On October 23, the Arizona Secretary of State determined that the referendum petition concerning HB 2305 has enough valid signatures to be on the November 2014 ballot. See this story. HB 2305 is an omnibus election law bill. Among other things, it makes it virtually impossible for a member of a small ballot-qualified party to get on his or her own party’s primary ballot. And it makes it literally impossible for a small ballot-qualified party to nominate candidates by write-in at its own primary.
As a result of the success of the petition drive, HB 2305 can’t go into effect in 2014. Voters will vote in 2014 on whether to repeal the law. Even if voters vote to keep the law, it can’t affect the 2014 election.
Collecting over 100,000 signatures was only possible because other parts of HB 2305 are considered damaging to voters who are inclined to vote for Democratic Party nominees. Therefore, the Arizona Democratic Party and its allies are responsible for collecting most of the signatures. Arizona and Ohio are two states in which the Democratic Party has been a force for fair ballot access laws, during 2013. In Ohio, Senate Democrats were united in opposing SB 193 this month, and for supporting an amendment to lower the petition for newly-qualifying parties from 56,000 signatures to 2,000 signatures. Of course, in both Arizona and Ohio, Democrats are in the minority in both houses of the legislature. The fate of Ohio’s SB 193 will be determined in the coming week, when the Ohio House takes up the bill.
Richard,
Does this mean that the D’s and R’s would be responsible for their 1/2% of 1/2% registered voters for a nominating petition as the same for other ballot qualified parties?
How do you think the new ‘AE’ Arizona party ballot access will be affected? What current law will allow AE to use Independents for signatures (even though Arizona has no provision for Independents and only a 3/8″ space to register as something other than D or R) ??
I believe that in most states, the D’s have permanent ballot access… Am I wrong in this assumption?
It means the 2012 rules will be in effect in 2014 as well.
No state names either the Democratic Party, or the Republican Party, and grants them automatic qualified status. The last state that did that was North Dakota, but their law was amended in the 1990’s. Of course, whenever either of those parties does happen to lose its qualified status, the legislature quickly amends the law so they recover. The last time that happened was 1990 in Virginia, when the Democrats lost their qualified status because they didn’t run anyone for US Senate (which was the only statewide office on the ballot). The legislature then quickly amended the bill so that a party can meet the vote test at either of the last two elections.
It means the 2012 rules will be in effect in 2014 as well.
No state names either the Democratic Party, or the Republican Party, and grants them automatic qualified status. The last state that did that was North Dakota, but their law was amended in the 1990’s. Of course, whenever either of those parties does happen to lose its qualified status, the legislature quickly amends the law so they recover. The last time that happened was 1990 in Virginia, when the Democrats lost their qualified status because they didn’t run anyone for US Senate (which was the only statewide office on the ballot). The legislature then quickly amended the law so that a party can meet the vote test at either of the last two elections.