The Conservative Party, and the Christian Party, have both recently filed paperwork with the California Secretary of State, indicating that they intend to qualify for the California ballot. In California, ever since 1950, all new parties that have qualified for the ballot have done so by persuading voters equal in number to 1% of the last gubernatorial vote to register into the party. The Conservative Party, and also the Christian Party, will now receive a tally of how many voters register into those parties. If either one persuades approximately 101,000 voters to become members, then they will become ballot-qualified parties.
In Nevada, the Tequila Party recently filed a copy of its bylaws and a list of its officers. The idea of a Tequila Party was first mentioned a few weeks earlier by advocates for an easier path for illegal immigrants to become legal immigrants. However, it is not clear that the people who organized the Tequila Party in Nevada have a political purpose. The paperwork was filed by George Harris and Irma Aguirre, who own a Mexican restaurant in Las Vegas. The Tequila Party is now free to place candidates on the general election ballot for all offices except President, with a small number of signatures. Each of the party’s nominees needs his or her own petition, but none of these petitions require more than 250 signatures. See this story, which has a link to the Tequila Party’s bylaws, which were filed November 30. Thanks to Glenn Brown for the link.
Based on complete but not yet certified returns, the new California parties will need at least 100,753 signatures to qualify. That is 1% of those who voted for the office of Governor, not including write-ins. If the definition of “voted in the gubernatorial election” means turned out on election day rather than voted for a candidate for Governor, the number of signatures will be higher.
Thanks for that comment, which is correct. I have fixed the post.
Beginning on January 1, 2011, parties in California only qualify for the presidential ballot, and elections of party officers, along with the authority to have their endorsements distributed with the sample ballot.
A voter who prefers the Christian or Conservative parties, and expresses that on his voter registration, may have that preference shown on the ballot if he runs for a voter-nominated office. 60 signatures are needed to qualify for the statewide primary ballot.
Every election is NEW and has ZERO to do with prior election results — except for deadlines.
i.e. in CA having enough party hack voter registrations by a deadline date — for #3 purposes.
Equal nominating petitions — based on the number of voters in the prior election in the area involved.
P.R. and App.V.
To Jim Riley (#3):
The presidential and vice-presidential elections are, however, the most important ones. Your side (“top-two” proponents) have not been able to take that away from us. All six of the currently qualified California parties (American Independent, Democratic, Green, Libertarian, Peace and Freedom, and Republican) should be on the 2012 November General Election ballot.
Naturally, I am very much looking forward to the Peace and Freedom Party Primary Election and State Nominating Convention in 2012. This past Wednesday, I was appointed to my old seat on the PFP-CA Sacramento County Central Committee and I will be a candidate for that seat in the 2012 Primary Election.
By the way, I purchased a very interesting book yesterday: “JFK And The Unspeakable: Why He Died And Why It Matters.” [“He chose peace. They marked him for death.”] The book is written by James W. Douglass and – along with “American Conspiracies” by Jesse Ventura (with Dick Russell) – should be required reading for any person who calls himself or herself a patriotic American.
To CA reformers — totally wipe out the party hack stuff ASAP — party hack Prez nominations.
P.R. and
nonpartisan App.V. – all elected executive officers [Prez/VP] and all judges
The Sun will continue to rise if ALL the party hack nomination stuff is put into the history graveyard — along with divine right of kings and slavery.
#5 The California Constitution says that the State may require a party to place the winner of a primary on the general election ballot. In 2008, this would have meant that Hillary Clinton, Ralph Nader, Don Grundmann, and Christine Smith would have displaced Barack Obama, Cynthia McKinney, Alan Keyes, and Bob Barr from the ballot. Maybe the State (or voters through the initiative) will implement this by then. Or maybe Top 2 will be implemented for Presidential elections as well.
Wouldn’t it make sense to move the party committee elections to be coincident with the presidential primary, so that election officials don’t have to mess with partisan ballots at the regular primary, which then only have non-partisan and voter-nominated offices, and propositions. Also if county central committees are elected in February, then you won’t have lame duck committee members making endorsements for the voter-nominated or nonpartisan offices. In non-presidential years, an all-mail ballot in February could be used.
Until WWII, the California primary was in August. It was moved to June to be combined with the presidential primary as a cost saving measure during the war. Now that the presidential primary has been moved to winter, wouldn’t it make sense to restore the primary to August?
Have the Sacramento County Central Committee defined their procedures for making endorsements which will appear on the sample ballot for voter-nominated offices? IIUC, that authority is vested in the county parties, though I suppose a party rule could require county parties to use a decision arrived at by the state or district party.