Maine Bill to Ease Requirement for Party Recognition

Posted on by January 26, 2011
Reply

Maine Representative Ben Chipman (I-Portland) has introduced LD 142, to remove the requirement that a qualified party, or a group attempting to qualify as a political party, must hold a municipal caucus in at least one town in each county in the state. Ballot access requirements that require support from each county in a state, or even support from any particular number of counties, have been held unconstitutional. Illinois, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Wisconsin, and Wyoming, all had ballot access requirements in the past that required support from a certain number of counties, but none of those laws exist any longer. Nebraska still has a county distribution requirement for non-presidential statewide independent candidates, passed in 2007, but that law is under attack in U.S. District Court. Nebraska’s county distribution requirement for petitions for a new party was held unconstitutional in 1984.

Maine has 16 counties, ranging in population from 17,000 (Piscataquis County) to 278,000 (Cumberland County).

Alaska Ballot Access Bill Introduced

Posted on by January 26, 2011
Reply

On January 18, Alaska Representative Max Gruenberg (D-Anchorage) introduced HB 96. It eases the definition of “political party” to a group that has at least 2,500 registered members. Currently, the number of registered voters a group needs to be a qualified party is 3% of the vote cast in the last election. That number varies according to whether the last election was a high-turnout presidential election, or a lower-turnout midterm election, and ranges from 7,000 to 10,000.

Delaware House Passes Bill, Forbidding Parties from Nominating a Non-Member

Posted on by January 26, 2011
Reply

On January 25, the Delaware House passed HB 11, which makes it illegal for any party to nominate someone who is not a registered member of that party (although the bill exempts Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates). The motivation for the bill is to make it impossible for two parties to jointly nominate the same person, but the bill goes further than that. See this story.

Pennsylvania Ballot Access Bill Introduced

Posted on by January 26, 2011
Reply

On January 12, Pennsylvania State Senator Mike Folmer (R-Lebanon) again introduced the Voter Choice Act that he had introduced in 2009. This year it is Senate Bill 21. It changes the definition of “political party” to a group that has registration of at least one-twentieth of 1% of the number of registered voters. If this bill were in effect, the Constitution, Green and Libertarian Parties would be recognized as parties, along with the Democratic and Republican Parties. Currently, only the Democratic, Republican and Libertarian Parties are recognized as parties. The existing law says a “party” is a group that polled 2% of the winner’s vote for either of the last two statewide elections (the Libertarians met the vote test in 2009).

The bill also says that qualified parties with less than 15% of the voter registration may nominate by convention, and inform election officials of their nominees no later than 8 weeks before the general election. They would not need any petitions. Currently, parties with less than 15% of the voter registration must submit petitions for all of their nominees (except they need no petition for special elections), and these petition requirements, for statewide office, can range all the way from 20,000 signatures to 67,000 valid signatures, because the formula for determining the number of signatures is erratic.

The bill also helps independent candidates, by cutting the number of signatures they need down to the same number of signatures that candidates running in a party primary need. Currently, statewide candidates in a primary need 2,000 signatures.

Homeless Candidate Removed from Chicago Ballot Because Post Office Where He Has Post Office Box is Not in the Ward He Sleeps In

Posted on by January 26, 2011
Reply

On January 25, Sylvester “Junebug” Hendricks filed a lawsuit in Illinois Circuit Court in Cook County, seeking to be placed back on the ballot as a candidate for Alderman, 5th district of Chicago. He had been removed from the ballot on December 23, 2010, on the grounds that the post office where he has his post office box is not in the 5th district; instead it is in the 9th district. See this story.

Illinois election law section 10 ILCS 5/3-2(b) says “A homeless individual must have a mailing address in order to be eligible to register to vote. For purposes of this Act, a mailing address shall constitute a homeless individual’s residence for voting purposes.”

Hendricks argues that he does regularly sleep at a particular address that is in the 5th district. He also points out that no one lives in a post office box. See here for the Board of Election Commissioner’s findings that he may not run in the 5th district.