On July 25, James T. Parker, independent candidate for New Mexico Education Commission (a partisan office elected by districts), filed this brief in his ballot access case, Parker v Duran. The lawsuit challenges the 3% petition for independent candidates, and seeks injunctive relief to put him on the November ballot. A decision is expected quickly.
On July 24, Gravis released a new poll for the Montana U.S. Senate race. The results: Republican Steve Daines 45%, Democratic incumbent John Walsh 38%, Libertarian Roger Roots 9%, undecided 8%.
Just a week ago, another poll had Roots at 6%. Both he and Daines have improved since last week’s poll, probably because of the news that Senator Walsh plagerized the works of other authors in 2007. Thanks to Michael for the link.
On July 26, the New York Times carried three letters to the editor, disagreeing with the July 22 op-ed by U.S. Senator Charles Schumer that advocates top-two primaries. Only one of the three letters mentions that a top-two system keeps minor party and independent candidates out of the general election campaign. Also, none of the letters mentioned Schumer’s factual error. Schumer said independents can’t vote in primaries in most states, but that is not true.
The Constitution Party and the Libertarian Party are both qualified parties in South Dakota, but neither one of them has been able to run any candidates for Governor, U.S. Senator, or U.S. House this year, because they must nominate by primary for those offices, and the petition for a candidate to get on the primary ballot for those offices requires 250 signatures of party members. Given the small number of registered voters in those parties, that is too difficult. The 250-signature petition has not been overcome by any qualified minor party in 2008, 2010, 2012, or this year.
On July 23, Charles W. Haan, the Constitution Party’s candidate for U.S. House, filed a pro se lawsuit, asking that he be placed on the November ballot even though he wasn’t technically nominated in the June primary. Haan points out that the party officers certified him as their nominee. He also points out that he did submit a primary petition signed by 205 registered party members.
The Constitution Party filed a similar lawsuit in 2010, but then the plaintiff-candidate withdrew, so the U.S. District Court ruled none of the other plaintiffs had standing. The Court also said that even if some of the plaintiffs did have standing, the requirement is constitutional. The plaintiffs then appealed, and the Eighth Circuit said the U.S. District Court should not have made a ruling on the merits, given that no one had standing.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Storer v Brown, 415 US 724 (1974) that the way to evaluate petition requirements is to divide the number of signatures required by the number of eligible signers. Because the Constitution Party has fewer than 600 registered members, and they are the only eligible signers, the calculation works out to 40%, which should be unconstitutional, if the U.S. District Court will follow the Storer rule. The case is Haan v Gant, 14-3009.
On July 24, a New Hampshire Superior Court in Strafford County struck down language on the New Hampshire voter registration form that seems to say that no one should register to vote in the state unless he or she has also registered one’s automobile in New Hampshire. The plaintiffs include some college students, who desire to vote in New Hampshire while they are in college, but who don’t expect to live in New Hampshire after they graduate. They don’t register their car in New Hampshire because they have a more permanent home elsewhere (generally their parents’ home).
Guare v The State of New Hampshire, superior court, 219-20120cv-458. The ACLU handled this case. Here is a copy of the 10-page decision.
