On November 4, Joe L. Read polled 42.8% of the vote for Montana state house, district 15. He got on the ballot by petition, and he chose the ballot label “Constitutional.” He is in sympathy with the Constitution Party, but since the Constitution Party is not organized in Montana, he felt it would be presumptuous to use “Constitution” as his label.
Read was in a two-person race with the incumbent Democrat. The 15th district straddles the continental divide near the Canadian border. Here is a link to the Montana election returns.
Read was elected to the Montana legislature in 2010 as a Republican, but was defeated for re-election in 2012. Thanks to Michael for this news.
Don’t presume the correct usage of the label of “Constitutional” in Mr. Reed’s candidacy was the reason for his strong showing, but do have to commend him for knowing that one who believes in Constitutional government is a “Constitutionalist” and the correct ballot label should be “Constitutional” even though the Secretary of State’s office used the 3 letter abbreviation of “CNL.”
So in the future, whether Mr. Reed insists on using the label of “Constitutional” and the party leaders want to use the label “Constitution,” I would hope they both can convince the Secretary of State the proper 3 letter abbreviation on the ballot should be CON – not CNL.
His showing was the results of being a once elected Republican, in a district that used to be more to the right. Redistricting has changed many districts. I don’t know why he tried to hid the fact he was a Republican, or he waited and missed the deadline for filing in March and went the independent route.
He is absolutely not a Republican any longer. I talked to him on the phone today and that came across loud and clear.
I assume Mr. Reed then considers himself a member of the Constitution(al) Party. Or did he just prefer to run under that label to let the voters know he is a “Constitutionalist?”
At any rate, the Constitution(al) Party could become a stronger party, if they would realize we are living in 2014 – not 1814. There are many of their planks of which I am in total agreement. But I also disagree with them that the federal government does have a role to play in promoting the general welfare of the citizenry.
Social Security and Medicare are but two examples.
He feels he can’t be a “member” of the Constitution Party because it isn’t organized in Montana. There is no state chair. If one looks on the Constitution Party national web page, it says the person in charge of Montana is the regional director, who lives in Utah.
There used to be a Constitution Party of Montana, but it disaffiliated from the national party & then went kaput.
Jed Ziggler:
This is interesting. Then how did Mr. Reed get to place his name on the ballot as a “Constitutional” candidate, as Richard indicates, and the Secretary of State’s Official Election returns shows him as such, even though they used the 3 letter abbreviation of “CNL?”
Are “Independent” candidates in Montana allowed to use another label for the ballot if they desire?
Should have paid more attention in the wording of the original post by Richard. Mr. Reed used the petition route to get on the ballot, and it appears under Montana statute, he can pick what ever label he wants to run under. I assume it was the Secretary of State which decided the 3 letter abbreviation of CNL was appropriate, even though CON is also appropriate.
In the past there has been a Green Party candidate from the same area on the ballot. Most just use Independent. Montana only has 3 major parties on the ballot.
Here is an interesting story about his gathering signatures.
http://www.valleyjournal.net/Article/10652/HD-15-boundary-changes-challenged-candidates
The incumbent, Frosty Calf Boss Ribs, did not seek re-election.
The district connects two Indian reservations on opposite sides of the Continental Divide. Physically the two portions are connect by a huge portion of Flathead County with almost no people (5), and no roads. By road between St.Ignatius and Heart Butte is 3-1/2 hours, but that connection through Glacier National Park is closed in Winter. The current shortest route is 4-1/2 hours through Missoula. Very little of either route is in the district.
No Republicans ran in the district until 2010, when Read was narrowly elected (72 votes). He lost his bid for re-election in 2012, when he received 42.3% of the vote as a Republican.
Redistricting added territory from the Blackfeet reservation on the eastern side of the district, and is heavily Indian. The Lake County portion has a small white majority (overall the district is a majority Indian district).
Read carried the Lake County portion 737:665 (52.6%), but lost the portion on Blackfeet reservation 38:371 (9.2%), so redistricting may have done him in. Apparently, the 5 persons in Flathead County are not permitted to vote.
Montana has very small house district, and it may be possible to campaign on a very personal level. 46% of the votes were cast in one precinct (in Ronan), and there were only 1811 cast district-wide.
The article says he needed a petition for minor parties like the Libertarian Party, but that’s not true. The Libertarians are a qualified major party in Montana. One does not need a petition to run as a Libertarian Party candidate. Local election administrators don’t often know the election law, title 13.
I looked on the Constitution(al) Party national web page, and got the same info.
If Mr. Reed feels closer to the Constitution(al) Party, he ought to volunteer to serve as State Chair until the party state committee can be organized.
Montana comes across as a more liberal state than most states in this region of the country, thus possibly one reason there is no organized Constitution(al) Party. But with his polling some 42.8% of the vote as a Constitutional candidate should be encouraging.
The confusion appears to be by the reporter, perhaps relayed through Mr.Read. The article was written in October, so Mr.Read in recalling his petitioning in the spring may have noted that independent candidates and minor party candidates had to petition. He might have included “Libertarian” or the reported might have extrapolated. It is quite unlikely that the reporter called the Lake County election officials.
A minor party in Montana is simply one that has qualified for access for all its candidates. Only the Democratic, Libertarian, and Republican parties are ballot-qualified.
There is no difference in the petitioning process for an independent or minor party candidate. They use the same petition form, and an independent candidate checks the Independent [ ], while a minor party candidate writes in the name of the party.
The directions from the SOS state “a political party and its regularly nominated candidates, members, and officers have the sole and exclusive right to the use of the party name. A candidate for office may not use any word of the name of any other political party or organization other than that by which the candidate is nominated. An independent candidate may not use any word of the name of any existing political party organization in his or her candidacy.”
Whether or not the Constitution Party of Montana is organized enough for this to apply, Mr.Read or the Lake County election officials may have had him add the “al” to the party name.
There were 6 candidates for the Montana House which were neither running as a Democrat or Republican. 3 were Libertarians.
The three petitioning candidates included 2 independents, and Mr.Read for the Constitutional Party.
All three were running against a Democrat. Mr.Read was the worst performing, as the two independents received 49.30% (in Missoula), and 43.98% (in Butte).
“…the Lake County election officials may have had him add the “al” to the party name.”
Could have happened this way and if so, they were correct in doing so. But the “al” added to “Constitution” is what the party ought to do. To call themselves solely the “Constitution Party” implies they are interested in only one issue. In fact, I have read some of their literature in which they refer to themselves as “Constitutionists.” There is no such thing. Webster’s Dictionary uses either “Constitutional” or “Constituionalists” and no other word for defining an adherent of the Constitution or of that form of government.
Look what happened to the Prohibition Party for doing this. After the cry for “Prohibition” was past, the party was stuck with a one issue name, while attempting to convince the public it had other issues (which it did). If the Prohibition Party had chosen the name “Progressive”(which most of them were during that era), it might be stronger today, notwithstanding Bob’s Lafollette’s 1924 and Henry Wallace’s 1948 respective presidential runs under that label.
There are many Americans who are “Constitutionalists” and the name “Constitutional” is the appropriate label for such a party. I would strongly urge the current party leadership to make this minor correction before it is too late.
This sort of thing has happened before where the local elections office is thinking the candidate needs a petition to gain access to the ballot but are unaware of the major parties in Montana. A County Commission candidate comes to mind, where the elections clerk said she needed a petition to file for a major party. You mentioned the Independent running in Missoula, he was a Republican who wasn’t going to file, but did so after the filing deadline.
In my last paragraph, I should have said “…Americans who are “constitutionalists” (lower case “c”)…”. One who is a member of the Constitutional Party would be properly called a “Constitutionalist” (capital “C”).
English and linguist experts, please correct me if I am wrong.
“Mr.Read was the worst performing, as the two independents received 49.30% (in Missoula), and 43.98% (in Butte).”
I wonder if it had anything to do with the platform he was running on?
What a heartbreaker for the Independent in Missoula. Only 76 votes difference. If he could have only changed the minds of 40 voters.
With such small house seat populations, I’m surprised there are not more 3rd party and Independents running. But with many of the districts so spread out geographically, it still would be hard to get to know the voters on a “first name” basis.
But then again, isn’t Montana somewhat of a “liberal” state when compared to other states in that region of the country?