On July 31, 2008, independent congressional candidate Andy Shugart filed a federal lawsuit, challenging the number of signatures needed for U.S. House. He complains that in his district, he needed over 6,100 signatures, yet an independent presidential candidate only needs 5,000 in Alabama. On January 9, several Alabama newspapers publicized the lawsuit, and a 45-second segment about the lawsuit was aired on National Public Radio stations in Alabama. Here is one of the newspaper stories.
The Alabama case is one of 4 lawsuits around the nation, challenging the number of signatures for independent candidates for the U.S. House. The Coalition for Free & Open Elections (COFOE) helped bring each of these four cases into existence. The other cases are in Georgia, North Carolina, and Illinois. Like the Alabama case, the Georgia and North Carolina cases are still in the evidence-gathering state. The Illinois case already lost in the 7th circuit, and COFOE will soon decide whether to pay for appealing that to the U.S. Supreme Court. COFOE appreciates the donations it has received for these cases. Those who donate at least $25 to COFOE get a free subscription to the written Ballot Access News newsletter. COFOE is at PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147.
There’s also a bill that’s been introduced into the PA Senate and is seeking supporters (it has about a dozen, but needs more). If you live in PA, please visit http://www.paballotaccess.org where you can learn about the Voters’ Choice Act and take action. There are very specific, easy directions and helpful tools on the website so that you can solicit your State Senator and State Representative.
I am wondering if Procedure would allow this suit to be amended to ask the Court to allow for a candidate to pay a filing fee in lieu of gathering the signatures on a petition? Richard, since you have had contact with the Petitioner, could you inquire from him, via his attorney, if such could be done? If so, I think it ought to be considered.
My worst fears for this suit, is that the Court will rule that candidates for President on the Alabama ballot must collect the same percentage of signatures as is currently required for candidates for any other state or federal office office.
If this happens, this would mean that future presidential candidates in Alabama would have to gather some 37,000 (or more) signatures, rather than the currently obtainable 5,000 signatures!
In my post of this past weekend, I challenged all 3rd party leaders to demonstrate via this blog an interest in working for the re-introduction of a bill that would allow for 3rd party and independent candidates to pay a filing fee as an option to gathering signatures.
Of the handful of posts on this issue, none were indicative of any 3rd party or independent leaders in Alabama stating they wanted to do so. I am disappointed and confounded at the lack of serious desire to try a strategy that just might be supported by the Alabama legislature.
From the impression I’ve gotten from past conversations and contact with legislators, they are NOT going to lower the percentage of signatures on petitions. Neither have the Courts shown any inclination to do so either.
We have to try something else. The filing fee approach just might get a more receptive response from the legislators.
So once again, 3rd party and independent leaders in Alabama, if you want to stop standing in the cold, the rain and/or in the hot sun – with no guarantee that you’re going to get the sufficient number of signatures – why not let’s make at least one effort with the 2009 Legislature (if its not too late to get a bill introduced) to see what can be done. This will at least give us some indication whether this might be the answer, or if we need to go back to begging them to lower the percentage of signatures on petitions.
We won’t know unless we try!
SEPARATE IS STILL NOT EQUAL.
BROWN V. BD OF ED 1954 — AS APPLIED TO ***ALL*** GOVT ACTIONS — even magical ballot access laws.
Way too difficult for the armies of constitutional law MORONS to understand.
Does there have to be a Civil W-A-R II to get REAL Democracy into the rotted party hack U.S.A. and State regimes ???
There is no danger that the court in Alabama would cause the number of signatures for president to rise. Courts can’t create new procedures; they merely say that old ones are perhaps unconstitutional.
If anyone wishes to e-mail “Alabama Independent” to work with him on improving ballot access in Alabama, his e-mail is donwebb1@bellsouth.net.
Richard:
I’m not suggesting the Court will “create new procedures” for Presidential candidates. I’m saying they could rule that Alabama MUST require equal precentages of signatures for all candidates so that candidates for a local office are not required to obtain more signatures than does a candidate for a statewide office – such as the 5000 currently required for presidential candidates . They could leave it up to the Alabama Legislature to decide if they wanted to lower the percentage to where it would coincide with about 5000 for a statewide office, or make it – including the candidates for President – be 3% as it currently is for all other offices.
Knowing these Democratic and Republican legislators, they are not likely to lower the percentages. Instead they would see this as a green light to raise the Presidential petitions to 3%. I think, as you have reported many times, that the Courts have already ruled that percentages as high as 5% for statewide office are not unconstitutional.
So this is my fear.
Still, I stay if there are any serious 3rd party and independent leaders in Alabama who want to try the filing fee approach, then get in contact with me. But I’m not going to destroy what little respect I might still have left by asking a legislator to introduce such legislation, if the 3rd party and independent leaders are not going to work to support it.