Both houses of the South Carolina legislature have now passed bills that make it more difficult for independent candidates to get on the ballot. However, the versions in each house are significantly different.
The House bill, HB 3746, is worse. It does not reduce the number of signatures, and it imposes three crippling restrictions: (1) no one could sign who had voted in the primary, or who will vote in a future primary that year; (2) newly-registered voters could not sign; (3) no one could sign for two independent candidates running for the same office.
The Senate bill, SB 590, is the same as the House bill, except it at least reduces the number of signatures. Statewide and U.S. House petitions would go from 10,000 signatures to 4,000 signatures; legislative candidates would go from 5% of the number of registered voters, to 3%. The Senate bill passed the Senate on February 3.
The part of the bills that says newly-registered voters cannot sign would be unconstitutional, under a U.S. Supreme Court summary affirmance from 1970, Socialist Workers Party v Rockefeller. The primary screenout would almost surely be unconstitutional if the number of signatures is not reduced. Even with no primary screenout, no independent candidate for either house of Congress has ever qualified for a government-printed ballot in South Carolina. In Storer v Brown, the U.S. Supreme Court said that a 5% (of the last vote cast) petition, combined with a primary screenout, is probably unconstitutional, and the way to settle the matter is to see how often any candidate has been able to get on the ballot.
Major advantages of a Top 2 Open primary are:
(1) You can have a reasonable restriction that no voter can sign the petition of more than one candidate for any office;
(2) Petitioning requirements for all candidates are likely to be greatly reduced;
(3) You eliminate partisan primaries, so you don’t have to worry about things like screenouts;
1. This is not necessary. In 2008, I signed petitions for primary ballot access for multiple Democratic and Republican candidates and two third party petitions for general election ballot access. I’ve yet to see the harm to my state’s electoral system.
2. This can be accomplished without restricting the general election ballot to two choices.
3. Again, the lack of primary screenout can be accomplished without restricting the general election ballot to two choices. Primary screenout is at best intentioned to solve something that is not a problem, and is at worst intentioned to keep third parties and independents off the ballot.
#1 (1) and (2): These matters can be addressed without the adoption of the “top two open primary.”
#1 (3): If you’re not going to let parties officially nominate state and congressional candidates, you might as well eliminate parties altogether (which I’m sure would be just fine with you).
Separate is still NOT equal. Brown v. Bd of Ed 1954 – noting that Feb is Black History Month — even in SC — the home state of rebellion in April 1861 — attack on Fort Sumter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Fort_Sumter
An ocean of blood and tears in 1861-1865 (by lots of grieving women — especially for DEAD fathers, sons, brothers, cousins, etc. — due to the EVIL party hacks before and during 1860-1861).
P.R. and A.V. — to put the party hacks OUT of business permanently — with their EVIL party hack machinations regarding caucuses, conventions and primaries.
#3
(1) The whole idea behind racketeering is to control certain territories.
(2) Coulda, woulda, shoulda, been addressed. But won’t. Why do you think it takes 176,000 signatures to get on the ballot as a statewide independent candidate in California, and 100 as a candidate for party nomination?
(3) Individual voters and groups are voters are free to endorse candidates. They can do so while wearing a tux, or blue jeans and sandals.
#5 “(3) Individual voters and groups [of] voters are free to endorse candidates.”
That’s true in the present setup. Political parties are “groups of voters” and have been around practically since the founding of the U. S. One of their basic functions is nominating candidates for elective office, which they cannot officially do in the “top two open primary.”
#6 Under the current setup, political parties not only endorse candidates, they get the State to eliminate losing challengers and publicize their endorsements.
If some folks want to endorse or support an individual candidate under Top 2, let them buy their own yard signs.