On August 10, the Democratic Party of New York’s 23rd U.S. House district chose attorney Bill Owens to be the Democratic nominee in the upcoming special election for that seat. Owens, 60, says he has been a registered independent since he first registered to vote at age 18, according to this news story. Actually, the 18-year vote didn’t go into effect until 1971, and Owens turned 18 in 1967, so what he probably means is that he has been a registered independent since he turned 21.
On August 6, the 9th circuit issued an order setting a briefing schedule for Nader v Cronin, 08-16444. The issue in the case is whether a state may require six times as many signatures for a single independent presidential candidate as it requires for an entire ballot-qualified party. The case had been on hold during most of 2009 to see if the Hawaii legislature would amend the law. However, no legislator even introduced a bill on this subject. This case has been pending since 2004.
Nader’s brief is due in the 9th circuit on October 13; the state’s brief is due November 12. Any Nader rebuttal brief is due two weeks after the state’s brief.
The only other ballot access case from 2004 that is still alive, in any court, as far as is known, is the Pennsylvania Nader case over whether Nader must pay for the costs of determining that his 2004 petition lacked enough valid signatures. That case is in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The Court could issue an opinion at any time, or it might yet schedule another oral argument.
A Quinnipiac Poll released on August 11 shows the following for the New Jersey gubernatorial race: Chris Christie (Republican) 46%, Jon Corzine (Democrat) 40%, Chris Daggett (independent) 7%, other or undecided 7%.
No candidate for Governor of New Jersey, other than the Democratic or Republican nominee, has polled as much as 5% since 1913, when the Progressive Party nominee, Everett Colby, polled 11.0%.
The New Jersey ballot is designed to minimize the vote for minor party and independent candidates. In almost all counties, the Democratic and Republican Party columns are headed by the words “Democratic” or “Republican” in very large print. All other candidates are squeezed into other columns headed by “Nomination by Petition.” That column is a confusing jumble of the other candidates, with any partisan label in tiny print next to their names. The order of these candidates is different in each county. New Jersey is the only state in the nation that gives party column headings to the qualified parties but not to the other parties. Also New Jersey has gone longer than any state (since 1920) in not recognizing any qualified parties except the Democratic and Republican Parties.
Long-time Chicago columnist and blogger Dennis Byrne has this op-ed in the Chicago Tribune of August 11. His point is that no one is in charge of determining whether candidates for federal office meet the constitutional qualifications.
Of course, the Constitution does give Congress the authority to count the electoral votes, and precedent permits Congress to refuse to count electoral votes for candidates for president or vice-president who do not meet the constitutional qualifications. This precedent was set in 1869, when Congress refused to count the three electoral votes for Horace Greeley. Congress felt the votes were void because Greeley had died after the November 1868 election, but before the electoral college had met in December.
Byrne’s column would have been stronger if he had mentioned the patchwork state of the law, when a presidential candidate who is clearly not eligible files to be on the ballot. The Socialist Workers Party has several times nominated under age 35 candidates for President. About half the states in which the party has petitioned print the name of such a candidate on the ballot anyway, under the theory that the true candidates are the presidential elector candidates. The other states have a different policy.
On August 7, U.S. Senators Russell Feingold and John McCain introduced S.1648. It would replace the Federal Election Commission with a Federal Election Administration. The new body would have three members. All three would need to have different party affiliations than any of the others. Section 352(a) of the bill says, “(a) In General — the Administration shall be composed of 3 members, 1 of whom shall serve as the Chair. No member of the Administration shall — (1) be affiliated with the same political party as any other member of the Administration; or (2) have been affiliated with the same political party as any other member of the Administration at any time during the 5-year period ending on the date on which such individual is nominated to be a member of the Administration.”
One difficulty is that 21 states have no such concept as registration by political party, so whether someone is “affiliated” with any particular party is ambiguous.
The bill has no other co-sponsors so far, and no companion in the U.S. House. Thanks to Damon Eris of Poli-Tea for this news, and also to ElectionLawBlog.
