California Republican Party Leaders Fret About Likelihood of No Republican on November Ballot for Governor

This San Francisco Chronicle article quotes several leaders of the California Republican Party on the problem that the top-two system will likely result in no Republican appearing on the November 2018 ballot.

Jim Brulte, chair of the state party, is quoted as saying the November election is a “run-off.” He is incorrect. A run-off is something held after an election, in cases when the election failed to produce a winner. But in California, the June primary is not an election, because no one can be elected in June (for congress and partisan state office). Federal law forbids states from holding elections for congress at any time other than November of even-numbered years (except for special elections). States that want run-offs must hold them after November. The only two states with congressional general election run-offs are Georgia and Louisiana. Georgia holds them in January of odd years, and Louisiana in December of even years.


California Republican Party Leaders Fret About Likelihood of No Republican on November Ballot for Governor — 29 Comments

  1. I must dissent from Justice Wingers —

    Federal law forbids states from holding elections for congress at any time other than November of even-numbered years (except for special elections). States that want run-offs must hold them after November. The only two states with congressional general election run-offs are Georgia and Louisiana. Georgia holds them in January of odd years, and Louisiana in December of even years.

    2 USC §7. Time of election

    The Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November, in every even numbered year, is established as the day for the election, in each of the States and Territories of the United States, of Representatives and Delegates to the Congress commencing on the 3d day of January next thereafter.

    (R.S. §25; Mar. 3, 1875, ch. 130, §6, 18 Stat. 400; June 5, 1934, ch. 390, §2, 48 Stat. 879.)

    **THE** day for **THE** election.

    ZERO mention in USA LAW of any later [run-off] day.

    The GA and LA super-morons have subverted Sec. 7.


    R.S. §25 derived from act Feb. 2, 1872, ch. 11, §3, 17 Stat. 28.

    The second sentence of this section, which was based on section 6 of the act Mar. 3, 1875 and made this section inapplicable to any State that had not yet changed its day of election and whose constitution required an amendment to change the day of election of its State officers, was omitted.

    1934—Act June 5, 1934, substituted “3d day of January” for “fourth day of March”.
    Constitutional Provisions

    The first section of Amendment XX to the Constitution provides: “The terms of Senators and Representatives [shall end] at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.”

    Time for election of Representatives, see Const. Art. I, §4, cl. 1.

  2. The United Coalition has been working with potential California Governor and Lt Governor candidates as potential elected leaders in 2018:

    Candidates for Governor of California, USA (November 2018)
    Nickolas Wildstar [Libertarian]
    Stasyi Barth [Republican]

    Candidate for Lt. Governor of California, USA (November 2018)
    Gail McLaughlin [Independent]
    Tim Ferreira [Libertarian]
    * * *

    Should voters and candidates seek the unity and teamwork being exhibited by the 7th California Parliament Election of 2018, we welcome you to the principles of equal free speech time, equal treatment and pure proportional representation which you may engage with the team in California or any region on the globe under one international region.

  3. Federal law is not applicable to state offices. Federal law may be changed, now that 1/6 of representatives are chosen under Top 2 systems, I would expect the statute to be be changed when the first (primary) event is Open to all voters and all candidates.

  4. The only top-two states are California (53 representatives) and Washington (10 representatives). 63 is one-seventh of the 435 members of the US House, not one-sixth.

  5. Any thoughtful person would realize that Louisiana representatives would favor a change in the federal statute, and not rely on narrow legalistic interpretations. 69/435 = 1/6.3

  6. What was Richard thinking? Why would legislators care about legal definitions. You can call an onion and apple, but it doesn’t change the taste.

  7. I believe Louisiana’s state legislators are quite happy with the current Louisiana system, as are Louisiana’s members of Congress.

  8. The minority rule gerrymander math is a bit worse in top 2 primary States — due to possible having 2 D or 2 R.

    Some percentage of D/R voters will NOT vote for a R/D — even the lesser evil R/D.

    NO primaries.

    PR and AppV

  9. The uniform Fed date is to lessen potential MAJOR corruption —

    what if CONTROL of the gerrymander Congress depended on a *run-off* election in LA, GA, etc. ???

    Same reason for Prez/VP election dates —

    2-1-4 The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the [Prez/VP] Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

  10. Republicans who don’t like the idea of two Democrats on the ballot for Governor in November ought to get behind the effort to repeal Top Two Primary.

  11. @DR,

    The uniform election date for President was established to prevent the practice of pipelining, where voters might move across a state line and vote in multiple states. At the time, there was no voter registration, so a voter could simply show up at the polls and claim residency.

    Since the presidency is a single office, it makes sense that the electors meet on the same date albeit in individual states. You might recall that the March 4 date for the beginning of terms was established somewhat by accident, when the Continental Congress chose the first Wednesday in January, February, and March 1789 for (a) choosing of presidential electors; (b) meeting of presidential electors; and (c) meeting of Congress, including counting of electoral votes, and contingent election of the president.

    The first Wednesday in March 1789 happened to be March 4.

    Congress realized the problem of electing the President after his term began (George Washington was not inaugurated until June 1790), so provided that the lame duck Congress would count the votes, with the House choosing the president if necessary. After the 1801 election, they set the date for counting electoral votes in January (giving them two months to elect a president), the meeting date for the electors in December, and the choosing of electors in November (at the time many electors were chosen by the legislature).

    By the time a uniform election date for choosing electors was set, only South Carolina used legislative appointment. As a practical matter, the popular election of electors had to take place in early November so that a statewide canvass could be done, the electors could be informed, and they could travel to the electoral college meeting place. The odd construction for the date (first Tuesday after the first Monday in November) was set to provide a uniform period every presidential election from a date in December.

    Incidentally, the bozo legislature in Sacramento did not realize this when they set the date for their March primary.

    How did the uniform date for election of Congress established in 1872, prevent what happened with the 1876/77 presidential election??? Of course that Congress had been elected in 1874 on the mostly-uniform November election date.

    There was nothing particular remarkable about the Senate runoff in Louisiana in December 2016, when there was a 51:48 Republican majority.

    And look at states where there is plurality election for senator and ensuing corruption (e.g. Vermont or Kansas).

  12. @Richard,

    Louisianans would prefer the return of the Open Primary for Congress to September or October.

  13. The Libertarian Party of Louisiana, which runs more candidates than any other third party in that state, is very happy to have all its candidates on the ballot in November, and forcing them to curtail their runs in September would make them very unhappy. So they don’t prefer the return of the old system.

  14. How many of the 50 States do NOT have a uniform date for *regular* State[wide] elections — on *A*/*THE* election day ??? — the *THE* as in 2 USC 7 above.

    How corrupt are such non-uniform States compared to the one uniform day States ???

    Related matter — How many folks vote in all 3 USA Senator elections in a 6 year cycle by moving around ???

  15. While the California election system doesn’t meet the diction definition of a run-off, it is basically the same thing. Winger wasted a whole paragraph “correcting” Jim Brulte over a word that is basically correct.

  16. A primary is meant to whittle down the choices of candidates on the ballot for the real election. The Top-2 system is the extreme end of this. The Open-ELECTION of Louisiana is the exact opposite of this. Sometimes they need a run-off election often times not. You can call shit a flower but it doesn’t make it stink less.

  17. Some of the southern States still have top 2 runoff primaries
    — from post- Civil War times
    — as de facto 1 party Donkey States — circa 1878-1964.

    Now some are de facto Elephant States — since 1964.

    NO primaries.

    PR and AppV

  18. The GA and LA morons can have their moron systems and conform to 2 USC 7 by having only the primary/ runoff primary winners be listed on the Nov ballots — ie force write-ins for others.

    Again – note 14 Amdt, Sec. 2 (1868) — NO write-ins allowed = blatant denial/abridgement of right to vote.

    Note CA ban on Nov write-ins. Fed case please ???

  19. @Richard Winger,

    Libertarians had a total of two candidates in the last two general elections in Louisiana (2011 and 2015). Are you really going to say that was because the general election was in October?

  20. The California Republican Party (CRP) must endorse one candidate at their convention and support the nominee completely to ensure a spot for the general election.

  21. When did an Elephant win a CA regular statewide election – for CA guv or USA Senator — a POWER office ???

    How many States are de facto ONE party States for partisan statewide offices — many for decades and decades ???

    PR and AppV

  22. Jim Riley, Libertarians have plenty of candidates for federal office on the Louisiana ballot. Out of the 6 districts, in 2016 there were four; in 2014, five; also five in 2012. The big issues that interest Libertarians are currently national issues.

  23. The Libertarian Party is the Freedom party compared to the other communist / leftwing // fascist / rightwing gangster control freak parties – esp since 1932 in Great Depression 1.

Leave a Reply

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