Political Science Professor Marshall Derosa has declared his candidacy for U.S. Senate from Florida in 2010, on the Constitution Party ticket. Assuming he is nominated for that office in 2010, he will be the first Constitution Party nominee on the Florida ballot for statewide office (besides president). Derosa teaches at Florida Atlantic University and is the author of a book on the 9th amendment, “The Ninth Amendment and the Politics of Creative Jurisprudence.”
How does Professor Derosa get on the ballot in Florida for Senator?
The Constitution Party is already on the ballot in Florida. In Florida, all qualified parties nominate by primary. Professor Derosa must file a declaration of candidacy to run in the Constitution Party primary next year, and pay a huge filing fee. Presumably no one will run against him in the Constitution Party primary, the government won’t bother to print up any Constitution Party primary ballots, and he will be automatically the nominee, set for November. The only real hurdle is the large amount of money needed for the filing fee. I think it’s almost $9,000.
Why on earth is the filing fee nine grand??
Because state legislators like high filing fees. The fees are so high, generally half the state legislators run for re-election with no general election opponent.
We here at Third Party Revolution endorse Marshall DeRosa in his campaign for the Florida US Senate Seat, along with many other third party and independent candidates for public offices nation-wide, ranging from local to federal levels.
I’ve met Dr. DeRosa, I’m familiar with his writings, and as a candidate h holds much promise. However, apparently there is nothing being done to promote or organize his campaign. If you go to the Constitution Party of Florida’s website, they’ve still advertising Chuck Baldwin’s presidential campaign (you can order yard signs and bumper stickers, etc.). When you hit the link for CP candidates, you get a listing of 2006 contenders. There is no DeRosa for Senate website. I signed up for the CP e-mail list and I get occasional mailings that blast the GOP candidates as not conservative enough — all well and good, but there is very little mention of DeRosa or his campaign. There is nothing about fund raising, grass roots organizing, or even appeals for volunteers. Zero. Zip. Zilch. I even wrote to the CP chair (and cc’d DeRosa) asking when the campaign would get off the ground, but received no reply. It’s a shame, because a legitimate CP campaign could really have an impact on a U.S. Senate contest that features two bland and predictable establishment candidates. DeRosa would be a refreshing alternative, but he won’t be noticed by the media or attract any support unless and until he does something … now.
I’ve only watched the short video of DeRosa. Nothing disrespectful, but “he’s no John Grady.”
As older “indies” like me may remember, John Grady, a medical doctor and charismatic speaker was nominated in 1974 by the now defunct American Party. He polled just shy of 300,000 votes or about 13% of the total vote in the 3 way race. Grady carried two counties and placed 2nd in a few others.
The GOP claimed his votes took votes away from their nominee, drugstore magnate Jack Echerd and cost him the election. The Democratic nominee Richard Stone won with about 45% of the vote.
Actually, Grady hurt both candidates. Looking at voting patterns and comparing them to the vote cast for Governor in the same election which only had a Dem & Rep running, it appears that Grady hurt Stone more in the “Republican” counties and Echerd more in the “Democratic” counties.
To make sure it would not be a repeat in 1976, the GOP convinced Grady to seek their nomination. He did and defeated in the Republican primary a not-too-well-known state senator rather handily. In the General Election, he failed to upseat incumbent U.S. Senator Lawton Chiles. If my memory serves me correctly, President Ford’s campaign, which was running hard to beat Jimmy Carter in Florida, placed an ad in Florida newspapers “endorsing” Grady. Whether Grady and Ford actually ever met, I do not know.
The American Party leaders were furious with Grady and saw such action as “traitorous.” Attempts were made by the more political savvy to persuade the party leaders to get Grady placed on the ballot also as the American Party nominee since the party had ballot position. And even though at the time there was no statute which allowed dual listings (like New York State) still there was always the chance the courts might uphold the dual nominations.
But certain American Party leaders would have nothing to do with it. They preferred to “gripe” and “complain” than undertake a strategy that might have resulted in a major upset. Had Grady been listed twice on Florida’s ballot as both the GOP and the American Party nominees, he might have pulled more votes in north Florida (where he ran strong in 1974) There were then (but not as much today) many “yellow dog” Democrats who would never vote “Republican” but who would vote “independent.” They had proved it in 1968 with George Wallace.
The American Party may have lost its best chance to have an influence on the American political scene. We’ll never know. Such is the foolishness and lack of savvy with many 3rd party leaders.
Alabama Indy …:
Yes, I remember John Grady – a great candidate. I agree with your assessment of the FL American party — although I’m new here, I am a political junkie and have been involved with 3rd parties since 1972. Locally and nationally they disolve due to unprofessional tactics and so many small fish looking for big ponds.
I met DeRosa at a Confederate shindig recently, where there about 1000 people and he spent most of his time sitting with the Constitution Party state chair off to the side. People had to come over to say hello … he didn’t bother to work the crowd. His speech was less than electric, but heck things are so dry here (and nationally) that almost anyone can make a difference with a little imagination and a lot of determination.
I still have a copy of Dr. Grady’s pro-life book. As a former member of the Indiana American Party (1974-1979) I’ve reached the point in my life where I can call 1974-1975 “the Good Old Days” of the American Party.
Peter Gemma brings to light a major problem with doctrinaire political parties – which most 3rd parties are. 3rd partisans have this idea that everybody is doctrinaire. They think all one has to do is start yelling about Abortion, or the United Nations, or Global Warming, or Alcohol, or Tobacco, or illegal aliens, and everybody will come running to their side. It don’t work that way.
The average Joe Voter (who makes up about 75% of the voters in this country) basically cares about 3 things: Am I going to have a job come Christmas? Will I be able to send my kids to college? If I have a major illness will it wipe out my savings? 3rd partisans don’t seem to be able to grasp that.
If 3rd party candidates would address those issues – and not in some doctrinaire lingo that the average Joe doesn’t understand – the average Joe will listen to them. Most of them could care less where the candidates stands otherwise on Abortion, the United Nations, or Global Warming. They want to know what are you going to do about his having a job, his kid being able to go to college, and assurance that a major illness will not send him to the poor house.
I was very active once in a 3rd party. I gave up dissolutioned just because of what I’ve described and experienced, and what others have sustained.
3rd parties have got to realize that voters are not robots and are not going to cross their “t’s” or dot their “i’s” on the issues just the way 3rd party gospel says it has to be.
I became an “Independent” (even though I’ve really always been independent)and if I ever find 3rd party that starts using some common sense along with its doctrine, then I might join up with ’em.
As of right now, I don’t see any major 3rd party on the scene that comes even close.
As a Christian I’m ashamed to admit this, but 3rd parties on the right have always imploded because of holier-than-thou stuff. The idea of using a political vehicle to proselytize is goofy.
To all those naysayers and pessimists. It’s certainly easy for all of you to criticize anyone who is spending their own time and money to try and save our nation. Running a large campaign is not easy when your resources are limited. Maybe what you should do is join in this fight, give some of your money and time instead of criticizing. Our new website, which launches today has been a real challenge financially and otherwise. Yet we have accomplished it in several short months. Marshall DeRosa is an incredible patriot and has a very good chance at winning a seat that will change the way things are done in this country. Many negative people have told us we can’t win, mostly men and women who live in that negative side of life, but they will not stop us from continuing our challenge even while fending off what should be our like minded supporters. Bye the way, I return every email and every phone call to every person who contacts me! Why don’t you all step up to the plate and visit our new website and donate $10.00 a month up until the 2010 election…it’s called putting your money where your mouth is.
God Bless and have a great day,
Dan Gonzales
Chairman, CPF
I will be covering Marshall DeRosa and his campaign during the upcoming election season. Mr. DeRosa will be appearing on Speak Out Florida several times over the coming months and this will provide Florida Voters with an opportunity to become more familiar with him.
If you have a candidate that you would like to see featured on Speak Out Florida, please contact us at:
Staff@WAFS.TV
Thank you
John J. Sottilare
Host: Speak Out Florida
WAFS-TV