The latest issue of the Fordham Urban Law Journal contains an article by Richard Winger on the federal court ballot access cases filed by Ralph Nader last year. A copy of the article is being sent to all subscribers to Ballot Access News. If you aren’t a subscriber, but wish a copy of the article, send $2 to Richard Winger, PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147. The article will not be posted on the internet until mid-2007, when the Fordham site will make it available.
Thank you, Richard, for this article. I do hope that the Helsinki group will find the U.S. out of compliance with respect to ballot access for third-party and independent candidates.
In the U.S. system, two parties tend to result from the winner-take-all nature of our elections. This is different from saying that our system is “based on” the two-party system. Quite to the contrary, the ability of third-party and independent candidates to challenge the incumbant major parties forces the incumbant major parties, periodically, to re-alignment themselves to better represent the spectrum of voters. We have seen this time and again in U.S. political history. Third-party and independent candidates also allow disaffected and even disgruntled elements within our country to voice their concerns, which – if nothing more – can have a paliative effect.
In 2004, the Democratic Party systematically challenged Ralph Nader efforts to gain ballot access, and nearly succeeded, in Ohio, by keeping him off the ballot there, in stealing the Presidential election. (Shame on you Lawrence Tribe!)
Fortunately, such a debacle was avoided, and there is now the opportunity to make the case to insure that ballot access strikes a balance between the right of citizens to vote and the interest of the state in conducting an orderly election.