D.C. Moves Presidential Primary from January to February

Posted on by September 4, 2007
Reply

The District of Columbia held a presidential primary in 2004 on January 13. Since that was even before the New Hampshire presidential primary, it should have got attention. But, because it was so early, the D.C. Republican Party refused to participate at all, and some of the leading Democrats refused to run in that primary. Howard Dean won the primary, but he got little boost from that victory since John Edwards and John Kerry weren’t on that ballot.

On July 25, the D.C. council passed Act 1788, which moves the presidential primary to the second Tuesday in February. The law won’t go into effect until Congress has a chance to veto it. It is extremely likely that Congress will permit Act 1788 to go into law, but that won’t be final until early October 2007.

D.C. has three qualified parties: Democratic, Republican and Green.

New Hampshire Libertarian Court Hearing Set for October 12

Posted on by September 3, 2007
Reply

On October 12, a New Hampshire lower state court will hold a hearing on the constitutionality of a state law, passed this year, that lets the qualified parties have the statewide list of registered voters for very little money, but denies it to all others. In New Hampshire, only the Democratic and Republican Parties are qualified parties. The case is New Hampshire Libertarian Party v Gardner, 2007-e-327, Merrimack Co. Superior Court.

In 1970 the U.S. Supreme Court summarily affirmed a lower court decision, saying that if states provide the list of registered voters to the qualified parties, they must also provide it to unqualified parties that are petitioning to get their nominees on the ballot. That case was Socialist Workers Party v Rockefeller. Given that precedent, it should be difficult for the New Hampshire law to be upheld.

Paul Responds to Inclusive General Election Debates Question

Posted on by September 2, 2007
Reply

During the last week in August, Ron Paul responded to Larry Reinsch’s question about whether, if he were the Republican nominee, he would participate in inclusive general election debates. Paul said, “Absolutely! You know, I’ve been there…I’ve done it…I know all the handicaps. Isn’t it tragic that we pretend we’re going to spread democracy overseas, and at the same time we’re exclusionary over here…Not just the third parties! Have you heard of a few efforts to try to exclude (in the primary season)? They already have! They don’t want to hear this message, because they don’t have answers…And I think this is what we need. Today when they asked me about what kind of change did I think should be done in the Executive Branch, and my answer is openness, transparency…Our Constitution was never designed for secrecy in government, it was designed to protect your privacy! Now just think of the attack on our privacy today…and so we want, we need openness in government, we need freedom of choice, we need free entry, we need these debates…and we shouldn’t have laws that keep people from voting for parties other than the Democrats and Republicans, and to keep anybody with an alternative view either out of the debates, or off the ballot! So Yes, the answer’s Yes.”

UPDATE: Thanks to Belinda Lawler for doing the difficult work of transcribing all these presidential candidate responses to the debate question.

Giuliani Responds to Question on Inclusive General Election Debates

Posted on by September 2, 2007
Reply

Last week, Larry Reinsch, star performer of RocktheDebates.org, managed to engage Rudy Giuliani on whether Giuliani would be willing to participate in inclusive general election debates. Reinsch, who lives in Iowa, has been attempting to ask all the leading Democratic and Republican presidential candidates this question. RocktheDebates criteria is that anyone running for president in the general election who is on the ballot in states containing a majority of the electoral college, should be included in general election debates, or at least one of them.

Reinsch asked the question. Giuliani responded, “It’s not for me to fix that. I mean the reality is that if I get nominated as the candidate of the Republican Party, I’ll participate in debates. I’ll participate in debates with the Democratic candidate, and the reality is, I have to focus on that. Once I become the candidate of the party.”

Reinsch attempted to bring the focus back on the question. Giuliani broke in, “I don’t know…I don’t know which parties would be legitimate, which parties wouldn’t be, who has some support, who doesn’t, what the rules of the debate are…It’s all in the negotiations prior to the debates…I never make a commitment I can’t keep…”

Reinsch: “But you could try! The Republican and Democratic Party are the two halves of the negotiation, and typically it’s the candidate on either side that sets 50% of the rules…so if you were to try, it would go a long ways to rectify this violation of our Democracy.”

Giuliani: Well, I’ll make an effort to make sure I debate. I enjoy debating. I debated this morning on one hour sleep. So, if somebody makes the effort to come here and debate on one hour sleep…I’m willing to debate most anytime anyplace…but as far as the rules are concerned, I can’t in advance tell you what they should be, until I see who the candidate is, what the Democratic candidate is going to do…there are a lot of rules that must be worked out. As I said, I never make promises that I can’t keep, so I can’t give you that information right now.”