Illinois holds a regular election this November in 39 State Senate districts. In 20 of them, there is only one candidate on the ballot. No independent candidate, and no candidate of an unqualified party, is on the ballot for any State Senate race in Illinois this year. Illinois requires a petition signed by 5% of the last vote cast, for such candidates.
Republicans failed to run anyone in 13 of the 39 districts, and Democrats failed to run anyone in 7 of them.
For the 118 State House of Representatives races, there is only one candidate in 52% of the races, and if the Green Party weren’t on the ballot and running 13 State House candidates, the percentage would be 56% of the races with only one candidate on the ballot. Republicans aren’t running anyone in 46 races, and Democrats aren’t running anyone in 20 races. As with the State Senate, the 5% petition requirement kept all independent candidates, and all nominees of unqualified parties, off the ballot.
Another state with one-party elections. The problem is that we (third parties) need to elect people to the state legislature to change such laws. This goes for many states. In the next two years a big push should be made by all third parties to recommend common sense ballot access across the board. Requirements such as 10,000 signatures for party access and 100 sigs to get on the ballot for State Senate and 50 sigs for State House. I am firmly against access via a percentage of a certain vote. This is too arbitrary and serves as more than a normal obstacle to keep common citizens off the ballot.
So Illinois is no longer a democracy.
More than half its legislature is unelected.
Out here in California, petitioning requirements are
fairly reasonable. There is a filing fee of 1% of the
salary of the office being sought. A candidate from a
minor (under 5% total registration) party only needs
40-60 signatures of party members from the District.
Thoses signatures can also be used to waive part of
the filing fee. If a candidate succeeds in gathering
the lesser of 10% of party registration within that
District or 150 signatures the filing fee is totally
waived. This requirement is the same for all State-
wide Offices or U. S. Senate. A major party candidate
must collect 5,000 signatures to fully waive the filing
fee which is usually just paid by the candidate. For
Independent {Decline to State} candidates the signature
rules are much higher. So even though there is a fairly
stiff requirement for qualifying a party in California
once that’s done the State is very reasonable in its
permission for a candidate to run for office. Also all
ballot qualified parties pick there candidate with a
State paid primary.
To stay on the ballot a party has 2 choices. First off
maintain registration above 1% of the most recent vote
for Governor or 1/15th of 1% registration with one or
more candidates earning 2% of the vote for ANY state
wide office. That is how the Prohibition Party was able
to stay on the ballot in California until 1962.
Actually the Prohibition Party stayed on the California ballot until January 1964. It passed the vote test in 1962, but flunked the one-fifteenth of 1% of the total state registration test, in January 1964.
“So Illinois is no longer a democracy. More than half its legislature is unelected.”
Good point. Richard, how many states are in this situation where over half of the races are unopposed? And of these states, how many have no 3rd party or independent candidates?
I’ll have the data for all states in the print issue of Ballot Access News for Nov. 1, 2008. I’ve been tracking that data ever since 1992.
I live in IL, and I read that our ballot will ask whether we should hold a constitutional convention. Many people, of all parties, favor reforms, including fairer petition signature requirements for all parties, term limits, recall elections, and binding citizen referendums. The legislators won’t vote for these reforms, because these reforms would decrease the power of the legislators. If you know anyone who lives in IL, please ask them to vote for the constitutional convention.
Is the Constitutional Convention limited to just the Illinois Constitution? If it means the US Constitution, then vote “no” because what are the odds of the people who delivered us a $10.2 Trillion debt re-writing the US COnstitution giving us more rights than we already have? They lose little sleep saddling our kids with a nearly bankrupt (financially and morally) country, so I do not trust them to have a Constituional Convention.
ALL State regimes are EVIL ANTI-Democracy regimes.
Half the votes in half the gerrymander districts is about 25 percent ANTI-Democracy indirect minority rule — by the EVIL party hack monarchs / oligarchs.
UNEQUAL votes for each gerrymander district winner.
UNEQUAL total votes in each gerrymander district.
Much worse primary math by the party hack gangs picking extremists — who later get elected.
Democracy NOW via 100 percent P.R.
Total Votes / Total Seats = Equal votes needed for each seat winner.
Difficult math ONLY for party hacks and MORON party hack judges.
NO primaries are needed.
Dems and GOP, a pox on both of their houses!
———–Donald Raymond Lake