On December 14, the Georgia Libertarian Party filed this Reply Brief in Cowen v Georgia Secretary of State, 21-13199. The reason the Libertarian Party is able to file one more brief is that both sides are contesting some aspect of the U.S. District Court decision.
This case concerns the 5% petition for district office, for Georgia independent candidates, and the nominees of parties that didn’t poll as much as 20% of the vote for president in the entire nation, or 20% for Governor, in the last election. The U.S. District Court struck down the petition, but imposed a 1% petition to replace it, combined with a filing fee.
Although the Libertarian Party is pleased that the 5% petition was struck down, it is unhappy that the judge imposed her own difficult interim requirement. This new brief is to present the Libertarian case against the interim relief.
The hearing is Friday, December 17, in Atlanta.
14-1 Amdt EQUAL ballot access tests —
much too difficult for armies of conlaw M-O-R-O-N-S since 1968 Williams v Rhodes – ESP IN SCOTUS.
I don’t know… Why *does* the state have to have the same ballot access requirements for federal elections as they do for state elections? The role of the U.S. Congress is pretty different from the role of the state legislature. Where’s the EQUAL?
Aren’t they getting distracted from the real issue, which is the fact that candidates from different parties (or no party) have different ballot access requirements for the same race? There’s the EQUAL!
For hair splitting math folks ready to be a SCOTUS hack — –
14-1 Amdt EQUAL ballot access test(s) for the SAME office in the SAME election area.
Your “equal” tests ignore factors which make them very unequal. We’ve been over this.
The regimes will survive with EQUAL ballot access test(s) for INDIVIDUAL candidates for the SAME office in the SAME election area —
namely EQUAL nominating petitions – ESP USING 1 VOTER FORMS.
>>> MORE PARTY CANDIDATES >>> PR FOR LEGIS OFFICES >>> MORE PARTY LEGISLATORS TO BREAK THE DONKEY/ELEPHANT OLIGARCHIES — TO GET REAL DEMOCRACIES.
Regimes surviving are not my main goal. My goal is dispersing political power, as opposed to concentrating it. Allowing new ideas and candidates who are not incumbent, wealthy, connected, or famous to break through. Your “equal ” scheme does the opposite, for reasons I explained several times now.
Proportional representation can be good, although it kind of screws local representation and independent candidates as actually practiced in some countries. The oddball version you propose, without party labels, forcing candidates to rank all other candidates and have their votes transfer to them and the candidates those candidates rank in turn if they don’t win as a condition of running, is an insane, cockamamie, convoluted, unworkable mess.
What if I’m a socialist candidate with zero interest in ranking capitalist candidates, or for that matter other socialists who I believe are heretics and frauds? What if I’m a libertarian candidate who thinks all the other candidates are equally evil “statists”? And so on. Your scheme is just goofy, and I’m not aware of any election having ever been run the way you propose – probably with good reason!
See https://ballot-access.org/2021/12/10/kansas-city-star-carries-criticism-of-top-four-initiative-by-larry-bradley-a-supporter-of-ranked-choice-voting/#comment-1034155 re: one voter forms, etc.
Far from breaking oligarchs, your scheme entrenches them further.
NEAR ZERO *COMPETITIVE* GERRYMANDER DISTRICTS IN 2022-2030.
MORE EXTREMIST MONARCHS/OLIGARCHS THAN EVER WITH THE CURRENT *SYSTEMS*.
SORRY — MATH PROGRESS IN POLITICAL *SCIENCE* SINCE 1776 —
CONDORCET — 1780S
PR — 1820S-1840S
APPV — 1972 [REBORN]
Empirical evidence is a crucial component of science, and empirical evidence confirms the theory that approval voting elects muddled middle, establishment politicians. Additionally, it confirms everything else I said above. Breaking your caps lock key doesn’t make you any more correct.
Adam, Georgia does not separate out federal office from state office. It separates out statewide office from district office. Libertarians running for statewide office need no signatures; Libertarians running for district office need very difficult petition drives. Georgia Libertarians can run for US Senate with no signatures but can’t run for US House without about 25,000 signatures per district. What is the rationale for that? There is none. It’s just historical accident.
Muddled middle exec folks every day rather than Trump/ Biden radical extremists.
If that’s your idea of radical extremists, expand your horizons.
Approval voting sucks. I’ve seen it used in organizational elections. Terrible.