The Georgia Secretary of State has posted some instructions on how minor parties can comply with SB 189, the new law that says if a minor party is on the ballot for president in at least 20 states and territories, it can notify the Georgia Secretary of State and the presidential nominee of that party will automatically be on in Georgia.
Here is the one-page set of rules, which says the documentation from other states and territories (that have presidential electors) is due August 23. This is only a regulation, not a law, and the Secretary of State is free to revise it. In practice, the deadline is too early. Petitions for presidential candidates in five states are not due until early September. Therefore, the Georgia rules ought to have a deadline in early September as well.
UOCAVA, the federal law that tells states to mail postal ballots to overseas voters, does not require the ballots to be sent until 45 days before the general election. That means the ballots need not be sent out until late September.
SEND CORRECT INFO TO GA SOS — EMAIL / SNAIL MAIL / RABBITS / TURTLES/ ETC
Richard, here’s the real kicker:
“This method of ballot access under O.C.G.A. § 21-2-172(g) does not apply to independent candidates. As drafted, the provision only applies to “political party” or “political body” candidates.”
So, this really only helps Stein and Oliver this year, unless Brainworm Bobby is on the ballot in 20-plus states as a political party candidate, not an indy.
And, there’s no indication whether or not that has to be the SAME party in all 20 of those states.
The bill has no impact on Chase Oliver. The Libertarian Party is ballot-qualified for all statewide office in Georgia (but not district or county office).
The Clerk of the US House of Representatives publishes general election returns every two years, and the Clerk’s booklet has the vote by party for each house of congress, and president also. The Clerk does include Green Party candidates in the Green Party column, even when the name of the Green Party in states in which the party has a different name. In DC, Statehood Green Party. In West Virginia, Mountain Party. In Maine, Green Independent Party. In Massachusetts, Rainbow-Green. So although the Georgia regulations don’t discuss the matter of whether the party has to have the same name in every one of the 20 states, the Clerk’s booklet is probably persuasive that the Georgia Secretary of State should have the same policy.
RICHARD,
THE Statement above is disinformation.
OCGA Section 21-2-172 (g) states: “Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, any political party or political body which has obtained ballot access in no fewer than 20 states or Territories for the office of presidential elector shall be allowed to qualify candidates for presidential elector and receive access to the general election ballot for the purpose of election of the office of presidential elector.”
It does not state “at least 20 states and territories” as stated in the posted article above. Please correct the above disinformation in this posted article.
Note “and” is not the work between
states & territories. The word is “or” in OCGA Section 21-2-172(g).
I do not believe a elector would be running in the Territory of Hawaii in the November, 2024 election. In 1959 upon statehood for Hawaii, the remainder of the Territory of Hawaii became unorganized, but it was still an incorporated territory of the USA.
After the split of Dakota Territory in the 19th Century there was remainder land which was called “LOST DAkOTA” and was unorganized but incorporated Territory. After years of being unorganized it was ceded to the Territory of Montana in 1873.
I do not believe there will be electors in 2024 from LOST DAKOTA either.
ANY PART OF THE USA STILL OWNED BY THE UK / FRANCE / SPAIN / MEXICO / RUSSIA / PACIFIC OCEAN / ETC ???
PRINT BALLOTS DEADLINE — BEFORE MAILING SOME OUT – ESP TO TROOPERS FIGHTING BARBARIANS OVERSEAS ???
CONSTITUTIONAL TO HAVE INTERNAL LAWS BASED ON EXTERNAL REGIME LAWS/ACTIONS ???
AZ,
ALL I can think of is Imperial Russia and it’s 50% interest in the island of Oahu, Hawaii which I noted in the records of the Hawaii State Archives in year 1970.
Also the issue of title to Stewart Atoll, Hawaii with a claim by the Government of the Solomon Islands in the South Pacific.
Then there is Machias Seal Island of the Western Seal Islands in Washington
County, Maine. New Brunswick makes a claim. Back between 13 March – 12 April 1930, Samuel Wittermere Boggs (Geographer of the US Department of State) at The Hague, Netherlands offered up that island to the UK as an Imperial Question to William Eric Beckett (Second Legal Advisor of the British Foreign Office), for the Plover Group of Island to the North of Alaska. It was rejected by the UK government. Now on 19 December 2023,
Biden bring up the offer anew.
It should be even later than early September, since states don’t certify candidates right upon the signature turn in deadline. When are the latest state certifications? When are Georgia ballots printed?
If memory serves Sept 7 is the latest turn in deadline. I’ve had state signature turn ins where we waited weeks or even months to hear back from states, but obviously it can’t be months for September turn ins.
I’ve read more recently that early voting starts September 20 some places now. Iirc the federal deadline is election day (Nov 5 this year) minus 45 days? Memory hazy on that, but if so, that would be right around that same date.
https://electionlawblog.org/?p=144540
DONKEYS –EARLY NOMINATION OF BIDEN — EXTREME-MACHINATION OR WHAT IN THE DONKEY MONARCH/OLIGARCH REGIME ???
https://apnews.com/article/kennedy-west-third-party-2024-election-10c4c166ad4d41cab73660c33a69a58a
AP — GOP SECRET $$$ FOR BALLOT ACCESS OF KENNEDY / WEST — DIVIDE AND CONQUER BIDEN/DONKEYS
@AZ
Alaska.
The Alaska “purchase” was in fact a 100 year lease. In 1967, the US failed to renew the lease so Alaska defaulted to a de jure Russian territory, while de facto continuing to be administered by the US.
Since the illegitimate Soviet government in 1967 was not in continuation with the legitimate Imperial government who had originally leased Alaska to the US in 1867, and since Russia has not obviously pressed its claim on Alaska since the collapse of the Soviet Union, that does raise the possibility that Russia might legally be considered to have relinquished its claim on Alaska through the legal doctrine of “abandonment”.
https://prod-static.gop.com/media/RNC2024-Platform.pdf
2024 GOP PLATFORM
CHAP 9 – ELECTION STUFF
NOT SURE WHEN PUPPETS/ROBOTS/HACKS WILL ADOPT IT AT MILW RNC
—-
NATION-STATE REGIME CHANGES – SUPPOSEDLY DO NOT AFFECT PRIOR FORN TREATIES / LOANS / CONTRACTS / ETC.
BUT OFTEN IGNORED BY NEW NATION-STATE REGIME — EG – 1917 COMMIE REGIME RE OLDE CZAR REGIME FORN DEBTS
IE TOTAL RISK HAVING TO DO ANYTHING WITH A FORN REGIME [ OR EVEN A DOMESTIC REGIME ] — ESP LOANS / CONTRACTS
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/07/16/rnc-2024-who-is-staying-away-from-milwaukee/74415168007/
TOP ELEPHANTS N-O-T AT MILW RNCONV — TO BE TOTALLY PURGED IN 2025 ???
NUNA,
You are in error. There was no lease.
It was a purchase but for only part of present day Alaska. Addition territory was added to Alaska on 17 May 1884, under the terms of Section 1
Of the Herrison Alaska Organic Act, by the Alaska Board of the United States
Department of the Treasury.
The purchase Treaty was signed on 30 March 1867.
Randall Terry needs to step up ballot access if he’s serious about his supposed goals. Georgia would be an important media market(s) for his ads. He’s close enough to 20 to make it, but would need to step on the gas.
Oliver, Stein, and Kennedy are on.
West has enough money to maybe make it if he steps on it, but if so, those certification lags would probably kill that. I don’t get the sense he takes ballot access seriously at all. His campaign is strictly a message vehicle and he’s already getting way more media, debate invites (which he doesn’t even accept when already right there on site) and poll inclusion than his ballot access warrants, so what does he need it for? It’s not like he’ll win or even swing a single elector.
Past that? Highly unlikely. Claudia de la Cruz would be the only one even worth discussing, and that seems unlikely. But not impossible – Marxist cults have the cult discipline to rack up volunteer sigs, since cult members will work as hard as they can every waking minute and miss out on as much sleep as physically able to carry out cult leader orders.
Is there anyone I forgot within range of making it by Sept 23, much less Aug 23?
Kennedy secures North Carolina ballot spot on a 4-1 vote
Thank you, Mark. I have amended the post.
Bobby g
Nice, but not very relevant to this article since his biggest number of partisan states for access is low single digit for one party.
“there’s no indication whether or not that has to be the SAME party in all 20 of those states.”
There is if Mark quoted the law correctly.
@Mark Seidenberg
Respectfully, I am not the one who is in error. The original terms of the Alaska “Purchase” were a 100 year lease. The English language version of the document that has been used by the US to falsify its claim to Alaska is neither the original document signed nor its original English translation.
Furthermore, the terms of the lease were signed by Russia only under considerable pressure from the US, thus pulling into question the validity of the lease and bindingness of its terms on Russia in the first place. Just like current Russian ownership of Alaska is pulled into question by the lack of the Russian government pressing its claim over the past 32 and a half years.
@Jay
There is nothing stopping Terry from advertising in Georgia even if he isn’t on the ballot there. Though, as Facepalm previously pointed out in the F&E debate thread, Georgians might be more susceptible if Terry was on their ballot.
Richard, I didn’t know if Chase was already qualified or not. I was speaking on the possibility he was not.
Thanks on the other information, but that’s federal. It’s not necessarily governing or constraining on the Georgia SoS, and I think, respectfully, you know that. So, I’d say “it will come out in the laundry” when the decision is made as to what policy Georgia has, unless you can find some written state-level information.
The amendment to SB 189 was interesting. Since the bill originated in the Senate it was heard in a senate committee then passed by the full Senate. It was then heard in a house committee, all along the way being amended.
On March 28, the last day of the session, the bill was recommitted to the Rules Committee, and the ballot access amendment added. The Rules Committee also serves to schedule legislation before the full House. The committee met three times for about 15 minutes each, to put some more legislation bills before the House. The amendment was made during the 3rd and last committee meeting. It was explained that it would provide presidential ballot access for ballot access for political parties with significant national access.
The discussion then focused on whether the bill would still permit unlimited objections to voters (i.e., Republicans want to be able to challenge all voters who might be ineligible; Democrats don’t want voters to be intimidated). The bill then passed out of the committee on a party line vote. It passed the House, and on the same day the House amendments were agreed to by the Senate.
So the bill that was certain to pass through both houses on a party line vote, had an added amendment that would qualify the Green Party in Georgia.
JIM RIlEY,
I note that OCGA Section 21-2-172(g) became effective on 1 July 2024. If stated that 20 states or territories.
Why would anyone drafting such a statute us the word “or” between states and territories if they wanted to include Washington, District of Columbia as part of the minimum 20 states. The District of Columbia is neither a state or territory, it is a Federal District of the United States and the 23rd Amendment to the Constitution extended the election of Presidential Electors to that District.
When the Territory of Hawai’i was annexed it also added dependent states to the United States like “Arossi” and “Maura”. Both near the Solomon Islands in the South Pacific.
In their interviews, Terry and his campaign manager said getting on the ballot in NJ will give them access to the NYC and Philadelphia nedia markets. I forgot exactly how they phrased it, but it was something to that effect for sure.
Even if it’s true that where they can advertise has nothing to do with where they are on the ballot, ad impact is maximized where they are on the ballot , and even more so in the swing states. It’s likely that if the ads have breakout impact it will be because they earn media discussion. Less of that will happen when they advertise in states where they’re not on the ballot.
In general, they’re likely to get less coverage if they’re on in fewer states, and thus fewer donations, fewer ad plays, etc.
In his interview with IPR, Joe Slovenec, Terry’s campaign manager said:
“But our goal is to get 10 states, because if you are on the ballot in 10 states, you can place national ads in all 50 states, and the FCC cannot censor your ad 60 days prior to the election. The key states we wanted were Virginia because of its proximity to DC. We wanted New Jersey so we could advertise in New York, etc. Our whole goal is putting our commercials on television, our radio spots on the radio.”
Since there is, as far as I’m aware, nothing that prevents them from running campaign ads anywhere in US after they hit ten states, I suspect the reason they want Virginia and New Jersey is just for ease of logistics. But you raise a good question and now I’m starting to doubt myself.
Does anyone happen to know with certainty whether any states (or federal districts), in particular New York and Washington DC, have additional restrictions to the federal ones, which would prevent local radio stations or television channels from airing campaign ads for parties or candidates that don’t have local ballot access?
I agree with you and Facepalm that campaign ads would likely be more effective when one is also on the ballot.
https://www.fcc.gov/media/policy/statutes-and-rules-candidate-appearances-advertising
“(C) A person seeking election to the office of President or Vice President of the United States shall, for the purposes of the Communications Act and the rules in 47 CFR chapter I, be considered legally qualified candidates only in those States or territories (or the District of Columbia) in which they have met the requirements set forth in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section: Except, that any such person who has met the requirements set forth in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section in at least 10 States (or 9 and the District of Columbia) shall be considered a legally qualified candidate for election in all States, territories, and the District of Columbia for the purposes of this Act.”
So, apparently, yes, Virginia and NJ are only for those secondary reasons, not because they can’t run the ads at all. But even more interesting is that they don’t even have to get on the ballot in 10 states (or 9 states and DC). Section B;
“A person seeking election to any public office including that of President or Vice President of the United States, or nomination for any public office except that of President or Vice President, by means of a primary, general or special election, shall be considered a legally qualified candidate if, in addition to meeting the criteria set forth in paragraph (a) of this section, that person:
(1) Has qualified for a place on the ballot; or
(2) Has publicly committed himself or herself to seeking election by the write-in method and is eligible under applicable law to be voted for by sticker, by writing in his or her name on the ballot or by other method, and makes a substantial showing that he or she is a bona fide candidate for nomination or office.”
So write in candidates count, and several states have automatic write in qualification, or, if that’s not good enough for the purpose of b-2 above, many other states make it much easier to qualify for registered write in status than to qualify for ballot inclusion.
What’s a substantial showing that a candidate is bona fide?
” (F) The term “substantial showing” of a bona fide candidacy as used in paragraphs (b), (d) and (e) of this section means evidence that the person claiming to be a candidate has engaged to a substantial degree in activities commonly associated with political campaigning. Such activities normally would include making campaign speeches, distributing campaign literature, issuing press releases, maintaining a campaign committee, and establishing campaign headquarters (even though the headquarters in some instances might be the residence of the candidate or his or her campaign manager). Not all of the listed activities are necessarily required in each case to demonstrate a substantial showing, and there may be activities not listed herein which would contribute to such a showing.”
But that only raises the question of what’s a substantial degree, so I can see why being on in ten states is a better way to go if your goal is to run ads rather than to win a court case that you should have been allowed to run ads, probably after the election is over.
Yeah, “a substantial degree in activities commonly associated with political campaigning” in combination with “there may be activities not listed herein which would contribute to such a showing” really is sweeping statement allowing the FCC to accept or dismiss anything as “a substantial showing of a bona fide candidacy” completely at their own discretion. It’s rather reminiscent of an End-User License Agreement or a Privacy Policy…
I suspect the Terry campaign is not actually raising all that much. Did the June Numbers come out yet? What dates of the month do they typically come out? I think some time near the end of the following month?