On June 9, Illinois elections officials removed four Green Party nominees from the November ballot. They are Iain Abernathy in the 8th district, David Kalbfleisch in the 10th district, Robert Hill in the 14th district, and Troy Dennis in the 17th district. All four districts are fairly competitive between the two major parties, and all four Greens had been nominated by party meeting after the February primary was over.
Illinois regulates political parties to a great extent. The Green Party followed state law, but it supplemented state law with its own Bylaws, especially in cases in which no Greens had run for party office in the February primary in certain counties. It is not clear if the Green Party will go to court to fight for these nominees. But case law, more and more every year, establishes the right of political parties to control their own nominations process.
On what grounds were they removed? Why is it not enough to follow the law?
Sorry – Nominations for PUBLIC offices is PUBLIC business by PUBLIC electors.
See the 1989 Eu opinion about the difference between PUBLIC business in the nomination process and internal clubby business by party hack parties.
Imagine US newspapers’ reaction if this happened in Russia…
I haven’t seen the documents yet, but the best I can understand, the law says certain party officials that presumably were elected in the primary must do certain things. The problem is, in certain counties the Illinois Greens didn’t elect any party officers at the primary, so they improvised with a bylaw that says the state party can appoint those “missing” officials. It’s an example of laws being written with large parties in mind, laws that don’t match the reality for smaller ballot-qualified parties.
Actually, the 17th district had no Republican. But the other races are very competitive.
Both Kalbfleisch and Hill are recent veterans from the armed services. This is seriously how the Democrats want to support the troops? They go and fight their wars, come home, and get barred from attempting to serve their country further? Is there any better way to honor our veterans?
Damn it all to hell, folks. Damn it.
The removal of Troy R. Dennis from the ballot in the 17th Congressional District means that incumbent Phil Hare (D) will be running unopposed for re-election.
In the spirit of comments 3, 5, and 7 above, this seems like the sort of story that ought to be brought to the attention of the national media.
Hope they go to court on this one. As it was already said…..done in a communist state and our press would be all over it…
I have found only two news stories on the removal of the Greens from the Illinois November ballot. The Chicago Daily Herald gets the number of candidates wrong, but quotes Green Party officials at greater length. The Pentagraph article includes some very nasty quotes from Democratic Party officials.
Dennis, other Greens removed from ballot
http://www.pantagraph.com/articles/2008/06/09/news/doc484dbbdab7e86793490814.txt
By Kenneth Lowe
Kenneth.lowe@lee.net
Bloomington Pentagraph
Monday, June 9, 2008 7:37 PM CDT
Three Green Party candidates removed from ballot
By David Beery | Daily Herald Staff
Published: 6/10/2008 12:03 AM
http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=205191&src=2
I agree that this story should be brought to the attention of the national media; I only hope it can be done without drawing attention to the fact that the Illinois Greens nominated Troy Dennis in the first place, even though he takes positions diametrically opposed to those of the Green Party on most issues.
Illinois law permits vacancies in precinct committeemen to be filled by appointment by the county chair, but explicitly does not allow this to occur from the time of the primary, when party voters elect them, until a month after the general election.
When precinct committeemen fill candidate vacancies, their vote is weighted based on the number of person’s voting in the party primary in their jurisdiction, in effect making the vacancy process a form of indirect primary.
It sounds like the Green Party is trying to turn a bottom up procedure into a top down process controlled by the party bosses.
“It sounds like the Green Party is trying to turn a bottom up procedure into a top down process controlled by the party bosses.”
It’s probably more due to the Greens not having the same organizational strength as the Democrats and Republicans than some sort of nefarious intention. They just achieved major party status in the 2006 election.
The four cases are all similar but not identical, and in the end, the four decisions wound up being all different as well. We got the written rulings from the SOEB today. (Richard, I’ll be sending you the written rulings as well as the hearing examiner recommendations, which are lengthier.)
One of the things I would spotlight here is that in none of the four cases was the Democratic objection proper. They all made vague allegations that proper procedure wasn’t followed but provided no evidence thereof. All evidence was based on testimony from the candidates themselves, or from Green Party officials. The effect of this is chilling, because it establishes a precedent where in the future, every single candidate who files can be objected against with impunity, and then those candidates can be hauled into proceedings like this at their own expense and be forced to prove they didn’t do anything wrong, even though the burden of proof isn’t legally on them.
The decision of whether or not to go to court is up to each of the candidates, not the party. I don’t know what the candidates are intending.
if the green party followed state law,i hope they fight it in court.The Illinois election code is set up to make it very hard for third parties to get on the ballot or to stay on the ballot.The republicans or democrats do not want the people to have a real choice in november.
“It sounds like the Green Party is trying to turn a bottom up procedure into a top down process controlled by the party bosses.”
As an Illinoisian Green, how our local area party slates candidates is that the legally recognized slating committee in that relevant district has its by-laws state that the committee shall act to the wishes of the Green Party membership in that area. This keeps the power in the hands of the GP members in the area and keeps intact consensus decision making and the integrity of one man, one man.
I wouldn’t call that “a top down process controlled by the party bosses.”
Illinois law provides that the party candidates are nominated by primaries open to voters who choose to vote in a particular party’s primary. That is the authority to nominate is vested in the Green Party voters and not the Green Party “members”.
Illinois law also provides a method of filling nomination vacancies. This is based on election of local party officials at the primary. When these party officials fill vacancies, their voting is weighted based on the number of primary voters in the area they represent. In effect, vacancies can be filled by a indirect process akin to a convention where the delegates are selected by party voters.
This does not preclude or interfere with a separate membership-based organization acting by consensus or otherwise, from recruiting, supporting, or funding favored candidates.