This year, in Georgia, 77% of the state legislative races have only one candidate on the ballot. Even for Georgia, which almost always has one-candidate elections in over half the state legislative races, this is shocking.
Georgia requires a petition signed by 5% of the number of registered voters to place anyone on the ballot for state legislature (or for U.S. House, or for local partisan office), except that the nominees of parties that polled 20% of the vote in the last election for President or Governor need not petition. Georgia also requires a filing fee of 3% of the office’s annual salary, even for candidates who are required to petition. This fee is the second highest filing fee in the nation for non-presidential office.
Legislation to ameliorate these ballot access laws has been repeatedly defeated in the Georgia legislature during the last 40 years. A measure to reduce the petition was defeated in 2012. It would have reduced the petition to 5% of the last presidential vote.
That a fairly populous state like Georgia can hold one-candidate elections in over three-fourths of the legislative districts is, sadly, an indictment of the U.S. Supreme Court, which has repeatedly refused to hear challenges to these laws. It is also an indictment of civic leadership in the state, and, ultimately, an indictment of the people of Georgia, for seeming not to notice or care that their own right to vote for such an important office as state legislator is so curtailed.
In 9 of 56 senate districts, and 44 of 180 house districts (22% of the total) there was a contested primary to determine a nominee who is unopposed in the general election.
By switching to the Top 2 Open Primary, Georgia would double the number of districts where all voters would be able to choose their legislator in an actual election.
As a side effect, this would eliminate the petition requirement for all candidates because of equal protection. It would also eliminate the party restriction, which would not withstand a challenge on 1st Amendment grounds.
#1, In 1998, Florida voters eliminated mandatory petitions for candidates and political parties. There is no necessary connection between a top-two system and eliminating petitions. Florida does not have a top-two system.
As a Georgia resident I agree that this a very negative issue with the political issue in Georgia. Also in the county where I live all the county commission and school board seats are unopposed in the general election. So I only have a couple of contested elections to vote in this general election
Seeing the difficult access requirements, it seems like shaming the legislators would be the least expensive route. Newspaper editorials, money spent on advertising in newspapers, an email campaign…something…….it is majorly frustrating that we go to other countries to spread freedom and liberty yet it cannot be increased in Georgia…..
P.R. in ALL regimes for ALL legislative bodies.
As for now — when will a Gen. Sherman clone liberate GA from its EVIL gerrymander monsters ???
#2 Equality of ballot access for all candidates is a necessary condition of a Top 2 election system.
California did not have to have a high barrier for candidates not affiliated with qualified parties, but it did. It is quite unlikely to have removed that barrier but for Top 2.
Sooner or later the current party affiliation barriers in California will fall, once there is an attorney who doesn’t try to turn Libertarian Party v Eu on its head.
70 of 160 Florida legislative races (44%) are not contested in the November election. The difference between Florida and Georgia may have more to do with Florida having a more diverse population and more populous legislative districts.
Admittedly, Florida does have more 3rd party (6) and independent (11) legislative candidates. Incidentally (or not), 14 of those 17 candidates have only a single opponent.
In 27 of the 70 races where there is no general election contest on the ballot, there was a contested primary, so by adopting Top 2 Florida would increase the number of contested legislative races by 30%.
#6, just because a state has a top-two system is no guarantee at all that all candidates will be treated equally. And, in all of the top-two states, there is unequal treatment. In California and Louisiana, a candidate can’t have a party label on the ballot unless the candidate is a member of a qualified party. So members of unqualified parties are treated worse than members of qualified parties. Washington state comes closer to treating all candidates equally, but even Washington breaks the rule by denying write-in candidates who place first or second in the primary from having a party label on the ballot in November, if they hadn’t filed a declaration of write-in candidacy. This practice was set aside last month by a good court ruling, but the law remains on the books. The case was won by the Socialist Alternative Party.
“richardwinger Says:
October 21st, 2012 at 7:03 am
#1, In 1998, Florida voters eliminated mandatory petitions for candidates and political parties. There is no necessary connection between a top-two system and eliminating petitions. Florida does not have a top-two system.”
FYI, somebody filed a Top Two Primary initiative petition in Florida. It’s listed on their Secretary of State’s website as an initiative that is cleared for circulation. I don’t know if there is any money behind it or not, but the fact that it has been filed means that somebody may try to get it on the ballot in Florida.
Somebody filed a Top Two Primary initiative in Colorado last year as well. Fortunately, they didn’t have any money, so it didn’t go anywhere, but they may file it in Colorado again and try to get it on the ballot for the next election.
#7 In California, some candidates may not have their party preference appear on the ballot because of misadministration by the Secretary of State. It will fail sooner or later because it violates equal protection (treating of candidates differently), the 1st Amendment (restriction on free speech and political expression), and the California Constitution Top 2 amendment (having regard for the party preference of the candidate).
Louisiana only requires 1000 registrants for recognition of a party.
Washington should split its legislative districts into two house districts; should only count votes for declared write-in candidates; and should not allow candidates to withdraw. That would solve the “problem” in Washington.
You need a major public figure to bring this up, otherwise
no one will pay attention. Note that Jimmy Carter is still alive and at least somewhat active.
Carter speaks out on the ME:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5irlsI-YyraVpeRKiaJn0VS2dIAbw?docId=6b24c9c5062646bd934efc1f5dd442a7