The United Independent Party polled 3.31% of the Massachusetts gubernatorial vote, according to this story. Therefore it is a qualified party, although it must poll 3% again in 2016 to retain its status, unless it can get its registration up to 1% of the state total. But because the party is qualified, its name will be printed on the voter registration form, which will make it easier to do a registration drive.
If the party does get its registration up to 1% by the end of 2015, it need not worry about the vote test in 2016. If it does meet the registration test, it will be the first party in Massachusetts to use that alternative, which has only existed since 1990.
Upon reading the article, Evan Falchuk needs to merge his United Independent Party with the Libertarian Party, since both parties appear to share the same basics. Also, the Greens-Rainbow efforts would be more comfortable and find respect within the Libertarian Party. Are the Libertarian leadership in Massachusetts working on this?
Being in Massachusetts, I can tell you that the Libertarian Party leadership there is phobic about getting ballot status. They complain that it’s harder for candidates for lesser office to get on the ballot with ballot status because they are restricted in getting signatures on nomination petitions from only Libertarians and unenrolled voters, yet the number they must get is the same as any other ballot qualified party, whereas if they are not ballot qualified, they can collect signatures from any registered voter.
It is not likely that the party would “merge” with any other party, especially a “soft” libertarian party like the UIP. The Mass LP leadership here barely gets along with its own national party.
What might be possible is if the UIP offers to hold an open Presidential primary and allow the prospective libertarian Presidential candidates to run in it, but if the primary nominated someone other than the national party, that would make things confusing for libertarians here.
Walter Ziobro:
You bring out some interesting facts about getting ballot qualified in Massachusetts and of the lack of cooperation with those parties of similar like mind. I think such is true most anywhere – its the “big frog in little pond” syndrome. Everybody want to be the Chief and nobody wants to be the Indians. Been doing this some 40 plus years and have heard and seen it all.
I will have to say, that even though Alabama has some of the harshest requirements (signature wise) of getting on the ballot, they don’t fret over technicalities when it comes to petitioning. They mainly want to see that the number of signatures from registered voters are sufficient, and they could care less who the petition bearer or gatherer was or from what state he or she resides in.
Since you are in Massachusetts, why not work with the United Independent Party and get them to attempt to become an informal affiliate of the National Libertarian Committee, and perhaps Libertarians vying for the UIP Presidential nomination in 2016 just might be accepted as legitimate candidates by both the UIP and the Libertarian National Convention.
I personally am sick and tired of these little political parties with no more than a dozen or two supporters refusing to work with other parties of like-mind. There are times I get so disgusted, I hope they all lose their ballot position and find themselves without a party and a ballot position to claim. Would serve them all the justice they need for their selfish and arrogant ways.
I’m doing all I can in Alabama. Trust you will do likewise in Massachusetts.