On August 31, the 10th circuit upheld Colorado’s unique law, barring independent candidates (for office other than President) if they have been registered members of a qualified party in the 17 months before the general election.  As a result, Kathleen Curry, Colorado’s only independent legislator, must be a write-in candidate this year as she tries to be re-elected.  The 21-page decision is here.  It is by Judge Michael Murphy, a Clinton appointee, and is co-signed by Judges Wade Brorby and Deanell Tacha, both Reagan appointees.

The decision was issued without oral argument, and will not be reported.

If any ballot access decision ever can be said to have lack common sense, this one qualifies.  The Colorado legislature this year repealed the requirement.  Unfortunately for the plaintiff-candidate, the new relaxed law does not take effect until 2011.  One wonders, if the legislature doesn’t feel the old law is needed, how can there possibly be a state interest in such a law?  Furthermore, the rationale of the decision, that the law is needed to preserve “stability”, is absurd.  No other state has such a restrictive prior disaffiliation law for independent candidates, yet one doesn’t observe “instability” in the other 49 states.

The decision also lacks common sense because Colorado permits political parties to nominate someone who is newly-affiliated with that party.  Therefore, independent voters who support an independent candidate have fewer rights than political parties.  The decision’s equal protection argument pays no attention at all to the interests of independent voters.

Recently, John A. Ferentinos filed a federal lawsuit against the Florida Secretary of State, over his exclusion from the ballot.  He wishes to run as a Tea Party candidate for State Senate, 26th district.  He paid his filing fee and submitted candidacy forms, but he was kept off the ballot because he forgot to fill in the name of his bank on the form “Appointment of Campaign Treasurer and Designation of Campaign Depository for Candidates.”

The only other person running for that seat is the incumbent, Senator Michael Haridopolos.  Ferentinos notes that Senator Haridopolos also failed to complete a question on his form.  Senator Haridopolos apparently failed to check a box that asks if the bank account is a primary account or a secondary account.

Ferentinos also notes that his failure to put the name of his bank on that form did not cause election officials any harm, because they had his filing fee check and obviously the bank’s name was on the check.  The lawsuit is Ferentinos v Roberts, in the middle district, in Orlando, 6:10-cv-1251.  His odds are not good because the state will probably argue that he should have filed the lawsuit back in June or July.  He was notified that he was off the ballot in late June.  Thanks to Darryl Mentro for this news.

On November 2, voters in New York City will vote on two amendments to the city charter.  The second question requires voters to cast a “Yes” or “No” vote on seven separate aspects of election law, including easier ballot access for candidates for city office.  See the details here.

The first amendment would restore two-term term limits for members of the city council, and the city’s executive elected positions.

These measures were put on the ballot by the Charter Review Commission.  That body heard lots of testimony in favor of making New York city elections non-partisan, but the Commission didn’t put that issue on the ballot.