Connecticut holds its presidential primary on April 24, and Pennsylvania holds its primary for president and all other partisan office on the same day. The various minor parties that are petitioning in those states will make special efforts to have lots of petitioners stationed near polling places on April 24. Petitioning outside polling places is generally very fruitful. Virtually everyone on the scene is a registered voter, and frequently people must wait in line and thus are more likely to be receptive. Many states do not permit petitioning within 100 feet of the entrance to a polling place, but this restriction is generally not so severe as to interfere with all petitioning.
Connecticut and Pennsylvania election laws permit stand-in presidential candidates on petitions.
Does anybody know if it’s legal in PA to sign more than one petition? Because if there’s minor party petitions at my polling place I’d gladly sign them all.
@Jed – you can sign more than one as long as they are running for different offices. Like you can only sign one petition for state rep for minor party, but you can sign a petition for state rep, state senator, US House and US Senate either separately or on a single petition. Did that in 2010 when I ran for PA State House.
Pingback: Connecticut, Pennsylvania Minor Parties Hope to Collect Many Signatures on April 24 at the Polls | ThirdPartyPolitics.us
Donna at the PA Dept of State, division of elections, states that signing minor party ballot access state slates indicates that you are signing for all candidates on the slate, since the parties have a choice of putting all the candidates on separate petitions. The petitioning restrictions in PA are irrational, anti-democratic, stupid, and belligerent, but Donna’s (and the state of PA’s) interpretation of their own law is internally consistent. Therefore, if you sign one state slate, and then sign even a single-candidate petition from another party that includes that same office, one of the two signatures could be stricken.
Now then, as far as enforcement of this provision, that’s apparently up to the counties to enforce, if there’s a petition challenge. The courts (or challenge process, –not sure what courts or trial process would be used) would then decide which petition was rendered invalid.
Donna stated that it is up to the voter to determine which petition he’s signed, not the circulator. Also, the circulator can carry any and all petitions he likes, because of this fact.
If the courts trying ballot access challenges follow proper due process (by offering the signature defenders a trial by jury), then this kind of immoral and backwards law would be ripe for “Jury Nullification of Law.” If you’d like to know more about this legal principle, please click the website linked to my name, above.
Thanks for caring,
-Jake