On July 23, Delaware Governor Jack Markell signed HB 425.  It reduces the number of registrants a party needs to be ballot-qualified, for 2010 only, from 612 members, to 306 members.  This has the effect of immediately putting the Green Party back on the ballot.  It will also make it much easier for the Constitution Party to get back on the ballot.  As a result of the bill, the Constitution Party only needs to get about 25 more registrants between now and August 10 in order to be ballot-qualified.

It is not easy for parties to gain more registrants during an election year in Delaware, because the state does not permit voters to change parties in the period before primaries or general elections.  The law is ambiguous about whether independent voters may switch to join parties during these periods.

Delaware is the third state in which the Green Party has gained party status this month.  The other two are Arkansas and Texas.

The July 25 San Antonio Express-News has this lengthy and interesting story about the Texas Green Party and its fight to get on the ballot this year.  But what is most revealing about the story is the very last paragraph, which quotes a Democratic Party opponent of the Green Party, Christian Archer.  The story describes him as a Democratic Party consultant.

Archer says, “I believe the (ballot access) laws are unconstitutional.  If anybody would challenge what it takes to get on the ballot, they would win in court.”  It is ignorant for Archer to say that, and it is bad journalism for the reporter to have printed that without challenging Archer.  Most of the repressive Texas ballot access laws were upheld in the U.S. Supreme Court in 1974 in American Party of Texas v White.  The vote was 8-1 to uphold the number of signatures, the primary screenout, the notarization requirement, and the short period for collecting signatures.

More repressive Texas ballot access laws have been added since.  But in 1996, the 5th circuit upheld the requirement that independent candidates (for office other than President) must file a declaration of candidacy in January.  And in 2004, the 5th circuit upheld the discriminatory parts of the law that require independent presidential candidates to obtain 40% more signatures than independent candidates for other statewide office, and also upheld the earlier deadline for independent candidates than for new parties.  And in 2006, the 5th circuit upheld petition-checking procedures that allow election authorities to take a very long time to tell independent candidates whether their petition is valid or not.  Thanks to Kimberly Wilder for the link.

On July 23, the Rhode Island Secretary of State used a random procedure to determine the order in which parties would appear on the November 2010 ballot.  The Moderate Party will appear first, followed by the Democratic Party, then the Republican Party, then the column for independent candidates.

Some Rhode Island towns do not use a party column ballot format.  However, even in those towns, the random procedure determines which parties are listed first in the part of the ballot that includes the straight-ticket device, and the Moderate Party will be first there also.