On the evening of September 17, the U.S. House of Representatives passed HB 6625 unanimously. It tells the Veterans Administration to permit groups to enter VA facilities in order to register people who live at those facilities. However, such groups must be non-partisan.
A companion bill, S 3308, has passed the Senate Rules Committee. Thanks to Scott Rafferty for this news.
On September 17, Ohio elections officials confirmed that the Green Party will have a candidate on the ballot for U.S. House. He is Dennis Spisak, running in the 6th district (the district in southeastern Ohio that runs along the Ohio River). Although a court had ordered the Ohio Green Party placed on the ballot earlier this month, Spisak had not been a named co-plaintiff. Ohio elections officials recently asked him for proof that the Ohio Green Party had nominated him. He supplied that proof, and is now on the ballot. Ohio elections officials have been very fair to minor parties this year.
This is the first time a “left” minor party has had candidates on the Ohio ballot for U.S. House, with the party label, since 1972.
On September 17, Pennsylvania Senator Mike Folmer received a bill number for his ballot access reform bill. It is SB 1578. It should be on-line at the Pennsylvania legislature’s web page by the end of the week. It defines a qualified minor party to be a group with registration equal to one-twentieth of 1%. If it were law now, the Constitution, Green and Libertarian Parties would be on the ballot automatically. They would nominate by convention. The law is based on Delaware’s law. The bill sharply reduces the number of signatures for independent candidates.
There isn’t much time left this year for the legislature to act, but if it doesn’t pass this year, Senator Folmer will reintroduce it next year.
On September 17, U.S. District Court Judge John Woodcock, a Bush Jr. appointee, ruled against an independent candidate for U.S. Senate. The candidate, Laurie Dobson, turned her signatures in on time to the town clerks, but some town clerks did not finish checking her signatures in time for her to take them to the Secretary of State. Dobson v Dunlap, 1:08-cv-00292. Here is the decision.
This decision is one of the worst ballot access decisions ever issued by a federal judge. Even though the candidate obeyed the statutory deadline, the judge blames the candidate for not anticipating that the town clerks wouldn’t have enough time to finish the job. So, the candidate who obeyed the law is punished because the government did not do its job. Judge Woodcock wrote, “A reasonably prudent candidate could and should anticipate the short turnaround time for the registrars and avoid procrastination by filing for and obtaining certifications throughout the signature gathering interval and well in advance of the deadline…Ms. Dobson had the statutory right to wait until 5 p.m. on the statutory deadline before delivering the petitions, but consequences of her decision to delay until the last possible moment is not of constitutional significance.”
The judge also said the May 27 deadline is constitutional. Of course, what he is really saying is that the true deadline is earlier than May 27. In support of his conclusion that the May 27 deadline is constitutional, Judge Woodcock cited the only published precedent anywhere in the nation that upholds an independent candidate deadline earlier than May. He cited Lawrence v Blackwell, a 2005 decision by the 6th circuit which upheld Ohio’s March petition deadline for non-presidential independents. He could have mentioned precedents that struck down March, April, and May deadlines, but he did not do so. Those precedents (for independent candidates other than presidential candidates) are from Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Jersey, North Dakota, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Thanks very much to Deborah Deitsch-Perez for obtaining a copy of the opinion.
On September 17, the Kentucky Libertarian Party won a lawsuit over the right to nominate someone, even if that person is a registered member of another political party. The Jefferson Circuit Court ruled that Edward Martin should be on the November ballot as the Libertarian nominee for U.S. House, 3rd district, even though he is a registered Republican. Cummings v Martin, 08-CI-08751.
The Kentucky Libertarian Party is not a ballot-qualified party, so it placed Martin on the ballot by petition. Kentucky election law says that an independent candidate must not be a registered member of a qualified party. The Secretary of State placed Martin on the ballot, but a Republican Party official sued to remove Martin, on the grounds that if he were an independent candidate, he would not be permitted to be on the ballot. However, the judge ruled that a Libertarian Party nominee is not an “independent candidate”, even though the procedures for ballot access in Kentucky for independent candidates, and the candidates of unqualified parties, are the same (except that, of course, the nominee of an unqualified party may have his party label put on the ballot next to his or her name).
A key fact was that Kentucky keeps track of registrations of certain unqualified parties, including the Libertarian Party. Another fact, noted by the decision, is that the Libertarian Party is a bona fide political party, even if it isn’t a qualified party in Kentucky. The decision says, “Mr. Martin’s use of the Libertarian Party label cannot be fairly construed as some sort of sham designation to mask his otherwise ‘independent’ status. The party has a platform adopted at a national convention in May; it has a presidential candidate, Bob Barr; and it has been in existence since 1971. It has a coherent political philosophy based on the rights of the individual and limited government. While it does not appear any member of the current Congress is a Libertarian, members of the party have won election as, and discharge the duties of, a number of public offices in a number of states.”
Martin became a registered Republican in order to vote for Ron Paul earlier this year in the presidential primary. He represented himself in court even though he is not an attorney. It is possible there will be an appeal.
