Arkansas Greens Submit Petition

On September 26, the Arkansas Green Party turned in 17,197 signatures. Assuming there are at least 10,000 valid signatures, the Green Party will then be a qualified party in Arkansas, able to nominate for all partisan office in the state, by convention.

The Arkansas Libertarian Party expects to turn in its presidential party petition on September 27. That type of petition entitles a group to be ballot-qualified just for the presidential election, and only requires 1,000 signatures. The Arkansas Constitution Party will also be turning in that type of petition shortly.

Oklahoma Democrat Wants to Outlaw Paying Circulators Per Signature

The Oklahoma legislature is not in session until next year. On September 25, an Oklahoma Democratic legislator said he will introduce a bill next year to make it a crime for anyone to pay a petition circulator on a “per signature” basis. The legislator, Rep. Mike Shelton, represents the 97th district in Oklahoma City.

He said, “We can’t continue to incentivize lying to the public about the issues. When a signature collector gets paid according to the number of signatures he collects, what’s to stop him from misrepresenting the issue to the public to get them to sign his petition? These matters are too important to allow snake-oil salesmen to bend the facts and flat-out lie just to fatten their paychecks.”

The implication of Shelton’s remarks is that the ordinary citizen is so stupid and gullible that he or she will sign any petition without looking at it first. Current Oklahoma law requires the title of the Initiative (which is written by the Attorney General) to appear in large print. Many legislators, judges and political commentators believe in their hearts that ordinary people are too uninformed and unthoughtful to be trusted at the voting box. This is the real reason why democratic practices in the U.S. are not secure…many of the most influential and powerful in the U.S., in their hearts, don’t believe in popular control of government. Therefore, they are eroding popular control of government, little by little, with laws and practices that reduce the political power of ordinary people.

U.S. Supreme Court Won't Let Grange Attorney Participate in Oral Argument

When the U.S. Supreme Court hears oral arguments, it is customary that only one attorney for each side is permitted to speak. Occasionally the Court makes an exception, but if one side wants two attorneys to speak for it, it must get permission. On September 25, the Court refused to let two attorneys speak on the side of Washington state, in the “top-two” case. This probably means that the state’s Attorney General will be the sole speaker on behalf of the Washington state law, and the attorney for the Grange will not be permitted to speak. Alternatively, it is possible that only the Grange’s attorney will speak, and in that case the Washington state Attorney General won’t be allowed to speak.

U.S. Supreme Court Won’t Let Grange Attorney Participate in Oral Argument

When the U.S. Supreme Court hears oral arguments, it is customary that only one attorney for each side is permitted to speak. Occasionally the Court makes an exception, but if one side wants two attorneys to speak for it, it must get permission. On September 25, the Court refused to let two attorneys speak on the side of Washington state, in the “top-two” case. This probably means that the state’s Attorney General will be the sole speaker on behalf of the Washington state law, and the attorney for the Grange will not be permitted to speak. Alternatively, it is possible that only the Grange’s attorney will speak, and in that case the Washington state Attorney General won’t be allowed to speak.