On February 10, Wyoming State Senator Chris Rothfuss (D-Laramie) introduced SF 56, to convert Wyoming to a top-two system. The bill would only permit partisan labels for candidates who are members of qualified parties, so it would not treat all candidates equally. However, it does not eliminate write-in space on November ballots.
The bill is badly drafted. It amends section 22-5-101, which is titled “How candidates nominated”, to eliminate the ability of anyone to get on the general election ballot by independent petition or by convention of a qualified minor party. However, it does not repeal Article 3, which starts at 22-5-301, and which is titled “Nomination by Petition.”
The bill does not acknowledge that a top-two system cannot realistically apply to presidential elections, and by its literal language, would seem to eliminate normal party labels for presidential candidates at the general election. And, its change to 22-5-101 seems to eliminate the independent presidential petition procedure, although, as noted above, that is contradicted by its failure to amend 22-5-301.
If this bill wouldn’t apply to presidential petitions, would other federal offices be the same, such as Congress.
The repealed sections are listed in Section 3 of the bill. Repeals include:
22-4-303 and 22-4-304 nominations by minor parties by convention.
22-5-301 through 22-5-308 nomination by petition.
22-5-401 through 22-5-403 filling vacancies in partisan nominations.
22-6-121 ordering candidates on general election by party (it appears the new order will be alphabetical since it is not explicitly specified).
Wyoming doesn’t appear to have any statutes regarding the designation of the presidential and vice-presidential candidates, though it does expect their name to be on the ballot. Apparently, independent candidates for president are nominated by petition. The literal language of the current 25-5-101 would require presidential candidates to be nominated at the partisan primary (direct primary).
Elimination of the 22-5-301 through 22-5-308 would appear to eliminate the ability to make independent presidential nominations, but this has less to do with the drafting of the bill, and more the current overall lack of provisions for presidential elections.
An independent presidential candidate could qualify as the candidate of a provisional political party – the petition standards are the same (2% of congressional vote). There is a difference in the petition deadline.
It appears to treat major, minor, and provisional parties equally. If a voter can register with an unqualified party, it is not clear that he could have that appear on the ballot if he runs for office. Presumably he is a member of that party and it exists, or he could not put that on his registration.
The effective date is January 1, 2014.
It looks like one of those bills where the legislator who drafts it fails to take into account that amending part of a law affects other parts of the same law and that those parts must be harmonized. Otherwise, it can create a big problem to those who are called upon to comply with the law, in this case, the elections administrators in the state of Wyoming.
I think that maybe this State Senator wants to have all elected officials get to office with more than 50% of the vote. The method seems mistaken. If that’s the purpose, it can be achieved through a runoff (separate or instant) when the candidate with the most votes does not get 50%+1 vote. That way, elected officials have more than 50% of the votes and minor parties are not excluded from the general election ballot.
#3 If you actually look at the current law, and the proposed bill, it is as Richard described it. It is specifically intended to eliminate the major party primaries and replace them with a Top 2 Open Primary in which all candidates run.
A lot of the ripped out code is dealing with election of precinct committees.
What Richard missed were the repealed sections of existing code, which were all listed in a single section of the bill, and which eliminated the other nominations.
And Wyoming does not currently have any way for a presidential and vice presidential candidate to be designated for the general election ballot. So it would be easy to overlook that the independent petition method is apparently how independent presidential candidates are placed on the ballot.
67% of Wyoming voters are registered with the Republican party. In the 2010 gubernatorial primary, the Democratic candidate would have finished 5th. So effectively, office holders are being chosen in the Republican primary.
Why couldn’t Top 2 be used for presidential elections? Wyoming’s primary is in late August. If a candidate doesn’t want to be nominated, he can tell voters not to vote for him.
The bill is poorly drafted, leaving in place all of the mechanisms for provisional, minor and major parties, while making them moot, at least for non-federal offices. The 2% rule for maintaining minor party qualified status can obviously not be met if the law were to be enacted. And how the presidential election is handled is left unspecified.
I believe Rothfuss’s objective with introducing this bill is to bring Top Two into the discussion in Wyoming. As the bill needs a 2/3 majority in both upper and lower chambers to even be considered, and this is a budget session that is limited to 20 days, there is very little chance it will get past the first vote to be assigned to committee to fix things. I suspect there will be much more serious effort to enact Top Two in the 2013 general session.
Will the West again save the East ???
Top 2 is a step on the road to —
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V. — pending Condorcet head to head math.
Pingback: Wyoming Top-Two Bill Introduced | ThirdPartyPolitics.us
#5, Wyoming has never had a presidential primary.
#6 The bill has explicit repeals, you and Richard Winger were careless in your reading of the bill.
Beginning on Page 20, Line 15:
Section 3. W.S. 18-3-524(d), 22-4-303, 22-4-304, 22-5-202, 22-5-203, 22-5-205, 22-5-212, 22-5-218, 22-5-301 through 22-5-308, 22-5-401 through 22-5-403, 22-6-117(a)(xi), 22-6-118, 22-6-121, 22-6-124 through 22-6-127, 22-10-101(a)(vi), 22-18-108, 22-18-111(a) iii)(A), (B) and (c) and 22-25-107(a)(vi) are repealed.
Current Wyoming law does not specify how the presidential election is handled. Somehow the Secretary of State knows whose name to put on the ballot. Or maybe not? Wyoming’s certificate of ascertainment does not contain any information about party affiliation or presidential candidates supported by the electors.
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/2008-certificates/ascertainment-wyoming-01.html
Did the ballots contain the names of the presidential and vice-presidential candidates, and if so, what actual statutory provisions was that based on?
If the 2% threshold for maintaining minor party status is removed; so is the 10% threshold for maintaining major party status. A candidate affiliated with a party who is nominated in a nonpartisan primary is not “the candidate of the party” in the general election.
So that just means that some other definition of major and minor party need to be established. Other than the nomination of candidates, there is little difference between major and minor parties in statute. Major parties are required to provide a more extensive party structure. Maybe the two sets of regulations can be combined into one.
There are some minor differences regarding the appointment of election judges, but parts of those regulations treat major and minor parties the same.
A simple fix would let a political party maintain its status based on votes cast in the primary election for candidates affiliated with the party.
#9 All the more reason to establish a proper system from the beginning.
Where is that Model Election Law ??? — always seems to be Missing in Action.
#10 – Under the proposed law, there is no such thing as a “party”. OK, except that the requirements for party structure, precinct committeeman/woman election, etc. would stay in existence. No party other than the Ds and Rs could ever gain such a status because there is no mechanism to ever become a party, even if someone who says he is LP comes in second in the primary and gets 11% in the general. That’s not enough for the LP to become a “party” again.
The whole concept of being a qualified party is the gateway to late specification of who will be on the general election ballot as pres/vp candidates. With no qualified parties, there would be no third party presidential candidates on the November ballot.
Unlike many in the third party world, I could support a well constructed Top Two law for Wyoming. Unfortunately, SF56 is poorly thought out and incomplete. That’s why it won’t make it past the 2/3 introduction vote necessary for non-budget bills in a budget session.
#13 How would the Democrats and Republicans maintain status as a major party? They would not have nominees on the general election ballot, there might be candidates who are affiliated with the party who qualify for the general election ballot.
That simply means that the definition of a qualified party needs to be adjusted, either using the primary or number of registered voters. After the changes, there is really little difference between major and minor parties.
Under the current system, there is a big difference – major parties nominate in a partisan primary, minor parties nominate by convention. After the changes, nobody nominates. So major parties define by party rule how precinct committeemen are chosen and have to maintain an elaborate structure of county and state organizations. But why does Wyoming care if there is a party organization in each county? Maybe for suggesting election judges?
There could be some minor changes in the bill. It certainly isn’t poorly thought out. It probably needs some finishing touches. Once you realize the repeals are in the bill, then there aren’t dead procedures.
The presidential procedures need some thought – but this is partly because they are currently incomplete. There simply is no designation of presidential candidates in the election code. If McCain received popular votes in Wyoming, its certificate of ascertainment does not show it.
Why would a Democrat introduce Top Two in a state that is so heavily dominated by the Republican Party? Top Two would not only wipe out third parties, but also damage the Democratic Party. Effectively, it would become Top Two Republicans in the general election.
Top 2 forces on the march to Democracy on many fronts —
NE, LA, WA, CA, AZ, WY, where’s next ???
Will the EVIL gerrymander Empires strike back ??? See Star Wars movies.
——–
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
Top Two dead in Wyoming for 2012. Two thirds aye was needed for consideration in the Senate to advance the bill. Results: 7 aye, 23 nay.
#17 The effective date was 2014 anyway. This will give time to correct the couple of anomalies that you noticed.
How about letting independent presidential candidates qualify with a $200 filing fee, just like for governor, and figuring out what differences are really needed between types of political parties.
Many of the interactions (appointment of election judges, poll watchers, delivery of voter rolls) between county clerks and county parties is through the county chair, and for the most part make no distinction between major and minor parties. But the minor party regulations don’t provide for county chairs; and the major party regulations are over elaborate. So maybe some sort of blend of the two.
In the few places where a distinction is needed, it can be based on registration. (eg major has 10% of registrants, with at least two major parties). Maintenance of qualified status could also be based on registration; or on votes cast in primary.
#15 The Wyoming Senate is 26R, 4D; the Wyoming House 50R, 10D.
If a Democratic legislature wants to have any success he will have to concentrate on state and local issues, and avoid hard partisan positions.
Most legislators are chosen in the Republican primary. A pragmatist who wants to serve his community is going to run in the Republican primary. And in a Republican primary, there may be candidates more partisan, and the electorate will be more partisan. So it will tend to screen out candidates who might be more willing to work with a Democrat on individual issues.
In an open primary, a candidate can be a Republican, but will be able to appeal to independent and Democratic voters. In a Republican primary, a candidate might get elected by running against Obama.
And in a small state like Wyoming (house districts have around 10,000 persons), so candidates may be able to reach voters based on personal relationships.