On January 12, the Arizona Secretary of State corrected misinformation that had been appearing on his website. The website had been saying that an independent candidate needs a petition of 3% of the number of registered voters as of January 2024, which would be approximately 135,000 signatures. That has now been deleted.
The statute says the requirement is 3% of the number of people who are registered to vote but who are not members of a qualified party, which is about 45,000 signatures.
The misinformation caused confusion. For example, ,here is an NBC News story that erroneously said the number of signatures is approximately 128,000. Thanks to Rick Lass for the news about the correction.
BINGO!
I just stopped this misinformation in a news story and thought the same thing.
The deadline in AZ is not until Setember so it makes no sense to prioritize AZ when there are a lot of states with earlier deadlines.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/federal-judge-rejects-attempt-place-230131680.html
FL DEM PREZ PRIMARY
ONE MORE REASON TO ABOLISH THE EC
All ballot access signature petition quotas are extortion of forced labor and a wealth qualification to seek election and can be held unconstitutional if brought to the SCOTUS. Compliance with such laws in 51 jurisdictions to overcome censorship of voters’ freedom to choose among candidates on state monopoly ballots are recurrent expenses that surely exceeds the costs of litigation to strike these laws down. Yet those with standing to bring such suit choose to pay and pay and pay. Some with standing and willing to be a plaintiff but indigent cannot obtain support for such suit.
Andy, the legislature moved the deadline from September to August 17.
Without the Electoral College, who should get to decide whether or not a candidate for President’s name would appear on a ballot? The Electoral College has the virtue of leaving this matter up to the states.
Without the electoral college, Killary Klingon would have started WWIII and we’d all be dead.