Vice Magazine, which is a print and on-line magazine for youth, has this interesting interview with Peter Diamondstone. The subject is the relationship between Diamondstone and Bernie Sanders. They were founders of the Liberty Union Party of Vermont in 1971. That party is still ballot-qualified, and Diamondstone is still a leader of that party.

The story says the party failed to receive enough votes in 2008 to retain its status as a party entitled to a primary. But the party did get enough votes in 2014 to regain its status as a party entitled to a primary. However, it doesn’t have a primary this year, because the legislature added an additional requirement, that such parties must be organized in thirty towns in order to qualify for a primary. But the party is on the general election ballot and it nominates by convention. Thanks to Eric Garris for the link.

As reported earlier, California Assemblymember Kristin Olson and Senator Anthony Cannella have introduced ACR 145. The text is now available. It would ask the Legislature to resolve that the Secretary of State print an “advisory ballot” listing all presidential candidates whose names are already on the ballot of one of the already-existing presidential primaries. The ballot would be intended for the voters who don’t want to choose one of the partisan primary ballots.

This year, six parties have partisan presidential primaries in California, with a total of 43 different presidential candidates on the six ballots. Also this year, independent voters are offered a Democratic, Libertarian, and American Independent Party ballot, if they wish to use them. But independents cannot obtain a Republican, Green, or Peace & Freedom presidential primary ballot, unless they join one of those parties by May 23.

If Assemblymember Olson and Senator Cannella were serious about this idea, they would have introduced a bill, not a resolution. The proposal would be expensive, and the Secretary of State has no authority to tell county election officials to spend public funds, in the absence of a law.

On February 29, South Dakota officials said that a party that wants to be on the general election ballot for President and certain other state offices still needs 6,936 valid signatures after all, but the signatures aren’t due until July 11.

On February 26, they had seemed to say that a party that just wants to be on for President and certain other state offices does not need a petition at all. The February 26 Attorney General’s letter said, “If a new political party files a written declaration to organize pursuant to SDCL 12-5-1 by July 11, 2016, that party could nominate candidates at a state convention for the offices outlined in SDCL 12-5-21.” The semantic problem is that when they said, “written declaration”, they meant “petition.”