In approximately half the states, the number of signatures required for a new party, or an independent candidate, depends on how many voters voted in the last election, or on how many people were registered to vote in the last election. In some of the states with the most restrictive requirements, the 2010 or 2012 requirements are substantially higher than they were in 2006 or 2008. This is because, across the nation, turnout and registration were relatively high this season.
California requires a statewide independent candidate to submit a petition of 1% of the number of registered voters at the last election. In 2008 a statewide independent needed 158,372 signatures, but in 2010 such a candidate will need 173,041 signatures. No one has qualified as a statewide independent in California since 1992.
Georgia requires a statewide independent candidate to submit a petition of 1% of the number of registered voters at the last election for which that office was elected. In 2008 an independent presidential candidate needed 42,489 signatures. In 2012 an independent presidential candidate will need 57,582 signatures, unless the law is changed. In 2010, a new party that wishes to run a full slate of candidates for U.S. House will need 287,910 signatures.
Texas requires an independent presidential candidate to collect signatures equal to 1% of the last presidential vote. In 2008 such a candidate needed 74,108 signatures. In 2012 such a candidate will need more than 80,531 signatures (Texas hasn’t finished its official tally yet; the requirement will be somewhat higher than 1% of the unofficial tally).
North Carolina requires a new or previously unqualified party, and a statewide independent, to submit signatures equal to 2% of the last gubernatorial vote. In 2008 the requirement was 69,734. In 2010 and 2012 it will be higher than 85,376.
I created a Face Book club for Fans of Richard Winger and Ballot Access News.
With the number required changing from one election to the next, hopefully state legislators will see the need to tack this down with an exact number. If shamnesty passes, these numbers will soar, but that would be the least of our worries…
Yes, but how many people will find the time to help lobby for ballot access law reform?
Well this sucks. Hopefully some candidate can with some miracle get ballot access.
Shouldn’t changing ballot access be based on the number of potential voters? Including unregistered and whatnot? This doesn’t take into account that each election is different. This is a very inconstant standard to use to me and quite unrealistic. In a year where people are not very fired up, it puts a modicum on others to break in using constantly higher standards. However, based on population it keeps relatively constant standards people must live up to.
SEPARATE IS NOT EQUAL.
BROWN V. BD OF ED 1954.
ANY ballot access lawyers with ANY brains – to overrule a mere 40 years of JUNK ballot access cases starting with Williams v. Rhodes ???
The Supremes do periodically overrule their earlier JUNK cases that are obviously defective.
287,910 signatures
Since we can’t start collecting signatures until January of the election year and have to turn them in by the deadline approximately 6 months later, working 8 hours a day, that comes to about 200 signaturs an hour. That’s why you don’t see any Libertarians on the ballot in Georgia for US house seats. This is criminal!
What are the rules like in states that don’t have it based on percentage?
The Alaskan Independence Party has retained major party ballot status. The Libertarian Party of Alaska has not. This leaves the AIP as the only viable opposition party to the D’s & R’s in Alaska. In this capacity, we have gifted the American people by thwarting the return of convicted felon Stevens to the U.S. Senate. Stay tuned for more from the Northern frontier!
I am vice chairman of the ballot access commitee for the constitution party of Nc. If you live in/know anyone who would be willing to sign our petition please let me know.
ballot@constitutionpartync.com
We will need just over 85,000 valid signitures in a little over 3 years to make the 2012 elections.
I can never support the Alaskan Inpendence Party due to the socially backwards views of some members and the general disregard that I have seen for environmental concerns. That said, I appreciate their ability to pull votes from Stevens this year in the senate race. Anyway, I predict a strong third party candidate from the left in Alaska by 2012.
Re #5, the problem using population is that there is not a good count on non-citizens; and you are probably still going to end up with fairly arbitrary percentages.
For example, let’s say you decided 5% of voters was OK. But then you decide to use registered voters. Someone points out that a lot of registrations might be by people who have moved, died, don’t care about politics, etc. So you adjust the figure to 3%. But depending on interest, better quality registrations, that might be 4% or 6% of voters. And registration can be almost as volatile as turnout.
#8, Sometimes they are a combination.
In Texas, nomination for a district office requires the lesser of 500 or 5% of the gubernatorial vote in the district. For US Congress, the 5% would typically be around 7 or 8,000, with a few outliers, especially on the low side.
The 500 value was approved in American Party of Texas v White, so the legislature would be unlikely to change it, even though it is now equivalent to about 0.35%.
But the same standards are applied to other district offices. There are 150 Texas House districts (vs. 32 congressional districts), which would mean that 5% would typically be around 1500. There may be a few districts that require 5% (but this would be less than 500). At the time the law was written, there may have been no districts where the cap of 500 would have been reached.