – 45.7%.


COURT INVALIDATES WISCONSIN GERRYMANDER

On November 21, a 3-judge U.S. District Court ruled that Wisconsin’s Assembly district boundaries are so stacked against Democrats, and in favor of Republicans, that the plan is an unconstitutional gerrymander. Whitford v Gill, w.d., 3:15cv-421. The plaintiffs are Democratic voters who had filed the case in 2015. The state is certain to appeal, and that appeal is directly to the U.S. Supreme Court. So far the U.S. Supreme Court has never found any plan to be so unfair to one party, relative to another party, that the plan is unconstitutional.


TWO DE LA FUENTE BALLOT ACCESS CASES SURVIVE MOTIONS TO DISMISS

During November, two of Rocky De La Fuente’s ballot access cases survived attempts by states to get them dismissed.

South Carolina: on November 9, U.S. District Court Judge Cameron McGowan Currie, a Clinton appointee, ruled that the South Carolina Democratic Party has not yet persuaded her that she should dismiss De La Fuente v South Carolina Democratic Party, 3:16cv-322. The issue is the party rule that won’t let anyone onto its presidential primary ballot, even if the candidate pays the filing fee, unless the candidate is discussed in news media. De La Fuente charges that in this new era for "media", that phrase is hopelessly vague.

Virginia: on November 18, U.S. District Court Judge Liam O’Grady, a Bush Jr. appointee, refused to dismiss De La Fuente v Alcorn, e.d., 1:16cv-1201. The issue is whether the state really needs to require all candidates for presidential elector (for an independent candidate or the nominee of an unqualified party) to reveal their social security numbers before the petition can begin to circulate. De La Fuente can now present evidence that this requirement prevented him from getting an early start on his independent petition.


OCTOBER 2016 REGISTRATION TOTALS

The chart below shows the number of registered voters in each party, in each state, as of October 2016. All figures are for active voters only.

Parties in the "other" column are: Alaska: Alaskan Independence 17,382; Veterans 1,150. California: American Independent; Colorado: Unity; Delaware: Independent Party 5,316, American Delta 835; Florida: Independent Party 262,599; Independence 44,194; America’s Party 768; Ecology 314; Socialism & Liberation 241; Kentucky: Socialist Workers; Louisiana: Conservative 844; Socialist 72; Prohibition 2. Massachusetts: United Independent 30,368; Socialist 466; Prohibition 13. New Jersey: Conservative 3,497; Socialist 1,271; Natural Law 1,086. New Mexico: Independent American 4,661; Better for America 121; Socialism & Liberation 64; American Delta 12. New York: Independence 501,738; Conservative 162,682; Women’s Equality 2,278. Oregon: Independent Party 119,277; Progressive 1,793; Americans Elect 78. Rhode Island: Moderate. Utah: Independent American 19,297.

~

Dem.

Rep.

Ind. misc

Lib’t.

Green

Consti.

Wk Fam

Reform

other

Alaska

78,560

143,852

278,318

7,557

1,709

351

?

?

18,532

Arizona

1,091,323

1,239,614

1,219,277

31,358

6,894

?

?

?

– –

Arkansas

80,517

80,886

1,598,249

322

?

?

?

?

– –

Calif.

8,720,417

5,048,398

4,825,157

139,805

94,647

330

?

?

507,377

Colorado

1,040,948

1,031,512

1,140,909

37,880

11,355

9,718

?

?

790

Conn.

790,188

452,243

831,652

2,561

1,827

?

323

11

– –

Delaware

320,852

189,399

156,108

1,519

822

311

435

66

5,316

Dt. Col.

363,642

29,862

80,050

918

3,621

?

?

?

– –

Florida

4,877,749

4,550,311

3,089,929

28,287

6,605

1,265

?

1,511

308,116

Idaho

86,493

392,530

326,340

5,229

?

2,626

?

?

– –

Iowa

629,081

662,167

694,005

8,366

2,671

0

0

0

– –

Kansas

403,973

754,230

466,821

13,586

0

0

0

0

0

Kentucky

1,693,778

1,338,054

264,488

7,456

1,695

457

?

83

107

Louis’na

1,344,741

898,448

760,249

14,088

2,528

210

0

1,344

918

Maine

324,820

267,586

358,963

5,388

40,096

?

?

?

– –

Maryland

2,170,800

1,026,633

720,927

19,343

9,009

?

?

?

– –

Mass.

1,549,828

484,508

2,454,276

8,846

6,367

169

39

133

30,847

Nebraska

369,538

581,088

246,493

10,935

?

?

?

?

– –

Nevada

577,679

488,861

317,262

13,381

4,306

63,330

?

?

– –

N. Hamp.

271,455

295,687

351,984

?

?

?

?

?

– –

N. Jersey

2,073,739

1,211,392

2,515,925

5,391

3,049

2,611

?

371

5,854

N. Mex.

599,813

399,930

274,919

5,714

3,891

359

?

?

4,858

N. York

6,179,734

2,839,704

2,720,139

7,128

28,913

?

50,039

900

666,698

No. Car.

2,725,054

2,079,619

2,059,579

32,097

?

?

?

?

– –

Okla.

856,717

983,932

313,191

3,599

?

?

?

11

– –

Oregon

987,449

715,623

700,390

18,995

10,234

3,663

10,681

?

121,148

Pennsyl.

4,217,187

3,302,106

1,140,690

48,966

13,530

1,419

?

?

– –

Rhode Is.

319,729

92,709

367,628

?

?

?

?

?

2,817

So. Dak.

170,690

252,111

119,488

1,620

?

500

?

?

– –

Utah

155,905

662,535

514,572

11,025

916

4,513

?

?

19,297

W. Va.

572,467

396,600

265,916

4,679

1,875

177

?

?

– –

Wyo.

45,959

160,202

26,210

1,496

?

474

?

?

– –

TOTAL

45,690,825

33,052,332

31,200,104

497,535

256,560

92,483

61,517

5,294

1,662,329

Percent

40.60%

29.37%

27.72%

.44%

.23%

.08%

.05%

.00+%

1.50%

Totals October 2014 were: Democratic 42,755,625 (41.17%), Republican 30,938,676 (29.79%), independent & miscellaneous 27,688,850 (26.67%), Libertarian 399,302 (.38%), Green 253,267 (.24%), Constitution 78,434 (.08%), Reform 22,880 (.02%), Working Families 58,757 (.06%), other parties 1,666,473 (1.60%).

Totals October 2012 were: Dem. 43,512,746 (41.85%), Rep. 31,298,863 (30.10%), indp. & misc. 26,808,810 (25.79%), Libertarian 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%), Libertarian 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%), Libertarian 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%), Libertarian 224,713 (.26%), Green 193,332 (.22%), Reform 99,408 (.11%), Natural Law 61,405 (.07%), other parties 620,668 (.71%). The October 2016 totals above include Arkansas for the first time. Arkansas was not included in the earlier tallies.


2016 PRESIDENTIAL VOTE (NOT FINAL!)

The chart below shows the vote for president by state, for the top eight candidates. These are far from final, and a future edition will include complete final returns.

~

Clinton

Trump

Johnson

Stein

McMullin

Castle

La Riva

De La Fuente

Alabama

725,704

1,314,431

44,211

9,341

?

?

?

?

Alaska

108,220

153,369

17,394

5,289

?

3,568

?

1,148

Arizona

1,161,167

1,252,401

106,327

34,345

?

?

?

?

Arkansas

379,004

682,798

29,662

9,422

13,188

0

0

0

Calif.

7,457,744

3,949,301

406,680

223,948

?

?

53,528

?

Colorado

1,331,675

1,196,662

143,069

38,073

28,765

11,632

526

1,246

Conn.

897,524

673,196

48,671

22,841

2,091

144

41

12

Del.

235,603

185,127

14,757

6,103

?

?

?

?

D.C.

282,830

12,723

4,906

4,258

?

?

?

?

Florida

4,504,975

4,617,886

207,043

64,399

?

16,453

?

9,108

Georgia

1,877,911

2,089,062

125,293

?

?

?

?

?

Hawaii

266,891

128,847

15,954

12,737

0

4,508

0

0

Idaho

190,383

410,269

28,369

8,506

46,536

4,411

?

1,374

Illinois

2,977,498

2,118,179

204,491

74,112

?

?

?

?

Indiana

1,036,632

1,556,310

134,142

4,004

?

?

?

10

Iowa

652,820

800,467

59,106

11,459

12,331

1,142

323

450

Kansas

414,788

656,009

53,648

22,698

?

?

?

?

Kentucky

628,834

1,202,942

53,749

13,913

22,780

?

?

1,128

Louisiana

780,154

1,178,638

37,978

14,031

8,547

3,129

446

?

Maine

354,873

334,838

37,764

14,075

?

?

?

?

Maryland

1,601,237

924,937

76,400

34,062

4,029

243

16

6

Mass.

1,964,768

1,083,069

136,784

46,910

?

?

?

?

Michigan

2,267,798

2,279,221

173,023

50,690

?

16,925

?

?

Minn.

1,367,705

1,322,949

112,972

36,986

53,075

9,456

?

1,430

Miss.

462,001

678,457

13,789

3,580

?

3,878

?

596

Missouri

1,054,889

1,585,753

96,404

25,086

1,372

12,966

?

10

Montana

177,709

279,238

28,036

7,969

?

?

?

1,570

Nebraska

278,176

490,675

38,264

8,533

?

?

?

?

Nevada

539,260

512,045

37,382

0

0

5,267

0

2,552

N. Hamp.

348,526

345,790

30,694

6,444

1,064

?

?

675

N. Jersey

2,021,756

1,535,513

68,695

35,949

?

5,830

1,613

1,765

N. Mex.

380,923

316,134

73,712

9,740

5,722

1,491

1,176

467

N. York

4,149,500

2,639,994

162,273

100,110

?

?

?

?

No. Car.

2,169,496

2,345,235

128,469

3,827

?

?

?

?

No. Dak.

93,758

216,794

21,434

3,780

?

1,833

?

364

Ohio

2,317,001

2,771,984

168,599

44,310

11,915

1,796

?

?

Okla.

420,375

949,136

83,481

0

0

0

0

0

Oregon

991,272

774,011

92,847

49,242

?

?

?

?

Penn.

2,844,229

2,901,352

142,464

48,887

?

20,917

?

?

R.I.

252,278

180,502

14,744

6,216

?

?

?

671

S.Car.

855,373

1,155,389

49,204

13,034

21,016

5,765

0

0

S.Dak.

117,442

227,701

20,845

0

0

4,059

0

0

Tenn.

869,189

1,521,162

70,286

15,954

?

?

?

4,072

Texas

3,868,291

4,683,352

282,655

71,327

22,697

2,789

?

?

Utah

302,510

494,862

37,896

9,081

233,266

7,626

?

830

Vermont

178,573

95,369

10,083

6,759

657

63

327

1,063

Virginia

1,981,473

1,769,443

118,274

27,638

54,054

?

?

?

Wash.

1,708,852

1,198,334

156,677

56,517

?

17,141

3,368

?

W.Va.

187,457

486,198

22,798

8,000

?

3,773

?

?

Wisc.

1,382,947

1,407,028

106,470

31,016

1,013

12,178

?

1,550

Wyoming

55,973

174,419

13,287

2,515

?

2,042

?

709

TOTAL

63,475,967

61,859,501

4,362,155

1,357,756

544,118

190,947

61,364

32,806


2018 PETITIONING FOR STATEWIDE OFFICE

STATE
REQUIREMENTS
SIGNATURES COLLECTED
DEADLINES
FULL PARTY
CAND
LIB’T
GREEN
CONSTI
WK FAM
Party
Indep.

Ala.

35,413

35,413

0

0

0

0

June 5

June 5

Alaska

(reg) 8,925

(est) #3,000

already on

(reg) 1,709

351

0

June 1

Aug. 21

Ariz.

23,041

(est) #40,000

already on

already on

0

0

March 1

May 30

Ark.

10,000

10,000

0

0

0

0

January 2

in court

Calif.

(es) (reg) 65,000

65 + fee

already on

already on

330

0

January 2

March 9

Colo.

(reg) 1,000

#1,000

already on

already on

already on

0

Jan. 10

July 12

Conn.

no procedure

#7,500

already on

already on

0

already on

– – –

Aug. 8

Del.

(est.) (reg) 680

(est.) 6,800

already on

already on

*311

435

Aug. 21

July 15

D.C.

no procedure

#3,000

already on

already on

can’t start

can’t start

– – –

Aug. 8

Florida

0

pay fee

already on

already on

already on

0

Sep. 1

July 15

Georgia

54,306

#51,912

already on

can’t start

can’t start

0

July 10

July 10

Hawaii

750

25

already on

already on

0

0

Feb. 22

June 5

Idaho

(est) 14,000

1,000

already on

0

already on

0

Aug. 30

March 9

Illinois

no procedure

#25,000

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

– – –

June 25

Indiana

no procedure

#34,195

already on

0

0

0

– – –

June 30

Iowa

no procedure

#1,500

already on

0

0

0

– – –

Aug. 17

Kansas

16,776

5,000

already on

0

0

0

June 1

Aug. 6

Ky.

no procedure

#5,000

already on

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

– – –

Aug. 14

La.

(reg) 1,000

#pay fee

already on

already on

210

0

May 17

Aug. 17

Maine

unsettled

#4,000

already on

already on

0

0

unsettled

June 1

Md.

10,000

10,000

already on

already on

0

0

Aug. 6

Aug. 6

Mass.

(est) (reg) 45,500

#10,000

already on

(reg) 5,709

169

39

Feb. 6

July 31

Mich.

32,261

30,000

already on

already on

already on

0

July 19

July 19

Minn.

(est) 150,000

#2,000

0

0

0

0

May 1

June 5

Miss.

be organized

1,000

already on

already on

already on

0

March 1

March 1

Mo.

10,000

10,000

already on

already on

already on

0

July 30

July 30

Mont.

5,000

#10,685

already on

0

0

0

March 15

May 29

Nebr.

4,880

(es) 121,000

already on

300

0

0

Aug. 1

Sept. 3

Nev.

(est) 11,000

250

already on

(reg) 4,306

already on

0

June 3

June 3

N. Hamp.

(est) 21,800

#3,000

already on

0

0

0

Aug. 7

Aug. 7

N.J.

no procedure

#800

0

0

0

0

– – –

June 5

N. M.

2,565

15,390

already on

already on

0

0

June 28

June 28

N.Y.

no procedure

#15,000

can’t start

already on

can’t start

already on

– – –

unsettled

No. Car.

(est) 94,000

(est) 94,000

already on

6,000

0

0

May 16

June 14

No. Dak.

7,000

1,000

already on

0

0

0

April 15

Sep. 3

Ohio

(est) 53,000

5,000

in court

already on

0

0

July 3

May 7

Okla.

24,745

pay fee

already on

0

0

0

March 1

April 13

Oregon

22,046

18,279

already on

already on

already on

already on

Aug. 28

Aug. 28

Penn.

no procedure

5,000

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

– – –

Aug. 1

R.I.

16,203

#1,000

0

0

0

0

Aug. 1

July 10

So. Car.

10,000

10,000

already on

already on

already on

already on

May 6

July 16

So. Dak.

6,936

2,775

already on

0

already on

0

in court

April 24

Tenn.

33,816

25

2,000

in court

in court

0

Aug. 16

April 5

Texas

47,086

47,086

already on

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

May 19

June 28

Utah

2,000

#1,000

already on

0

already on

0

Feb. 15

March 15

Vermont

be organized

#500

already on

0

0

already on

Jan. 1

Aug. 7

Virginia

no procedure

#10,000

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

– – –

June 12

Wash.

no procedure

#pay fee

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

– – –

May 18

West Va.

no procedure

#6,516

already on

already on

0

0

– – –

Aug. 1

Wisc.

10,000

#2,000

already on

already on

already on

0

May 1

June 1

Wyo.

5,036

5,036

already on

can’t start

already on

can’t start

June 1

Aug. 27

TOTAL STATES ON
38
21
13
5
~

#partisan label permitted (other than "independent").
"WK FAM" = Working Familes Party.
(reg.) = registered members


VERMONT PROGRESSIVE PARTY ELECTS LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR

On November 8, the Progressive Party elected its nominee for Lieutenant Governor of Vermont, David Zuckerman. This is the first time since 1936 that a party, other than the Democratic or Republican Parties, has won a statewide state office other than Governor. In 1936, both the Progressive Party of Wisconsin, and the Farmer-Labor Party of Minnesota, elected most of the statewide state executive offices, but no third party has since won any such office, until the Vermont Progressive instance of 2016.

The percentages are: Zuckerman 52.18%; Republican nominee Randy Brock 45.52%; Liberty Union nominee Boots Wardinski 2.30%. The Democratic Party did not run anyone and cross-nominated Zuckerman.


GUAM PRESIDENTIAL VOTE

Guam is the only overseas possession of the United States that votes for President in November. Some of the other possessions have presidential primaries, but none of the others vote for President in November. Guam has no electoral votes, so the popular vote has no effect on the outcome. Any minor party or independent presidential candidate can get on the November ballot merely by request. This year, the only candidate who did that is Emidio Soltysik, the Socialist Party nominee. He received 1,352 votes. Hillary Clinton won with 22,972; Donald Trump received 7,747.


OTHER MINOR PARTY WINS IN PARTISAN ELECTIONS

Progressive Party: elected two State Senators and seven Representatives to the Vermont legislature. This is the largest number of legislators the party has ever elected. All are members of the party; some of them also had the Democratic nomination, but the ballot clearly showed that they were Progressives.

Green Party: elected five candidates in Michigan and one in Connecticut. The most significant win was Tom Mair’s election to the Grand Traverse County, Michigan County Board. He defeated his only opponent, the Republican incumbent, 3,168 to 2,769. The other partisan wins were instances when the Greens essentially couldn’t lose because they were running in races with no more candidates than there were seats to be filled. They were: (1) Korie Blyveis, Town Clerk, Newberg Township, Cass County, Michigan: (2) Shauna McNally and Stuart Collis, both elected to the Park Commission, Ypsilanti Township, Washtenaw County, Michigan; (3) Jesse Torres, Park Commission, Holly Township, Oakland County, Michigan; John Amarilios, Registrar of Voters, New Canaan, Connecticut.

Libertarian Party: won three elections: (1) Mitch Rushing was elected to the Jefferson County, Kentucky, County Commission. This is a countywide position with little power. Rushing’s only opponent was an independent candidate who was removed from the ballot because his petition was defective; (2) Susan Bell was re-elected as Town Judge in Hagerstown, Indiana; (3) Elizabeth Corder was elected to the Ypsilanti Township Park Commission, the same office to which two Greens were elected. The voters were permitted to elect seven members, but only four Democrats ran, and no Republicans ran, so it was easy for both minor parties to also elect someone.


NEW YORK REFORM PARTY BREAKS FREE FROM REPUBLICAN CONTROL

On October 27, a New York Supreme Court Judge in Albany County ruled that the legal officers of the Reform Party are those elected in the party’s September 2016 primary, and that Curtis Sliwa is the state chair. This is a defeat for the faction of the party that wanted the party to only cross-endorse Republican Party nominees. The decision is Merrell v Sliwa, case 5829-16. The pro-Republican faction has filed a notice of appeal.


SUBSCRIBING TO BAN WITH PAYPAL

If you use Paypal, you can subscribe to B.A.N., or renew, with Paypal. If you use a credit card in connection with Paypal, use richardwinger@yahoo.com. If you don’t use a credit card in conjunction with Paypal, use sub@richardwinger.com.

Ballot Access News is published by and copyright by Richard Winger. Note: subscriptions are available!


Go back to the index.


Copyright © 2016 Ballot Access News

Comments

December 2016 Ballot Access News Print Edition — 9 Comments

  1. Richard, I put a full ballot access chart for 2018 on my website for every party in at least one state, could you check to make sure it’s correct. Click on my name to go to my homepage.

  2. Elections are over so sit back and do nothing.Enjoy life.Be apathetic politically.Let the politicians do there thing.

  3. WK, I saw your great school office campaign video! But I can’t find the 2018 petitioning table. Is there a specific link?

  4. WaunaKeegan11 – The Independence Party is distinct from the Independent Party in CT. The Independent Party has statewide enrollment privileges and 21,216 registered voters, the Independence Party does not have statewide enrollment privileges and has only 22 registered voters.

    There are two dozen parties that exist only in a single town in CT and I’d guess maybe a quarter of those are active and may have ballot access for specific local offices. I don’t know if you want to get down to town-specific parties and local offices. I don’t know which ones have ballot access and I don’t know that anyone has ever made a list, let alone an up to date list. You’d probably have to go through the local election results for all 169 towns for 2015 and 2013 to figure out which ones do.

  5. Have you ever seen an explanation why the Maine IRV measure doesn’t violate the state constitution?

  6. The October 2016 Registration Totals is supposed to have an “other” column. I can see it in the page source. But it’s not displaying on screen.

    This problem of tables being too wide to display on screen has been going on for close to a year now.

Leave a Reply

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