The September 10 issue of The Daily Campus has this op-ed by Gregory Koch, advocating that Connecticut ballot access laws be eased. The column points out that Jill Stein was unable to qualify in Connecticut this year.
3
On September 10, U.S. District Court Judge Paul D. Borman amended his opinion of September 7 in Libertarian Party of Michigan v Johnson, eastern district, 2:12-12782. He deleted two sentences, which had said, “To avoid this unconstitutional predicament, the Supreme Court of Michigan ordered that Mr. Anderson’s name be removed from the primary ballot so that he could appear on the general election ballot as the candidate of a different party. Michigan Republican State Central Committee v Secretary of State, 408 Mich. 931 (1980).” Those two sentences had been on page 17.
Judge Borman added footnote one on page one, which says, “The only amendment to the Court’s September 7, 2012 Opinion and Order is the striking of one sentence and a citation appearing on page 17 of the Court’s Opinion: ‘To avoid…(1980).’ The Court did not in any way rely on this language or citation in reaching its decision on the merits. Indeed the Court noted, also at page 17 of its Opinion, that Mr. Anderson’s name did appear on the primary ballot as a candidate for the Republican Party but, as explained in the Bureau of Elections Director’s May 3, 2012 letter to Plaintiff Gary Johnson, also cited by the Court at page 17 of its Opinion, Anderson’s efforts to also appear as a candidate on the general election ballot as the Anderson Coalition’s candidate were not challenged at that time by the Bureau of Elections because Michigan did not then have in place a statutory procedure for qualifying an independent candidate. That procedure is in place today and Plaintiff Gary Johnson could have availed himself of this procedure, thus distinguishing the instant case from the situation faced by John Anderson in 1980.”
The error in the footnote is that the footnote purports to quote, or at least paraphrase, the May 3 ruling of the Secretary of State. But the May 3 Secretary of State ruling said, “Thus, in 1980, there was no mechanism for an independent candidate to obtain access to the ballot.” See page two. Michigan did have procedures for an independent presidential candidate to get on the ballot in both 1976 and in 1980, and independent presidential candidates used those procedures, which were court-authored procedures, not statutory procedures. Judge Borman knows this, but he is trying to disguise the fact that the Secretary of State either did not know this, or did not tell the truth, in her May 3 ruling.
After almost three weeks of Pennsylvania state court proceedings in Philadelphia and Harrisburg, approximately 41,000 signatures on the Libertarian Pennsylvania statewide petition have been processed. There are still 8,500 unprocessed signatures.
“Processed” means that both sides have looked at each processed signature, and either both sides agree that the signature is valid, or both sides agree it isn’t valid, or the two sides disagree. Many of the disagreements hinge on certain unresolved legal issues, such as whether a petition signature is valid if the signer put the month and day in the “date” column, but not the year. The printed forms all says “Revised January 2012” at the bottom, so it is obvious that all the signatures were signed in 2012. But the challengers say those signatures aren’t valid.
“Processing” will be suspended while some of the legal issues are argued, which will be done on September 12. If the determination of various legal issues means that the unprocessed 8,500 signatures will determine whether the petition has enough valid signatures, then the “processing” will start again for those signatures. In the meantime Pennsylvania is one of the states that can’t start printing ballots. The legal requirement is 20,601 signatures.
On September 7, Ruth Johnson, Secretary of State of Michigan, informed the Libertarian Party that she won’t print Gary Johnson of Austin, Texas, on the November ballot, because Michigan has no procedure for contingent presidential or vice-presidential party nominees.
However, Michigan has no statutory procedure for a qualified party to substitute a new presidential or vice-presidential nominee either, yet in 1972, when the Democratic nominee for vice-president resigned from the ticket, Michigan let the Democratic national committee choose a new vice-presidential nominee. The national convention had nominated Thomas Eagleton in July, but he had resigned from the ticket in August, and Sargent Shriver was chosen to replace him. All fifty states made the substitution.
What is at stake is the First Amendment right of candidates for presidential elector to have printed on the ballot the name of the candidates for President and Vice-President that they say they will vote for. Also at stake is the ability of the Libertarian candidates for presidential elector to continue to be recognized as candidates themselves.
The Kentucky Secretary of State’s office has already approved all three presidential petitions submitted earlier. Therefore, Kentucky will have five presidential candidates on its ballot, the nominees of the Republican, Democratic, Libertarian, and Green Parties, and independent candidate Randall Terry.
This is the first time the Green Party presidential nominee has been on in Kentucky since 2000. Thanks to Tamar Yager for this news.