The Independent Party is entitled to its own presidential primary in Oregon. This is the first time Oregon has ever held a presidential primary for a party other than the Democratic and Republican Parties, except it is possible Oregon held one for the Progressive Party in 1916.
On March 16, the Oregon Attorney General ruled that the Independent Party ballot will not have any presidential candidates’ names. But there will be a presidential primary ballot for the party, and all write-ins will be tallied. Because the Independent Party is the only party that allows independents to vote in its primary, and because the Independent Party itself has over 110,000 registered members, there will almost certainly be tens of thousands of write-ins to count.
The Independent Party wanted the Secretary of State to list all the presidential candidates whose names are on the Democratic and Republican ballots, and Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, and Michael Bloomberg as well. But the Oregon law says that candidates should be on presidential primary ballots automatically only if newspapers mention their candidacies for a particular party. Because there are no newspaper stories that say any of those presidential candidates are seeking the Independent Party nomination, the state won’t list those candidates.
State officials also say that the presidential candidate who gets the most write-in votes will be the Independent Party’s nominee in November, regardless of the wishes of the state party officers. This part of the ruling seems contrary to law, and it is not known if the Independent Party will accept that ruling or not.
If it’s not too oxymoronic to ask, is this Independent Party affiliated with any other qualified parties in other states? If not, then perhaps the SOS feels this primary is the be-all and end-all for the party’s Presidential process, and the winner has to go on the ballot. (Not saying I agree, just trying to understand the thinking.)
But what if the write-in winner is actively running for another party’s nomination — and gets it? Does Oregon allow fusion? (And/or does it have sore-loser laws that might somehow reach even the Presidential race?)
Oops — sorry; SOS and/or AG. (I guess those are the state officials” meant.)
Yes, Oregon has fusion.
The Oregon sore loser law has been interpreted not to apply to presidential primaries. John Anderson in 1980 was on the Oregon Republican presidential primary ballot, and also he was an independent candidate in November in Oregon and all states.
The AG’s interpretation of ORS 249.078 is correct. It does not make sense that a person would be a candidate to be the nominee of a generic major party. In addition Gary Johnson and Jill Stein are not seeking the nomination of a major (Oregon) party. The candidacy that would have to be generally advocated or recognized would be seeking the nomination of the IPO. Petitions for the presidential ballot require that the electors be registered with the party of the candidate. It would be nonsensical for Democrats to be able to place Hillary Clinton on the Republican (or Independent) party primary ballot. So it must mean that members of the party holding the primary could petition for a candidate seeking the nomination of the party.
+++++
I did not see anything in statute about the process of a national party making nominations. There are requirements that delegates to the convention be apportioned based on the popular vote.
Why you say that the SOS said, “that the presidential candidate who gets the most write-in votes will be the Independent Party’s nominee”, there is nothing like that in the AG’s letter. You also say “that it seems contrary to law”. Which law are you referring to?
If a candidate is nominated by write-in votes, there is no need for intervention by party officials. The nomination is being made by those party members who vote as a whole.
The reason it’s contrary to election law is that the true candidates in November are the candidates for presidential elector, and it is up to them to say who they are pledged to. No state uses any type of primary for parties to choose candidates for presidential elector. In all states, for all parties, party meetings nominate candidates for presidential elector.
The name of these “true candidates” does not appear on Oregon ballots. Instead the names of the presidential and vice-presidential candidates does appear. Oregon law (ORS 248.355) requires that the “true candidates” to pledge to vote for the nominal candidates whose name does appear on the ballot.
You have not explained why the person who receives the most votes in the presidential preference primary becomes the presidential candidate.
The November ballot in Oregon in presidential years says, “Your vote for the candidates for United States President and Vice President shall be a vote for the electors supporting such candidates.” In 1992 and all previous presidential elections, the ballot listed the names of the candidates for presidential elector.
You have not explained why the person who receives the most votes in the presidential preference primary becomes the presidential candidate.
That is not true for the other two major political parties. Why do you believe it to be true for the Independent Party?
Oregon did not have government-printed ballots for all previous presidential elections, and the practice of even 24 years ago is irrelevant to 2016.
The State of Oregon can assure voters that the presidential electors support the candidates whose names do actually appear on the ballot because the presidential elector candidates are required to sign a pledge to do so.
But that does not explain how the presidential candidates are determined by any major party, and in particular the Independent Party.
There was no space available on the Independent Oregon Primary Ballot for a write-in for President – only for judges, etc. Very disappointed with the Independent Oregon Primary Ballot. Am changing affiliation as a result.