South Carolina Bill to Provide that State Pays for Presidential Primaries Advances

Posted on by March 21, 2014
Reply

On March 20, the South Carolina House Judiciary Committee passed HB 4732. This is the bill that says the government will pay for the administration of presidential primaries. The only qualified parties that may have presidential primaries are those which polled at least 5% for President in the last election.

South Carolina is the only state in the nation in which no party, other than the Democratic and Republican Parties, has ever polled as much as 5% for President. South Carolina did not have elections for president before 1868; the legislature chose the presidential electors. When Strom Thurmond ran for President in 1948, although he carried South Carolina, he was the nominee of the Democratic Party of South Carolina, and President Truman was an independent candidate.

In 1956, presidential elector candidates pledged to U.S. Senator Harry Byrd were on the South Carolina ballot, and they polled 29.45%. But they were on the ballot as independent candidates, not as nominees of a party. The ballot label was “Nomination by Petition.”

In 1996, when Ross Perot was the Reform Party nominee, he polled over 5% for President in every state. But in South Carolina, which permits fusion, he was on the ballot twice, once as the Patriot Party nominee and once as the Reform Party nominee. He polled 3.21% as the Patriot nominee and 2.39% as the Reform nominee, so neither of his two parties themselves polled as much as 5% for President.

Jay Paterno Ballot Status to be Determined in Commonwealth Court on March 31

Posted on by March 21, 2014
Reply

Jay Paterno, a leading Democratic candidate for Pennsylvania Lieutenant Governor, will face a petition challenge on March 31 in Commonwealth Court. He needs 1,000 valid signatures to get on the May 20 primary ballot, and the law also requires 100 signatures from each of five counties. The county distribution requirement should have been declared unconstitutional long ago, because in 1969 the U.S. Supreme Court said they violate “one person, one vote”, because counties have different populations.

Paterno only submitted 1,117 signatures, so chances are high that even without considering the county distribution requirement, he likely does not have 1,000 valid signatures, although it is possible. See this story.

Sixth Circuit Expedites Libertarian Primary Ballot Access Case

Posted on by March 21, 2014
Reply

On March 21, the Sixth Circuit agreed to expedite Libertarian Party of Ohio v Husted. All the briefs will be in by April 15. As reported in an earlier blog post today, the fact that some primary ballots will have been printed by then will not injure the Libertarian candidates. If they win in the Sixth Circuit in late April, their names can be added to the ballots in the counties that use electronic voting machines, because that just involves reconfiguring the machines, rather than printing paper ballots. Because the three Libertarian Party candidates are each unopposed for the party’s nomination, their vote total doesn’t matter; they just each need one vote in order to be nominated.

Constitution Party has Contested Primary in One Idaho Legislative District

Posted on by March 21, 2014
Reply

Except for newly-qualifying parties, Idaho technically provides for a primary for all ballot-qualified parties. However, no primary is held when only one candidate files in any particular party’s primary for any particular office.

But, there will be a Constitution Party primary ballot printed up for the May 20, 2014 primary in the First Legislative district. That is because two candidates filed for the party’s nomination for State Senate. They are Christian Fioravanti and Jack Mervin. As far as is known, this is the first primary held for any party, other than the Republican and Democratic Parties, in Idaho, in decades. See this story.

The Constitution Party had the option late last year to notify the state that it wants to open its primary to independent voters, a step the Democratic Party took. But the Constitution Party did not exercise its option to tell the state that it wants independents to be able to vote in its primary, so the Constitution nomination will be settled by the party’s registered voters who live in that district.