December of even-numbered years is the prime time for individuals to contact state legislators and ask that bills be introduced. There are many irrational and repressive ballot access laws. These laws can be improved, and the most effective way to improve them is for activists who care about ballot access to ask state legislators for bills to improve these laws.
I live in California and am seeking a legislator in California who will introduce a bill to reduce the number of signatures for an independent presidential candidate. The requirement is risen to 219,000 signatures for 2024 and will probably be even higher in 2028 if nothing is done. The law requires a number of signatures equal to 1% of the number of registered voters. The law is so extreme, it has not been used successfully since 1992, when Ross Perot used it. If anyone wishes to help me, please contact me at richardwinger@yahoo.com, or 415-922-9779.
This is some of what the supporters of COFOE desire. If you know of any citizens or legislators who can help, please contact me at scottkohlhaas15@gmail.com:
1. Alabama, reduce the 20% vote test to anything lower. Republicans are so secure in Alabama, I don’t see why they would fiercely resist this. I am not aware that our being on the ballot in 2022 upset the Republicans or caused them any grief. The case is overwhelmingly strong for reducing the 20%. If the 20% had been in effect in the past, the Republican Party would not have been on the ballot, as recently as the early 1960’s. The median vote test is 2% and no state is above 10% except for Alabama, on vote tests. The 20% was never thought thru. It was an accident. Originally 20% separated primary parties from convention parties. Then the legislature repealed the procedure staying on, for convention parties, so by default the 20% came into being as a vote test.
2. Arizona, of course, repeal the 2015 law that made it so tough for small parties with ongoing status to get on the primary ballot.
3. Arkansas, of course, change the vote test from 3% for pres/gov to 3% for any statewide office at either of the last two elections.
4. Connecticut, if a party gets 1% for any statewide race, then it is on automatically for all the statewide races. The Working Families Party, which has influence, would benefit from this because they have never been on for president, but with this idea they would be on for president.
5. Georgia, change the vote test so that if it is met, then it would cover the next two elections. That would restore our statewide status, because we met it in 2022.
6. Illinois, eliminate the start date for petitioning. There was no start date until 1985.
7. Iowa, change the vote test from 2% for Pres/Gov to a group with at least 5,000 registrants. We have that.
8. Kentucky, change the vote test from 2% for Pres, to a group with at least 5,000 registrants. We have that.
9. Maryland, change the retention law, which irrationally says if a group submits a petition it gets the next 2 elections, but if it meets the vote test, it only gets one more election. That is just silly. We got over 1% for Governor in 2022 so if they passed that, we would be back on. Now the Green Party is on and we are not on, so that might give the Democrats an incentive to pass this idea.
10. Massachusetts: With only two Republicans running for US House this year, it should be obvious to everyone that the number of signatures, 2,000, to get a primary candidate on the ballot for US House is too high and should be reduced to 1,000. Republicans in the legislature might help with this because they would benefit.
11.Minnesota, which already has two tiers of party for purposes of public funding, could expand the lower tier to include automatic ballot access.
12. New Hampshire, cut the party petition from 3% to something lower. It has existed since 1996 and has only been used twice, both times by us.
13.New York, obvious.
14. North Dakota, cut the 5% vote test to something lower.
15. Rhode Island, try again with our 2024 bill.
15. Tennessee, cut the party petition to something lower.
16.Virginia, ease the vote test from 10% to something lower. Democrats might want us on the ballot.
Thanks!
1% sounds reasonable to me. Get better candidates.
Bob, California lets any independent to run for Governor with 65 signatures plus a filing fee, but requires someone running for president in the general election as an independent to get 219,000 signatures. That comparison is laughable. Why should a state require so few signatures for Governor and so many for President? Sometimes election laws are absurd.
The problem is ballots.
total pressure from doc/rnc for having NOOOOO 3rds/indees on ballots EVER AGAIN
EQUAL IN 14-1 AMDT——-
FAILURE [ESP BY THE NATL/STATE LPS] SINCE 1968 TO DO A PROPER CASE IN SCOTUS
1954 BROWN V BD OF ED — SEPARATE IS NOT EQUAL
Stan has a great point. Standing count would solve this issue. Why won’t Richard Winger advocate for it?