A “primary screen-out” is a law that says voters who voted in a partisan primary may not then sign an independent candidate’s petition. There are no such restrictions left in any state, except Texas; and also Nebraska has a primary screen-out, but only for independent presidential candidates.
Ten states once had primary screenouts, but they have mostly been repealed. Oregon repealed its primary screenout in 2009.
Illinois repealed its primary screenout in 1975. Before 1975, the Illinois election law said, “Any person who has already voted at a primary election held to nominate a candidate or candidates for any office or offices, to be voted upon at any certain election, shall not be qualified to sign a petition of nomination for a candidate or candidates for the same office or offices, to be voted upon at the same certain election.”
Illinois repealed the primary screenout because it was simultaneously moving the independent candidate deadline to a far earlier date. The 1975 change said independent candidates had to file their petitions on the same day that candidates running in partisan primaries had to file. Obviously, it made no sense for Illinois law to say that people who voted in the primary could not then sign for an independent, if the independent petition only circulated well in advance of the primary. The 1975 bill did say that anyone who had signed an independent candidate petition could not then vote in a party primary. However, that was never enforced, because no one would know at a polling place if a particular voter might have signed for an independent candidate.
In 2006, the 7th circuit struck down the early petition deadline for independent candidates, in Lee v Keith. The 2007 session of the legislature then passed HB 632, which moved the deadline from December of the year before the election, to June of an election year, a much better deadline. The Illinois primary is held in March. HB 632 also repealed section 5/7-43, the provision that people who signed independent candidates could not vote in the primary.
Now, in 2010, Illinois Democrats claim that Illinois election law still has an implicit primary screen-out. See this story, which says that Democrats plan to challenge the petitions of several independent candidates and will claim that anyone who voted in the primary cannot validly sign an independent candidate petition. This decision by Illinois Democrats is extraordinarily illogical. There simply is no primary screen-out anywhere in the Illinois election code. Illinois Democrats seem to feel that just because they wish the law had a primary screenout, therefore it must somehow be there.
Are the EVIL IL Donkey party hacks from Mars — with NO laws ???
In Texas, voters may only participate in the nomination of one candidate per office, it doesn’t matter whether that participation is in a party primary or party convention, or signing the petition of an independent candidate. In 2006, neither Kinky Friedman or Carole Strayhorn had trouble getting signatures. Friedman even ran commercials urging voters to save themselves for Kinky, by not voting in a party primary.
Pingback: Registered Nurse????????????????????????????
Carole Strayhorn did have some trouble with Texas ballot access in 2006. She sued Texas but lost the case, Strayhorn v Williams, 430 F Supp 2d 661.
The government and especially the courts in Illinois is so corrupt that the Dems could win this case.
I don’t agree that Illinois state courts are corrupt. The Illinois state courts seemed about average, for state courts. Sometimes they rule in favor of voter choice.
The worst state courts for ballot access are in Georgia, Hawaii, Oklahoma, and especially Pennsylvania.
#4 Strayhorn did not question the limitation on who may sign petitions, but rather wanted to require the SOS to use statistical sampling. Her original complaint had also wanted to start collecting signatures after the polls closed on election day (the law says that they may not be collected on or before election day).
One reason that the SOS did not want to use statistical sampling was there were 12 independent candidates who had declared their intent to run.
Strayhorn submitted 222,514 signatures in 101 boxes; while Friedman submitted 169,574 in 11 boxes (7 times as many per box). 137,000+ of Friedman’s were valid (81%) vs. 108,512 of Strayhorn’s (49%).
Friedman had transferred his signatures to a machine readable format (the same as used by the SOS), so apparently was able to do much better pre-validation.
Michael Madigan is behind THIS!
That guy wants to ruin Illinois!