On April 12, the Arizona Libertarian Party filed a federal lawsuit against the law passed last year that makes it difficult for members of small qualified parties to get themselves on their own party’s primary ballot. Arizona Libertarian Party v Reagan, 1:16cv-1019.
The old law required signatures for a member of any party to get on a primary ballot equal to one-half of 1% of that party’s registration (for statewide office), or 1% of that party’s registration for district and county office. The new law changes the denominator from the number of registered voters in that party, to the number of voters who are in that party or who are not members of any qualified party. The new law does not change the law for “new” parties, so the new law, for 2016 and 2018, has no impact on the Green Party, and very little effect on the major parties. But it vastly increases the primary petition burden for Libertarians. For 2016, a statewide Libertarian needs 3,023 signatures of registered Libertarians or registered independents, whereas under the old law, 134 signatures of registered Libertarians were needed. The case is assigned by Judge David T. Campbell, a Bush Jr. appointee.
What if Arizona stopped printing candidate names on the ballot, and simply printed each office along with a blank space. A candidate could be certified as a write-in candidate. A vote for someone not on the certified candidate list would be set aside and not counted unless it could affect the result. If no candidate received a majority, a second trial would be held.
Only candidates who collectively received 90% of the vote would be certified for the second trial. Votes for other persons would be discarded. Candidates who qualified for the second trial could voluntarily withdraw.
The process would be repeated until a candidate received a majority, with one candidate being eliminated each trial.
If a group of people wanted to support a candidate, they could advertise that candidacy by word of mouth, social media, or advertising. They could hold rallies or debates, and distribute lists of endorsed candidates. They could campaign outside polling places.
If a group wanted to organize as a party they could do so.
Under the old law, voters eligible to vote in the primary could sign a candidate petition. If someone can vote for a Libertarian candidate, and sign a petition for a Libertarian candidate, why shouldn’t they count in the base for calculating the number of signatures?
Also you, and the lawsuit, gloss over the fact that the percentage was cut in half.
Jim, I won the Green Party primary for Congress in AZ-06 in 2010 with 6 write-in votes and was on the November ballot. http://apps.azsos.gov/election/2010/Primary/Canvass2010PE.pdf
Similarly, in 2012, I won the Americans Elect primary with 11 write-in votes and got on the November ballot that year, too. http://apps.azsos.gov/election/2010/Primary/Canvass2010PE.pdf
Green Party candidates again this year need only to register as write-in candidates for the primary by mid-July and in August received a plurality of the votes. This is true, as Richard’s post notes, for “new parties” (in the first two elections after they qualify for the ballot).
What puzzles me about the Libertarian lawsuit is why they waited so long.
In what 1,000 or even 1,000,000 year time period will any so-called lawyer or even a court notice that —
1. Every election is NEW.
2. Separate is NOT equal — even in election law stuff. Brown v. Bd of Ed 1954
i.e. requiring EQUAL tests to get on general election ballots.