February 2017 Ballot Access News Print Edition

Ballot Access News
February 1, 2017 – Volume 32, Number 9

This issue was printed on gray paper.


Table of Contents

  1. BILLS TO EASE BALLOT ACCESS PENDING IN ELEVEN STATES
  2. NEW HOPE FOR PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES
  3. BILLS TO USE RANKED-CHOICE FOR ALL PARTISAN ELECTIONS
  4. BILLS TO ELIMINATE STRAIGHT-TICKET
  5. BILLS TO INJURE BALLOT ACCESS
  6. MARYLAND GOVERNOR DELETES BALLOT ACCESS IMPROVEMENT
  7. BOOK REVIEW: THE INEVITABLE PARTY
  8. NATIONAL POPULAR VOTE PLAN BILLS
  9. 2016 MINOR PARTY STATE HOUSE VOTE
  10. 2016 MINOR PARTY STATE SENATE VOTE
  11. 2016 PRESIDENTIAL VOTE TOTALS
  12. TWELVE INDEPENDENTS ELECTED TO STATE LEGISLATURES IN 2016
  13. SUBSCRIBING TO BAN WITH PAYPAL

BILLS TO EASE BALLOT ACCESS PENDING IN ELEVEN STATES

Bills to improve ballot access have been introduced in eleven states. One of them, the Kansas bill, has already been passed and signed.

Arizona: SB 1307 eases the June deadline for a party to file presidential elector candidates. The bill sets the deadline in late August. Although an early deadline to file the presidential electors may seem a trivial barrier, it has been a problem in the past. In 1996 the Libertarian Party missed the deadline, and in 2016 the Green Party missed it. Both times a court told the state to put the party’s presidential nominee on the ballot anyway

Georgia: HB 133 would reduce the number of signatures for independent and minor party candidates for district and county office from 5% of the number of registered voters, to 2% of the last vote cast for that office. For U.S. House in 2018, the petition in the average district would drop from 19,643 signatures to 4,921. The lead sponsor is Representative John Pezold (R-Columbus).

Illinois: SB 63 would lower the petitions for independent candidates, and the nominees of unqualified parties, to the same number that are now required for candidates seeking a place on a primary ballot. For statewide office, the petition would drop from 25,000 to 5,000. For U.S. House, the petition would drop from approximately 9,000 signatures to approximately one-tenth that number. The sponsor is Senator Kyle McCarter (R-Lebanon).

Indiana: SB 418 would lower the number of signatures for statewide independent candidates, and the nominees of unqualified parties, from 2% of the last vote cast for Secretary of State, to exactly 4,500 signatures for President, Governor, and U.S. Senate, and one-half of 1% for other office.

The current statewide requirement is 26,700 signatures, and that is unusually low, due to poor voter turnout in 2014. In the recent past the requirement has been as high as 35,040. The sponsor is Senator Greg Walker (R-Columbus), chair of the Senate Elections Committee. The existing law has made Indiana one of only four states in which Ralph Nader never qualified in any of his presidential runs.

Kansas: HB 2017 has already been signed into law. It eases ballot access for special U.S. House elections. The old law required a petition of 4% of the registered voters for an independent in a special U.S. House election (about 14,000 signatures in the typical district), even though in a regular election an independent needs exactly 5,000.

Also the bill removes a silly law that says qualified minor parties cannot run in the special election. The bill was signed on January 18, and took effect immediately.

Nebraska: LB 34 adds a second method for a qualified party to remain qualified. Current law says it must poll 5% for any statewide race at either of the last two elections. The bill adds a second method, that the party have at least 10,000 registered members. The author is Senator Laura Ebke, a member of the Libertarian Party. The Libertarian Party has about 11,000 registered members.

New Hampshire: HB 384 would set up a committee to study the state’s ballot access laws and how they should be improved. If the bill passes, the study will be completed by November 1, 2017, with recommendations for the 2018 session of the legislature. The author is Will Pearson (D-Keene), a member of the House Elections Committee.

New Mexico: HB 226 would lower the number of signatures for non-presidential independent candidates from 3% of the last gubernatorial vote, to the average number of signatures needed for candidates for that office who are seeking to get on a primary ballot. That would decrease the number of signatures for a 2018 statewide independent candidate from 15,390 to 1,342.

The bill also eases the number of signatures for minor party nominees. New Mexico is the only state that requires nominees (people who were nominated in a ballot-qualified minor party’s convention) to submit a petition. Ideally the bill ought to abolish such petitions, because the party already did its own petition and the nominee petitions are redundant. But it is better to ease these petitions than to do nothing. The statewide minor party nominee petition would drop from 5,130 to 1,342. Currently the Green Party, and Better for America, are the only ballot-qualified convention parties. The bill would have no effect on the Libertarian Party, which nominates by primary in 2018. The sponsor is Representative James E. Smith (R-Sandia).

North Dakota: HB 1417 makes two ballot access improvements: (1) it lowers the vote test for a party to remain on the ballot from 5% for certain specified statewide offices, to 2%; (2) it abolishes the primary vote test, a requirement unique to North Dakota that says if a party doesn’t attract between 10% and 15% of all primary voters to choose its primary ballot, then it can’t run any nominees for state legislature. This law is so devastating to minor parties, no minor party nominee for legislature has been on the November ballot since 1976. The bill’s sponsor is Representative Corey Mock, the Democratic leader in the House.

Oklahoma: One set of bills in each House would make it easier for a party to remain on the ballot. They would change the vote test from 2.5% for the office at the top of the ballot (president in presidential years, and governor in midterm years) to 2.5% for any statewide race at either of the last two elections. They are HB 1565 and SB 350.

Another set of bills would ease ballot access for presidential independents, from a petition of 3% of the last presidential vote (which would be 43,590 signatures in 2020), to either 5,000 signatures or a fee of $5,000. They are HB 1563 and SB 351.

Another bill, SB 145, would allow an independent presidential candidate to avoid a petition if he or she paid a fee of $2,500 per presidential elector. If the candidate submitted a full slate of presidential elector candidates the fee would be $17,500. Oklahoma has 7 electoral votes.

South Dakota: HB 1037 would allow stand-in candidates on independent petitions, for vice-president and lieutenant governor. It passed the House State Affairs Committee on January 20. This bill exists because independent gubernatorial candidate Michael Myers won a lawsuit over this issue in 2014.

A sponsor has been found for ballot access bills in Alabama, Pennsylvania and Texas. Also it is likely the Secretaries of State of Connecticut and West Virginia will find sponsors to repair ballot access laws that were struck down last year.


NEW HOPE FOR PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES

On January 5, U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan heard arguments in Level the Playing Field v Federal Election Commission, 1:15cv-1397. This is the lawsuit over whether the Commission on Presidential Debates is violating federal campaign law, by paying for the general election presidential debates with corporate donations.

Federal law forbids corporations from contributing to federal candidates. The issue is whether the debates, which never include anyone but the Republican and Democratic nominees, are realistically events that boost the campaigns of those two parties against all their competitors. If so, the FEC has a duty to investigate, but the FEC has not done so.

Judge Chutkan seemed to believe that the FEC has not done its duty. She asked how she could give deference to the FEC, given that the FEC clearly has not even investigated the evidence that the Commission on Presidential Debates is composed of individuals who donate to the major parties and support them in other ways., and all the other evidence already submitted by plaintiffs.


BILLS TO USE RANKED-CHOICE FOR ALL PARTISAN ELECTIONS

Bills are pending in two states to provide for Ranked-Choice Voting (also known as instant runoff voting) in all partisan elections.

Connecticut: HB 6153 is sponsored by Representative Josh Elliott (D-Hamden).

Hawaii: SB 824 is sponsored by Senator Russell Ruderman (D-Puna) and six other legislators.

A similar Virginia bill, HB 2315, by Delegate Nicholas Freitas (R-Culpeper) was defeated in a subcommittee of the House Privileges & Elections Committee on January 26.

Bills to study IRV are pending in several other states.


BILLS TO ELIMINATE STRAIGHT-TICKET

Bills to repeal the straight-ticket device exist at least three states:

Iowa: Senator Mark Chelgren (R-Ottumwa) has introduced SF 60.

Kentucky: Representative John Sims (D-Flemingsburg) has HB 157.

Oklahoma: Senator J. J. Dossett (R-wherever) has SB 9.


BILLS TO INJURE BALLOT ACCESS

Arkansas: SB 122, by Senator Gary Stubblefield, moves the primary from May to the first week in March, for all office, in all future years. The bill has the indirect effect of moving the petition deadline for non-presidential independents from early March, to December of the year before the election. It also moves the petition for a new party from January to September of the year before the election.

Arkansas is already being sued over the March independent candidate deadline. A sensible bill would move the primary but not move the petition deadlines, or else would make them later to avoid litigation.

Idaho: SB 1001 would convert Idaho to a top-two system. Experience shows that limiting the general election ballot to just two candidates means that the only party members who ever appear on the November ballot are Democrats and Republicans, except when only one major party member files to run in the primary. The sponsor is Senator Grant Burgoyne (D-Boise).

New Mexico: HJR 6 would covert New Mexico to a top-two system. It is a proposed constitutional change, so if the legislature passes it, then the voters would be asked to vote on it. The sponsor is Representative Anthony Maestas (D-Albuquerque).

South Dakota: HB 1035 would make it illegal for someone circulating a petition to qualify a new party to be paid on a per-signature basis. It passed the House unanimously on January 24. South Dakota already has a similar ban for petitions for candidates and initiatives.

Utah: SB 13 moves the deadline for a petition to qualify a party from February 15 to November 15 of the year before the election. It passed the Senate on January 23. The case law is overwhelmingly clear that such an extremely early deadline would be unconstitutional.


MARYLAND GOVERNOR DELETES BALLOT ACCESS IMPROVEMENT

In September 2016 the Maryland State Board of Elections drew up a proposed bill for 2017 election law changes. The bill included a proposal to lower the number of signatures for a statewide independent candidate from 1% of the number of registered voters (approximately 40,000) to exactly 10,000. However, in December, Governor Larry Hogan, a Republican, ordered that part of the bill deleted.

This was surprising, because after a 2016 court ruling in Dorsey v Lamone, the Board had promised to try to persuade the legislature to pass that provision. The lawsuit had been filed by an independent candidate for U.S. Senate, Greg Dorsey, who argued that the state had no reason to require so many signatures for him, when it allows a new party to get on the ballot with 10,000 signatures. If the purpose of ballot access laws is to keep the ballot from being too crowded, it makes no sense to require four times as many signatures for a single independent, than for a new party, because a new party can run someone for every partisan office on the ballot, adding more names than just a single independent.

Under the court settlement, Dorsey is free to return to court and get a decision on declaratory relief. The judge already said the case is strong.


BOOK REVIEW: THE INEVITABLE PARTY

The Inevitable Party, by Seth E. Masket, Oxford University Press, 2016, 196 pages.

If there is any book that I wish all political activists and legislators would read, it is this one. Professor Masket is one of the leading political science researchers on political parties, and the information he presents is badly needed, at a time when so many well-meaning individuals believe political parties harm the United States.

Masket studied what happened in various states at various times, when state legislatures passed proposals to weaken political parties. His research determines that every time, the new policy backfires and the Democratic and Republican Parties are as powerful as they had been before the "reform" passed.

The earliest experiment described in the book occurred in Wisconsin in 1904, when the state became the first to use a direct primary for parties to nominate candidates. Contrary to expectations, the new primary system did not reduce polarization between the two major parties, it did not create greater diversity among the legislators from either major party, and most surprisingly, it did not even create a better fit between the views of legislators and the views of their constituents.

The next-earliest experiment in the book is Minnesota’s converting its state legislature to a non-partisan body in 1913. Even though party labels in legislative races disappeared from ballots, the legislators themselves organized into caucuses that strongly resembled caucuses in states that had partisan legislatures. At first the informal "two-party system" inside the legislature was centered on opposing views about the prohibition of alcohol. Starting in the late 1930’s, liberal and conservative caucuses organized and exerted discipline over their members. When the conservative caucus had a majority in a particular house, all the committee chairs would be named from the ranks of that caucus. Legislators who seemed disloyal to their own caucus were challenged in primaries by more loyal supporters of that caucus. Organized interests outside the legislature, i.e., business and labor, shored up each of the caucuses with money and organization.

Other chapters present research on Colorado’s 2002 experiment to limit contributions to parties; the Nebraska non-partisan legislature; and the California 2003 special gubernatorial election, which did not allow parties to formally have nominees

Why do parties exert control, regardless of what legal changes are made? Masket writes, "Parties are not rigid entities, limited in their appearances in legal definitions or business filings. They are, rather, networks of intense and creative policy demanders, working both inside and outside the government to determine the sort of people who get elected to office and thus change public policy. Making some aspect of party behavior illegal doesn’t remove or necessarily even weaken parties; it just makes for a new business environment for the policy demanders."

Also, "Parties are, quite simply, fiercely resilient entities, capable of adapting to reforms designed to weaken or kill them. But it is not so much that they are strong as that they are both endemic and essential to democratic governance." Masket presents the research that shows that non-partisan elections favor incumbents more than partisan elections do; cause lower turnout; cause more voter "dropoff" (failing to finish marking the ballot) and weaken accountability.


NATIONAL POPULAR VOTE PLAN BILLS

The National Popular Vote Plan has passed in Ca., D.C., Hi., Il., Md., Ma.,, N.J., N.Y., R.I., Vt, and Wa. Bills are pending in these states:

Arizona: HB 2277.
Connecticut: SB 9; HB 5205; HB 5434; HB 5435; HB 5736.
Florida: SB 242; HB 311.
Idaho: HB 59.
Indiana: SB 372.
Kansas: HB 2024.
Maine: LD 156.
Minnesota: SF 10; SF 16; HF 42; HF 44.
Missouri: HB 497; HB 635.
New Hampshire: HB 447.
New Mexico: SB 42; SB 54; SB 102; SJR 7.
Ohio: HB 626.
Pennsylvania: HB 189.
South Carolina: HB 3173.
Texas: HB 496.
Virginia: HB 1482.


2016 MINOR PARTY STATE HOUSE VOTE

~

Libertarian

Wrk Fam

Green

Constitut.

Indpndc

Indp Pty

other(1)

other(2)

indp.

Alaska

0

0

0

4,634

0

0

730

0

20,163

Arizona

0

0

62,102

0

0

0

0

0

0

Arkansas

17,615

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2,484

Calif.

130,798

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

71,944

Colorado

51,103

0

1,802

0

0

0

0

0

20,173

Conn.

1,265

31,892

4,979

0

73

39,096

0

0

4,119

Del.

1,546

0

2,177

0

0

218

0

0

0

Florida

27,144

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

148,451

Georgia

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

7,726

Hawaii

4,411

0

4,106

648

0

0

0

0

1,247

Idaho

2,545

0

0

6,541

0

0

0

0

4,842

Illinois

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

7,259

Indiana

37,043

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

10,511

Iowa

15,785

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

11,980

Kansas

5,345

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1,070

Kentucky

972

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Maine

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

15,796

Mass.

2,885

0

4,740

0

0

8,849

2,680

0

43,351

Michigan

52,389

0

13,234

9,306

0

0

0

0

0

Minn.

2,467

0

919

0

0

0

0

0

5,423

Missouri

29,756

0

8,264

603

0

0

0

0

32,216

Montana

1,861

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2,019

Nevada

16,489

0

0

3,373

0

0

0

0

983

N. Hamp.

960

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

10,482

N. Mex.

2,292

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2,337

N. York

1,149

169,194

19,223

0

180,695

0

305,700

52,393

4,672

No. Car.

16,102

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

4,169

No. Dak.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Ohio

0

0

3,857

0

0

0

0

0

44,090

Okla.

11,568

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

13,106

Oregon

28,292

0

7,606

0

0

17,610

9,985

0

4,782

Penn.

8,354

0

5,730

5,429

0

0

0

0

14,276

R.I.

5,053

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

39,472

S.Car.

3,537

4,702

0

3,245

2,299

0

1,933

0

0

S.Dak.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

5,736

Tenn.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

62,057

Texas

182,815

0

15,286

0

0

0

0

0

9,072

Utah

7,763

0

0

3,930

0

0

541

0

0

Vermont

1,136

0

0

0

0

0

18,954

0

21,488

Wash.

111,794

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

33,244

W.Va.

10,612

0

3,031

304

0

0

921

0

2,136

Wisc.

12,092

0

0

0

0

0

1,580

0

42,992

Wyoming

0

0

0

2,186

0

0

0

0

1,671

TOTAL

804,938

205,788

157,056

40,199

183,067

65,773

343,024

52,383

727,539

In 2014, totals for State House were: Libertarian 542,570; Working Families 167,797; Constitution 54,961; Green 52,509; other parties 481,441; independent candidates 410,118.

Parties in the other(1) column are: Alaska, Alaskan Independence; Mass., Pirate; N.Y., Conservative; Or., Progressive; S.C., American; Utah, Indp. American; Vt., Progressive; W.V., Socialist Equality; Wis., Veterans.

The other(2) column for New York is 27,359 Reform and 25,034 Women’s Equality.


2016 MINOR PARTY STATE SENATE VOTE

~

Libertarian

Wrk Fam

Green

Constitn

Indpndc

Indp Pty

other(1)

other(2)

indp.

Alaska

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

14,610

Arizona

0

0

9,381

0

0

0

0

0

0

Arkansas

15,054

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Calif.

48,316

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Colorado

23,881

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Conn.

0

31,359

3,468

0

0

41,265

0

0

2,234

Del.

0

0

462

0

0

0

0

0

0

Florida

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

163,573

Georgia

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Hawaii

10,111

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Idaho

1,159

0

0

4,826

0

0

0

0

2,048

Illinois

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Indiana

21,697

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Iowa

15,512

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

8,766

Kansas

7,830

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Kentucky

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Maine

0

0

3,712

0

0

0

0

0

20,653

Mass.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

44,426

Minn.

7,899

0

0

0

3,197

0

0

8,861

0

Missouri

42,224

0

12,555

0

0

0

0

0

11,798

Montana

623

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Nevada

26,033

0

0

13,664

0

0

0

0

0

N. Hamp.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

N. Mex.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

N. York

6,413

142,142

36,856

0

204,632

0

346,458

78,839

6,486

No. Car.

76,965

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

No. Dak.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2,072

Ohio

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Okla.

12,505

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

6,866

Oregon

18,098

0

0

0

0

9,114

10,390

0

0

Penn.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

14,032

R.I.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

28,776

S.Car.

0

0

10,166

5,556

0

0

0

0

0

S.Dak.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

7,058

Tenn.

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

17,460

Texas

172,255

0

12,535

0

0

0

0

0

0

Utah

6,042

0

0

0

0

0

6,824

0

0

Vermont

0

0

0

0

0

0

46,404

3,972

29,896

Wash.

28,405

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

22,986

W.Va.

5,619

0

1,404

0

0

0

0

0

0

Wisc.

2,964

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2,093

Wyoming

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

8,570

TOTAL

549,605

173,501

90,539

24,046

207,829

50,379

410,076

91,672

414,403

In 2014, the national totals for State Senate were: Libertarian 328,020; Working Families 169,927; Green 58,416; Constitution 35,737; other parties 336,063; independent candidates 251,674. In 2012, the national totals for State Senate were: Libertarian 599,772; Working Families 179,084; Green 85,743; Constitution 48,469; other parties 519,348; independent candidates 372,10y6.

Parties in the oth(1) column are: N.Y., Conservative; Or., Progressive; Utah, Independent American; Vt., Progressive. In the oth(2) column: Mn., Legal Marijuana Now; N.Y., 40,462 Women’s Equality and 38,377 Reform; Vt., Liberty Union.


2016 PRESIDENTIAL VOTE TOTALS

The January 1, 2017 BAN had presidential totals for the eight candidates who received the most votes. However, when that issue was published, the Rhode Island write-ins were unknown. The totals in that issue for Evan McMullin did not include his 732 Rhode Island write-ins. His new total is 732,001. Darrell Castle received 47 Rhode Island write-ins, so his new total is 203,024.

Besides the eight candidates in the January issue, there are sixteen candidates who polled at least 1,000 votes:

Richard Duncan, independent: Delaware 1, Florida 25, Indiana 25, Kentucky 2, Maryland 18, Minnesota 1, Ohio 24,235, West Virginia 1, total 24,308.

Dan Vacek, Legal Marijuana Now: Iowa 2,246, Minnesota 11,291, total 13,537.

Alyson Kennedy, Socialist Workers: Colorado 452, Louisiana 480, Minnesota 1,672, New Jersey 2,156, Tennessee 2,877, Utah 521, Vermont 2, Washington 4,307, total 12,467.

Mike Smith, independent: Arizona 62, Colorado 1,819, Connecticut 12, Delaware 3, Georgia 53, Idaho 7, Illinois 4, Kansas 6, Kentucky 9, Maryland 13, Minnesota 3, Montana 1, Ohio 62, Tennessee 7,276, Utah 19, Vermont 1, West Virginia 2, total 9,352.

Chris Keniston, Veterans: Colorado 5,028, Idaho 15, Kentucky 22, Louisiana 1,881, Minnesota 31, New York 90, Ohio 114, Vermont 6, Wisconsin 67, total 7,254.

Mike Maturen, American Solidarity: California 1,316, Colorado 862, Georgia 151, Idaho 56, Kansas 214, Kentucky 155, Maryland 504, Michigan 517, Minnesota 244, New York 458, Ohio 552, Rhode Island 33, Texas 1,401, Vermont 18, Wisconsin 284, total 6,765.

Lynn Kahn, independent: Arkansas 3,390, Delaware 1, Iowa 2,247, Kansas 2, Maryland 18, New York 72, total 5,730.

Jim Hedges, Prohibition: Arkansas 4,709, Colorado 185, Kansas 3, Maryland 5, Mississippi 715, total 5,617.

Tom Hoefling, America’s: Arizona 85, Colorado 710, Connecticut 31, Delaware 7, Georgia 70, Idaho 56, Illinois 175, Indiana 269, Kansas 45, Kentucky 39, Louisiana 1,581, Maryland 42, Michigan 95, Minnesota 28, Missouri 48, Montana 10, New York 136, Ohio 268, Tennessee 132, Texas 932, Utah 6, Vermont 1, West Virginia 10, Wisconsin 80, total 4,856.

Monica Moorehead, Workers World: Idaho 2, Mass. 15, Michigan 30, New Jersey 1,749, New York 68, Ohio 19, Texas 122, Utah 544, Wisconsin 1,770, total 4,319.

Laurence Kotlikoff, independent: Arizona 52, California 402, Colorado 392, Connecticut 23, Florida 74, Georgia 34, Idaho 5, Illinois 82, Indiana 49, Kentucky 8, Louisiana 1,048, Maine 16, Maryland 73, Massachusetts 28, Michigan 87, Minnesota 17, Missouri 28, Montana 7, Ohio 90, Tennessee 20, Texas 1,037, Utah 9, Vermont 4, West Virginia 4, Wisconsin 15, total 3,604.

Peter Skewes, American: Conn. 4, South Carolina 3,246.

Rocky Giordani, Independent American: Utah 2,752.

Emidio Soltysik, Socialist: Colorado 271, Indiana 57, Maryland 6, Michigan 2,209, Minnesota 15, Montana 1, New York 36, Texas 72, Utah 4, Vermont 2, Wisconsin 33, total 2,706.

Scott Copeland, Constitution of Idaho: Idaho 2,356.

Kyle Kopitke, Independent American: Colorado 1,096.


TWELVE INDEPENDENTS ELECTED TO STATE LEGISLATURES IN 2016

Vt.: Alyson Eastman, Adam Greshin, Ben Jickling, Barbara Murphy, Oliver Olsen, Paul Poirier, Laura Sibilia; Ak: Jason Grenn, Dan Ortiz; Me.: Owen Casas, Kent Ackley; R.I.: Blake Filippi.


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 © 2017 Ballot Access News

Comments

February 2017 Ballot Access News Print Edition — 10 Comments

  1. I didn’t include the vote for Benjamin Phelps because that was a district with two Libertarians on the ballot, and votes were permitted to vote for both of them. If I had included the Phelps vote of 15,302 along with the vote for Michelle Darnell of 16,824, then the number of people who voted Libertarian for state house would have been inaccurate, because some people’s votes would have been counted twice.

    But you are right about the other two. I missed them. I appreciate your good detective work.

  2. You don’t show Soltysik’s 1352 votes from Guam, the only 3rd party candidate for President on the ballot there in 2016.

  3. Guam has no electoral votes, so although the Guam vote is interesting, the votes aren’t really official.

  4. But Phelps was running for 48-2 and Darnell was running for 48-1. It was the same people voting, but aren’t those two separate elections, with one person being elected for each position?

  5. Jim, you’re right, but the voters voting for position 48-1 and for 48-2 were exactly the same voters.

    Unlike Minnesota, in which each of two house districts is nestled inside one state senate district, so that the territory of the two house seats is separate, Washington has house districts that are equal in territory to each other and to the state senate seat that shares that district number. My principle is that I am really tallying the number of voters who voted for each party, and adding both 48-1 and 48-2 would be counting those voters twice.

  6. In the State House table, the “indp.” column is completely cut off. In the State Senate table, I can see the letter “i” and part of the letter “n” at the top of the column, and one or two digits of some of the numbers.

    Richard, can you consult with some computer guru and find a way to stop the rightmost columns of your tables from being cut off?

  7. Joshua, you’re right. Thanks for pointing it out. I’ll ask my webmaster if there is anything that can be done. If you tell me your postal address I will send you a paper copy in the postal mail.

  8. Richard: Thanks for the offer, but I don’t need a paper copy. I just want to see future tables display correctly, since this problem of table columns getting cut off has been happening almost every month since the site was last re-designed.

  9. Yoս гeally makie it sееm so easy with your presentation bսt
    I find tһіs topic to be really something that I think
    I would never understand.Ιt seеms toօ complex and extremely broad
    fоr me. I ɑm l᧐oking forward for ʏߋur neⲭt post, I’lltry t᧐
    get tһe hang of it!

Leave a Reply

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