In 2010, both the Libertarian Party, and the Anti-Prohibition Party, qualified for the general election ballot in New York. New York generally permits candidates to be the nominee of multiple political parties. However, New York will not print the name of a candidate nominated for the same office by two different unqualified parties on the ballot twice. By contrast, if two or even three qualified parties nominate the same candidate for the same office, that candidate is listed on the ballot multiple times.
In 2010, both the Libertarian Party and the Anti-Prohibition Party nominated Randy Credico for U.S. Senate. When the State Board of Elections told him that he could not be listed on the ballot twice, he sued. Almost two years later, the case has an oral argument date. It will be argued in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn on September 19, 2012. The case is Credico v New York State Board of Elections, 1:10cv-4555.
It’s hard to see what the BoE’s rationale was for making the distinction. If the parties were “qualified” for the ballot in 2010 — presumably by petition, having not gotten the requisite number of votes (50,000, I think, or maybe that’s outdated) for their 2006 gubernatorial nominee), they should be subject to the same rules as other ballot-qualified parties. In any case, I’d be interested in hearing NYS’s argument.
In 1970, I worked on the campaign of US Rep. Richard Ottinger for the United States Senate. He was running against James Buckley (running on the Conservative line, the ultimate winner) and incumbent Sen. Charles Goodell (father of the current NFL commissioner, running on the Republican and Liberal lines). Ottinger was a Democrat and we created a new party, the Conservation Party to cross-endorse him and give him a second ballot line, and it was allowed. The Conservative Party challenged our new party in court based on the similarity of name, but the Supreme Court (trial court in NYS, very confusing) ruled against them and allowed the Conservation Party to nominate Ottinger.
http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?page=1&xmldoc=197016764Misc2d103_1139.xml&docbase=CSLWAR1-1950-1985&SizeDisp=7
However, the Appellate Division (mid-level appellate court) reversed and removed the Conservation Party from the ballot. http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=197078235AD2d747_2195.xml&docbase=CSLWAR1-1950-1985 But it was based on similarity of name, not the new party nominating a candidate nominated by another party.
How am I so sure? Because James Buckley also thought he needed a second ballot line, the Independent Alliance Party. That was challenged too, and in the same day the Appellate Division ruled the Conservation Party off the ballot, it allowed the Independent Alliance Party on the ballot provided it changed its visual symbol. http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=197078427NY2d757_1527.xml&docbase=CSLWAR1-1950-1985
In the 2001 New York City mayoral election, Alan Hevesi got the nomination of the new party, the Better Schools Party, along with that of the Liberal Party (an established party). Michael Bloomberg (Republican/Independence won), with Mark Green (Democratic/Working Families) coming in second.
There are numerous other examples of an established party candidate creating his or her own party for a second ballot line.
Was the Board of Elections’ rationale that two new parties can’t nominate the same candidate but a new party can nominate the same candidate as an established party?
We’ll all find out the New York State Board of Elections rationale when the Board files its brief.
Ballot Access has been a mini-WAR event since 1968 — due to SCOTUS.
More legal forces with more legal ammo than the other side is required to win.
—
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
Richard’s final question:
“Was the Board of Elections’ rationale that two new parties can’t nominate the same candidate but a new party can nominate the same candidate as an established party?”
Any body, whether a recognized party or an independent body, can nominate anyone. The issue is how the candidates appear on the ballot. Randy was nominated by the Libertarian Party and the Anti-Prohibition Party, but appeared only once.
You can read all the rules for listing candidates on the ballot in § 7–104(4) of the New York Election Law http://www.elections.ny.gov/NYSBOE/download/law/2012NYElectionLaw.pdf Randy’s situation is addressed in § 7–104(4)(e) and (e) is the only section being contested. § 7–104(4)(d) is equally offensive for the same reason as (e), but is not being contested. If (e) is struck down, a peculiar anomaly will exist in (d), but that is a story for another day.
You will notice that § 7–104(4) does not address the common situation where a candidate is nominated by exactly one recognized party and exactly one independent body. The reason for the omission is historical, but in such cases the Boards of Elections always list the candidate on the ballot twice–once with the recognized party and once with the independent body.