HR 5388, the bill in Congress to give the District of Columbia a member of the U.S. House, and also to temporarily expand the size of the House so that Utah gets a fourth seat, is considered likely to pass Congress in December 2006. Leaders of both major parties say they support the bill.
On November 21, the New Hampshire State Supreme Court upheld New Hampshire’s ballot access laws. The case is Libertarian Party v State of New Hampshire, 2005-0606. The outcome is very disappointing, since at oral argument, it had seemed that the court was leaning in favor of the plaintiffs.
New Hampshire requires a group to poll 4% for Governor or U.S. Senator before it can be recognized as a “party”. This definition, passed in 1997, has never been met by any group except the Democratic and Republican Parties. The former law, requiring 3% for Governor, had been met by the Libertarians in 1990, 1992 and 1994, but previously, had not been met by any party (other than the two major parties) since the 1910’s decade.
Since the lower court had also ruled against the plaintiffs, without even granting a hearing at which evidence could be presented, plaintiffs had felt sure that even if the Supreme Court didn’t uphold the laws, it would remand the case and permit evidence to be admitted. But, the Supreme Court denied even that. The Court depended on the unfavorable ballot access decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court, and didn’t discuss the favorable decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court.
The flaw in the New Hampshire State Supreme Court’s reasoning is this: the court said that the state is not making it more difficult for minor party members to run for office, since major party members must fight to win a party primary. However, minor party members may also need to fight to win their party’s nomination. For example, Pat Buchanan had a very difficult time winning the Reform Party nomination in 2000, since Ross Perot was fighting him. Buchanan spent over $1,000,000 on the battle for the 2000 Reform Party nomination. Another example is the New Hampshire Libertarian Party gubernatorial fight, when 3 Libertarians sought the nomination.
Since members of ALL parties must fight to win their own party’s nomination, but since only the Democratic and Republican nominee is on the November ballot automatically, it is not true that state laws are giving each candidate an “equal opportunity to be elected” (The State Constitution mandates that all candidates must be given an “equal opportunity to be elected”).
On November 20, Ralph Nader asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear his appeal of a Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision that said he must pay $82,102 in court costs from 2004. Pennsylvania is the only state that has ever removed a candidate from the ballot and then tried to charge him money for the costs of removal. The idea is so odd, there are very few relevant precedents. The U.S. Supreme Court has never heard a ballot access case from Pennsylvania; possibly this will be the first one. The case is Nader v Seroty, 06-696.
Ballot access activists had been looking forward to a meeting of the House Government Committee, set for November 28 at 10 am. The Committee had invited all those interested in reforming the ballot access laws to attend and discuss the matter. But on November 22, the meeting was cancelled. The chair of the committee said it can probably be held in January, but he can’t be sure since the new session of the legislature may have different committee chairs.
On November 20, several Washington state officials asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the state’s appeal, on the validity of the “top-two” primary. The U.S. Supreme Court hasn’t assigned a case number yet, but the case, if accepted, would be called “State of Washington v Washington State Republican Party”.
The issue is whether the First Amendment Freedom of Association Clause permits a state to hold elections with party labels on the ballot, yet give the parties no ability to nominate candidates. The 9th circuit had ruled earlier this year that if Washington wants to have an election system in which all candidates run for a particular office on the same primary ballot, and the only the top-two vote-getters are allowed onto the November ballot, party labels must be omitted.
