John Mertens, an engineering professor, is running for U.S. Senate in Connecticut in 2010 on a platform of abolishing federal subsidies for ethanol. He says such a step would save $70,000,000,000 per year and also help the environment. He says he is an independent candidate, but that he also is seeking the nomination of the Independent, Green, Libertarian, and Connecticut for Lieberman Parties. See this story.
Connecticut would permit him to appear on all those party lines, but the Green, Libertarian and Independent Parties are not ballot-qualified for U.S. Senate in 2010. They are qualified for certain other races. In Connecticut, a party is ballot-qualified for each race for which it polled 1% in the last election (it is also ballot-qualified for all office if it polled 20% for Governor in the last gubernatorial election).
The Connecticut for Lieberman Party is ballot-qualified for U.S. Senate in 2010. Mertens would need 7,500 signatures to appear for as the nominee of any of the other parties.
Seeking the Green Party nomination with the others is a stroke of smarts.
Kevin Zeese did same in Maryland U.S. Senate race in 2006.
Let’s hope the Green Party gets behind Mr. Mertens.
Maryland doesn’t permit fusion, so Kevin Zeese wasn’t able to appear under multiple party lines as he had hoped. He was on the Maryland 2006 ballot as just “Green”.
Pingback: Independent Candidate for U.S. Senate from Connecticut wants multiple Party nominations | Independent Political Report
He is the Connecticut for Lieberman Candidate. He controls that party. I do not think that the Independent Party can cross endorse him because they do not have state wide recognition. The GP and LP could.
Even if Maryland doesn’t have fusion, they can do “soft fusion”, where they endorse him without actually having their party name on the ballot.
Does Connecticut have referendum? Why not rally the minor parties into legalizing fusion? Get the Working Families Party into Connecticut, etc….
When can this guy start gathering petition signatures for ballot access?
The Independent Party does have statewide recognition, because it got over 1% for president in 2008, so the state keeps track of how many registrants it has statewide. It is true that because president is not on the ballot in 2010, that presidential status alone is not enough to let it engage in fusion in 2010. But, because it got over 1% for one US House district in 2008, and US House is again up in 2010, that means it can engage in fusion in statewide races in 2010.
Connecticut doesn’t have the initiative.
I stand corrected. I forgot that Nader was the IP candidate.
Pingback: Skull / Bones » Blog Archive
I appreciate the interest! Please visit my website, http://www.Mertens2010.com
Energy, Ethanol, and the Environment are just a few of my issues. I present 30 detailed position statements and solutions to long-term problems. I offer honest, intelligent, non-partisan problem-solving.
All my best,
John