On October 8, the Ohio Senate Government Oversight and Reform Committee passed SB 193 by a vote of 7-4. They voted after a hearing that last two hours and fifteen minutes.
Shortly afterwards, the bill passed the Senate by a vote of 23-11. The vote in the Senate was almost a pure party line vote, with all Republicans voting in favor and all Democrats voting against, except that Republican Senator Kevin Bacon voted against the bill. The bill removes the Constitution, Green, Libertarian, and Socialist Parties from the 2014 ballot. Those four parties were on the ballot in all elections 2008-2013. The bill removes them because none of them polled as much as 3% for either President or Governor in either of the last two elections. In 2010, the Libertarian Party had polled 2.39% for Governor and the Green Party had polled 1.52% for Governor. The other two minor parties had not run for Governor in 2010, although they did run for U.S. Senate in 2010.
The bill requires parties to obtain 55,809 valid signatures by the beginning of July 2014 if they wish to be on the ballot in 2014. It also requires each of their nominees to obtain their own petitions, but none of these nominee petitions would be greater than 50 signatures. The statewide petition would also have a distribution requirement, and would need at least 500 valid signatures in each of half the U.S. House districts.
The bill now goes to the House. Because the bill has an urgency clause, it cannot pass unless it obtains 60% of the members of the House. The House has 60 Republicans and 39 Democrats, so if all Democrats oppose the bill, and even one Republican opposes the bill, the bill will not pass, unless the urgency clause is removed from the bill. The House vote could come as soon as Thursday, October 10.
The Democrats on the committee moved to amend the bill so that only 2,000 signatures, instead of 55,809, would be required on the party petition. The amendment lost, 4-7, with Senator Bacon the only Republican in support of the amendment. UPDATE: here is the Columbus Dispatch article about the bill.
“Shortly afterwards, the bill passed the Senate by a vote of 23-10. The vote in the Senate was a party line vote, with all Republicans voting in favor and all Democrats voting against.”
This is further evidence that debunks the myth put out by some that Republicans are better than Democrats when it comes to fair ballot access. This time it is the Democrats that are being more reasonable, however, there are times when the Democrats can be just as hostile about ballot access as the Republicans are here. Usually whichever party has the most power in a given state is the party that is the most unreasonable about ballot access.
This is what fear looks like, and republicans are definitely motivated by fear.
http://www.ohiochannel.org/MediaLibrary/Media.aspx?fileId=140643
In the last few years it has been Republicans who have fought to eliminate the competition from the ballot. Montana is voting on a two primary pushed by Republicans and in Arizona, Republicans pushed legislation, this year, to make it harder for 3rd parties to get candidates on the ballot. Republicans may have the edge on this issue, they don’t trust the free market or their idea’s.
Republicans have every reason to fear. They are the ultimate enemies of liberty and their days are numbered.
Eric Dondero =/= “some”
Republicans hate us for our freedom. We must fight them over there or we’ll have to fight them over here.
Republicans are wusses. They espouse free market at the top of their shrill voices, but when it comes to free market elections that is something else altogether.
Democrats have always been the party of cutting edge ideas. They stole ideas from the Populists then the Socialists. They may not have been good ideas but at least they were willing to change with the times. Perhaps it is time the Libertarians to focus on Democrats to carry the message of liberty. The GOP sure isn’t interested. Look at what they did to Ron Paul!
I notice that they changed the qualification period after receiving 3% to four years; and eliminated the names of candidates from the party qualification petition, so your email may have had some effect.
My interpretation of the emergency clause is that if the bill is passed, but fails to get a 2/3 majority, the bill becomes law 90 days after it is signed by the governor.
The emergency clause has to be in a separate section, and considered in a separate vote from that for passage. If the emergency clause is passed, the bill goes into effect immediately AND it is not subject to referendum.
For a bill passed without an emergency clause, there is a 90-day period in which a referendum petition could be gathered before the law goes into effect. For SB 193, this would put the effective date into January 2014.
The filing deadline for primary candidates is February 5, so it would violate due process for any candidates attempting to qualify for the primary to have his effort discarded, so I doubt that it will have any effect for 2014.
I didn’t see where the bill changes the independent filing deadline, which is the day before the primary. I’d suspect that an independent candidate could challenge the deadline on equal protection grounds.
Independent tried that and lost in Lawrence v. Blackwell (2006).
Much of the Democratic Party doesn’t appear interested in civil liberties or even human rights either at this point; go look up some of the Obama Administration’s policies, particularly concerning journalism, electronic spying (ie, the NSA)and foreign policy. In short, the Democratic Party is too much in bed with the military-industrial complex and the other corrupt powers that be.
What I think the Libertarians might need to do, since you’re already considering them cooperating with the Democrats, is to instead ally themselves with the Green Party. There are some pointed differences to be sure, but at least the Green Party also strongly believes in a more rational (and peaceful) foreign policy and in civil liberties.
Such an alliance could, were it to hold (and the necessity for it to hold together does exist these days), result in a political party as strong as the Progressives when TR ran for President, or at least in a third party able to get 5% of the vote in the Presidential election.
The above comment was meant to be in reply to Casual Bystander.
Lawrence v Blackwell came down in November 2005, almost a year before Libertarian Party of Ohio v Blackwell came down. So when Lawrence came down, there was no equal protection violation, as there would be if SB 193 becomes law.
I don’t think that either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party are really interested in liberty or fair ballot access. It is more of a case of the party that has more power in a given state being more hostile to ballot access. The Democratic Party has caused plenty of problems for those seeking access to the ballot around the country. Just ask Ralph Nader.
SB 193 changes the filing deadline for minor parties and minor party candidates to significantly after the date of the primary. Independent candidates are at a disadvantage because they have to file before the minor party candidates.
Under current law, all partisan nominees are selected in the primary, and primary candidates must file some time before that. Independent candidates must file the day before the primary. All general election candidates are chosen contemporaneously.
Good point. Lawrence does not appear satisfied.
Both majors are bad on ballot access. They offer help only when it suits their ends.
http://www.ohiohouse.gov/Assets/CommitteeSchedule/calendar.pdf
Next hearings are in the House on Wednesday the 16th and Thursday the 17th.