Texas State Senator Sarah Eckhardt (D-Bastrop) has introduced SB 1292. It repeals the law that says primary voters can’t sign a petition to place an independent candidate on the ballot. Thanks to Linda Curtis for this news.
Texas State Senator Sarah Eckhardt (D-Bastrop) has introduced SB 1292. It repeals the law that says primary voters can’t sign a petition to place an independent candidate on the ballot. Thanks to Linda Curtis for this news.
This would also allow primary voters to sign petitions for alternative parties.
I am surprised that nobody filed a lawsuit against this stupid law a long time ago.
Texas law considers signing a petition to organize a party to be the equivalent of attending a party organization convention as a delegate. Therefor it makes zero sense to allow people to vote in one party’s primary while organizing another party, or to claim to be independent or nonpartisan and organize a party at the same time.
The US Supreme Court upheld that Texas law in 1974 in American Party of Texas v White. But the decision is flawed. Signing is petition is not the same thing as voting in a primary. Signing a petition means the signer wants that candidate on the ballot but the signer hasn’t “voted” for the candidate and may never do so, even if he or she gets on the ballot.
Signing a petition is not the same thing as attending a party’s organizing convention, and no other state does this. I know West Virginia did it at one time, but it got thrown out there a long time ago.
Arthur got it right. It’s for third parties, not just indies.
Andy, you mean like filing a suit against HB 2504 from the 2019 Lege? I’ve not checked recently to see what the status is on the federal case, which was supposed to go to trial sometime this year. (The suit isn’t only over HB 2504.) https://socraticgadfly.blogspot.com/2019/07/third-parties-sue-texas-over-hb-2504.html
Washington state and I think some others call their petition an outdoor convention and the petition is the attendance roll. The party has to serve notice in a newspaper of the dates and places of its outdoor convention. Many states petition sag they are signing for organizing a party and or nominating candidates, which are supposed to be indicating supporting the party or candidate, on that same theory. Illinois does not allow signing, circulating (or notarizing?) a petition if you signed or circulated one for the primary or for a competing party or candidate. I believe some other states also disqualified signatures and or petitioners for signing or circulated more than one for the same reason, on the theory that it is supposed to be an indicator of affiliation or support.
I do not know of any other state that does it like Washington, and the requirement of placing newspaper ads is pretty stupid.
Illinois has stupid things in its law as well
Nevertheless, Illinois and Washington state voters may vote in the primary and also may sign the petition.
There are eight court decisions that say it is unconstitutional for petitions to force the signer to say he or she intends to support the candidate or party named on the petition, or that the signer is a member. They are from Kentucky, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, and West Virginia.
Texas did not have a starting date for petitioning party at the time of American Party of Texas v Wh-te. The SCOTUS assumed that was the case. The legislature later passed the restriction saying that the SCOTUS had ruled that such a restriction would be constitutional.
They should permit signing before the primary, set the filing deadline in August, and make the number of signatures rational.
Better yet would be to eliminate state recognition of nominations made by private groups acting in a quasi-governmental role. In Eckhardt’s election to the senate, there were two Ds, two Rs, 1 L, and 1 I. This caused no problems.
Eckhardt should be designated as (D-Travis). I’d be extremely surprised if she has moved since her election.
Secret sigs on ALL petitions = less PURGE lists.
Akin to secret ballots.