Texas state Representative Solomon Ortiz (D-Corpus Christi) has introduced HB 820. It lowers the number of signatures for both new parties and independent candidates. The bill provides for 500 signatures for new parties and for statewide independent candidates. District independent candidates would need 100 signatures, or 2% of the last gubernatorial vote, whichever is less. The Constitution Party of Texas did the work for bringing this bill into existence.
It is expected that another bill, ending the prohibition against a primary voter signing a minor party or independent candidate petition, will soon be introduced. That bill will probably be sponsored by Representative Mark Strama. That bill probably won’t lower the number of signatures.
The Reform Party of California congratulates The Constitution Party of the Lone State for doing what the local ‘reformers’ have been to busy ‘politicking’ bout: real reform and real political change.
Any one short of Independent Texans working with high profile maverick Jewish Cowboy Kinky Friedman? Animal rescue, promotional cigars, non Democrat /non Republican issues? Hey Richard Winger [your BAN has already arrived prior to my hospital stay. I already read it and forwarded to other trouble makers….] Kinky might be a source of off months revenue — including advertisement[s] for concert tours…
I was so disappointed in what 2008 became [one year long flat tire intercepted by occasion skid marks !] and what 2009 is becoming, Bill Clinton with a sun tan!
Donald Raymond Lake, prognoses up in the air, cat scan on Monday…………
This proves once again why the LP needs more legislation lobbying efforts than what they have. Certain states are doing it. Others are not. Hopefully Pat Dixon can get LPTX ED Butler on this ASAP.
Mike, The Libertarian Party of Texas has ongoing ballot status -it does not need to have an easier ballot access law. It was in the self-interest of the Consitution Party to get easier ballot access.
Interesting that the Texas CP got a Hispanic legislator to introduce the bill.
The Libertarian Party of Texas only has ballot status at the whim of the Democratic Party. The Democrats know that they can run a full slate of statewide candidates and when they do that, the Libertarians fall off the ballot. That has only happened in 2002 (I’m just covering the years since 1986, because the vote test has been either 5% for any statewide office, or 2% for Governor, starting in 1986). The Democrats ran a full slate in 2002 because the Greens were also on in 2002, so both minor parties got knocked off. Therefore, the Texas Libertarians had to petition in 2004, which soaked up a lot of money. So it would be hugely in the interest of the Texas Libertarian Party to get ballot access reform.
The bill provides for 500 signatures for new parties and for statewide independent candidates. District independent candidates would need 100 signatures, or 2% of the last gubernatorial vote, whichever is less.
Are these numbers correct? Is the 2% of the last gubernatorial vote thing just there for technical reasons, or are they anticipating the actual possibility of a 5000-vote governor’s race?
The 2% is most likely refering to the vote in that district not statewide.
The 2% is to cover very small partisan elections. Texas has one county (Loving) with fewer than 100 registered voters.
The sponsor should be styled as Solomon Ortiz, Jr.. His namesake father is a US Congressman.
The bill would actually set wildly inconsistent ballot qualification standards. Qualification as a state party entitles a party to nominate candidates for all state, district, county, and precinct offices – more candidates than the required number of signatures to qualify the party.
It would retain existing petition standards for candidates seeking the nomination of a party. So if I wanted to seek the gubernatorial nomination of the Constitution Party nominee, I would have to file 5000 signatures by early January, 10 times as many signatures as needed to qualify the party as a whole.
Setting arbitrary numeric standards does not account for the wide variation in the number of voters among various districts in the states. In the most populous districts (for the two Houston-based appeals courts) there were 855,731 votes cast for governor in 2006. 2% of that would be 17,114. So in that case, the 100 maximum makes the actual requirement 0.012% (this is not 1.2% but a little 1.2/100 of 1%. What rational defense could Texas offer for a variation in percentage of over 3 magnitude?
It would make more sense to set the qualification for all candidates regardless of party based on some small percentage of the vote, say 1/10 of 1% (or 5 persons, which ever is greater), eliminate the party primaries and let everyone run in the general election, followed by a runoff if necessary. It moves the filing deadline up 8 months, and could be applied to presidential candidates as well – the only difference would be that they would have to name their vice presidential candidate and associated electors.
#7. Actually, Loving County has 119 registered voters (for the 2008 election). You’re getting registered voters confused with the total population, which is less than 100.
The 2% is the percentage of the vote cast for governor in the district, county, or precinct from which the candidate is seeking office.
The standard would apply to district offices (US representative, Texas legislature, and state board of education, and judicial districts); county offices (county judge, sheriff, count judges at law, sheriff, etc.); and precinct offices (county commissioner, justice of the peace, county constable).
A precinct is a subdivision of a county, not to be confused with an election precinct. Each county has at least 4, since every county has 4 county commissioners who are elected from single-member precincts.
The largest district had 855,000 votes cast in the 2006 gubernatorial election. 2% of that is 17,000 or so, so the 100 maximum would apply.
Loving County had 90 voters in the 2006 gubernatorial elections, so 2% is 1.8 voters. But there are additional tiers for areas with between 500 and 1250 votes (25 signatures) and less than 500 votes (5%). So an independent candidate in Loving County would need 5 signatures. The 4 precincts would have had around 20 votes, so their requirement would be 1 or 2 signatures.