September 2021 Ballot Access News Print Edition

Ballot Access News
September 2021 – Volume 37, Number 4

This issue was printed on white paper.


Table of Contents

  1. TEXAS LEGISLATURE PASSES BILL FOR A LATER PRIMARY; BALLOT ACCESS WILL BE AFFECTED
  2. MAYOR OF BUFFALO EXPECTED TO SUE OVER PETITION DEADLINE
  3. IDAHO WIN FOR INITIATIVES
  4. U.S. HOUSE PASSES BILL TO RESTORE VOTING RIGHTS ACT
  5. GEORGIA U.S. HOUSE BALLOT ACCESS
  6. ILLINOIS U.S. HOUSE BALLOT ACCESS CASE
  7. UTAH INITATIVE FOR TOP-FIVE
  8. ALASKA STATE COURT UPHOLDS TOP-FOUR
  9. TEXAS ACCESS BILL
  10. OHIO LIBERTARIANS APPEAL CASE ON EXCLUSION FROM ELECTION COMMISSION
  11. CANADA 2021 ELECTION DEBATES
  12. MOST CROWDED GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT FOR U.S. HOUSE
  13. 2022 PETITIONING FOR STATEWIDE OFFICE
  14. PROGRESSIVE PARTY WINS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL ELECTION
  15. RICHARD LAMM DIES
  16. MARKHAM ROBINSON DIES
  17. WORKING FAMILIES NOMINATES NO ONE FOR NEW YORK CITY MAYOR
  18. INCARCERATED MAN ELECTED TO PUBLIC OFFICE IN D.C.
  19. COFOE HOLDS ANNUAL MEETING
  20. VIRGINIA USES SAME BALLOT LABEL FOR LIBERTARIAN PARTY AND LIBERATION PARTY
  21. SUBSCRIBING TO BAN WITH PAYPAL

TEXAS LEGISLATURE PASSES BILL FOR A LATER PRIMARY; BALLOT ACCESS WILL BE AFFECTED

On August 26, the Texas legislature passed SB 13. It provides for a later 2022 primary in the event that redistricting isn’t finished by November 15, 2021. Current law says the primary will be on March 1, 2022, but it is virtually certain that redistricting can’t be finished by November 2021. Whatever plans pass the legislature, they will inevitably be challenged in court.

If the redistricting isn’t final by November 15, but is final by December 28, then the primary will be in April. If redistricting isn’t finished by December 28, the primary will be in May, with a runoff in July. If this occurs, ballot access will need to be completely revised. Texas law does not permit petitions for an independent candidate, or a new party, to circulate until after the primary.

MAYOR OF BUFFALO EXPECTED TO SUE OVER PETITION DEADLINE

On August 27, the Erie County Board of Election Commissioners rejected the independent petition filed by the Mayor of Buffalo, Byron Brown, because it was filed after the deadline. He wants to run for re-election, but he lost the June Democratic primary, so he then circulated a petition to be on the November ballot as the candidate of the Buffalo Party.

His petition had 3,000 signatures and the requirement is 750. He submitted the petition on the old August deadline, but in 2019 the New York legislature moved that deadline to May, which is unconstitutional under every precedent. Independent candidate petition deadlines cannot be more than a day or so earlier than the primary date, and the New York deadline is a month before the primary.


IDAHO WIN FOR INITIATIVES

On August 23, the Idaho Supreme Court unanimously rejected two recent laws that handicap the ability of people to use the statewide initiative. Reclaim Idahov Denney, 48734 and 48760.

The decision strikes down a 2021 law that required signatures of 6% of the registered voters in all 35 legislative districts in the state. The decision also strikes down a 2020 law that said no initiative can take effect until July 1 of the year following the election.

The decision uses strict scrutiny, and says that there is no compelling state interest in requiring signatures from all 35 legislative districts. Page 42 of the decision says, “This power (the initiative) is meaningless unless it is accessible.” Page 37 says, “There is simply no logical reason why a ballot proposition supported by 6% of the voters in 34 of the 35 legislative districts has not clearly established that it has statewide support.” The opinion also contains a history of the use of the statewide initiative throughout its existence, and points out that even under the old law, very few initiatives qualified in any one election year.

The decision held that one set of plaintiffs lacked standing, but another set did have standing. Justice John Stegner wrote separately to say that he thought all plaintiffs had standing, and that standing is generally more relaxed under state constitutions than under the U.S. Constitution. Justice Robyn Brody wrote separately to say that although she agrees with the holding, she would not have applied strict scrutiny, but rather a balancing test.


U.S. HOUSE PASSES BILL TO RESTORE VOTING RIGHTS ACT

On August 24, the U.S. House poassed HR 4, the "John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2021." It would restore sections 4 and 5 of the Act, which were declared unconstitutional in 2013 in Shelby County v Holder, 570 U.S. 529. These are the parts of the law that say jurisdictions that have a history of injuring voting rights for racial minorities cannot change any voting law or procedure without asking for approval from the Voting Rights Section of the U.S. Justice Department.

The old preclearance law was struck down because it punished jurisdictions for events that had happened as long ago as 65 years. The bill changes that, so that a jurisdiction only falls under preclearance if it has 15 or more violations in the previous 25 years, or 10 or more violations if one was at the state level.

The Voting Rights Act has sometimes been used to block ballot access restrictions, but only when the restriction injured a racial minority. The Act prevented Mississippi from increasing the statewide independent petition from 1,000 to 10,000 signatures in 1966, because it was clear that the change was meant to block an African-American independent candidate for the U.S. Senate that year. It was also used to block Alabama from stiffening the definition of a qualified party in 1982, because the change would have removed an African-American party, the National Democratic Party, from the ballot that year. Alabama was allowed to make the change, but not immediately.


GEORGIA U.S. HOUSE BALLOT ACCESS

As reported earlier, on March 29, 2021, U.S. District Court Judge Leigh May struck down the Georgia 5% petition (of the number of registered voters) for ballot access for U.S. House, for independent candidates and the nominees of parties that didn’t poll 20% of the vote in the last election. She had then asked both sides to suggest what the new requirements should be, until the legislature fixes the law. The Libertarian Party suggested 500 signatures. The State objected to that idea, but did not propose its own solution.

On August 23, the judge tentatively suggested a petition of 1% of the registered voters, which would be 5,150 signatures in the average district in 2022. Her order also said the 1% should apply to petitions for the legislature, and for partisan county office. That was a surprise, because the Complaint in the case only challenged the requirements for U.S. House, but no other district or county offices. The existing law for those offices is also a petition of 5%. The existing petition for statewide office is 7,500 signatures for president, and 1% for other statewide offices, which is approximately 70,000 signatures.

If the judge’s tentative decision is finalized, Georgia will still have one of the nation’s most severe petition laws in the nation for U.S. House. For example, as applied to the Libertarian Party in 2022, no Libertarian running for U.S. House in any other state except Alabama would require more than 5,000 signatures (although in North Dakota, Ohio and Tennessee, they would not have the party label). Furthermore, the Georgia Libertarian Party has already showed that it has substantial voter support. It is always on the ballot for statewide office, and it always polls over 100,000 votes in some races with both a Republican and a Democrat, and always polls over 30% of the vote in statewide races with no Democrat running.

The judge asked both sides to respond to her idea, by September 2. She also said that she would require the filing fee, which is over $5,000 for U.S. House (3% of the office’s annual salary). So far, neither side has responded.

Generally, when judges strike down the number of signatures in a ballot access case, they don’t substitute a new requirement. Instead they most often put the party or the candidate on the ballot with no petition. Examples:

1. In 1968 the U.S. Supreme Court put the American Independent Party on the Ohio ballot, in Williams v Rhodes.393 U.S. 23. However, the party had already submitted many signatures, although they were all invalid because they were filed five months after the deadline.

2. In 1976 the U.S. Supreme Court put independent presidential candidate Eugene McCarthy on the ballot in Texas with no petition. McCarthy v Briscoe, 429 U.S. 1317.

3. Also in 1976, the Fifth Circuit put McCarthy on the ballot in Florida with no petition (at the time, Florida was in the Fifth Circuit). McCarthy v Askew, 540 F.2d 1254; a U.S. District Court put McCarthy on in Delaware with no petition. McCarthy v Tribbitt, 421 F.Supp. 1193; a U.S. District Court put an independent in on Delaware for U.S. Senate with no petition. McInerny v Wrightson, 421 F.Supp. 726.

4. In 1980, a U.S. District Court put Gus Hall (Communist Party presidential candidate) on the Michigan ballot with no petition. Hall v Austin, 495 F.Supp. 782.

5. In 1982, a U.S. District Court put an independent candidate on the Michigan ballot for a statewide office, and in 1984 the Sixth Circuit upheld that decision. Goldman-Frankie v Austin, 727 F.2d 603. Also in 1982, a U.S. District Court put the Libertarian Party on the Kansas ballot with no petition. Reagan v State, not reported, 82-4083.

6. In 1984, a U.S. District Court put the Libertarian Party on in Oklahoma with no requirement that it collect any more signatures (it had been trying but had not succeeded). Libertarian Party of Oklahoma v Oklahoma State Election Board, 593 F.Supp. 118.

7. In 1986, a U.S. District Court put the Libertarian Party on in Nevada with no requirement that it collect any more signatures (it had been trying but had not succeeded). Libertarian Party of Nevada v Swackhamer, 638 F.Supp. 565.

In 2008, a U.S. District Court put the Libertarian Party on in Ohio with no need for a petition. Libertarian Party of Ohio v Brunner, not reported, s.d., 2:08cv-555.

The basis for these decisions was evidence that the candidate or party had some voter support, as measured by polls, or organizational strength, or sometimes by having attempted to petition.

Even when courts have set new petition requirements to replace old, void laws, they have usually set a very lower number of signatures. For instance, in 2017 a U.S. District Court in Montana altered the number of signatures for U.S. House from 14,268 signatures to 400 signatures, for special elections. In 2016 a U.S. District Court in Georgia set the presidential independent and minor party petition at 7,500 signatures, which was one-tenth of 1% of the registration.

Judge May did not deal with the point that requiring a severe requirement for Libertarian nominees for U.S. House violates Equal Protection, because the state does not require Libertarian nominees for statewide office to submit any petition. She wrote that the Equal Protection part of the case is moot, when it clearly is not, because it affects the nature of the relief.

It is likely that the party will submit some of this information, and other points, to Judge May, and perhaps she will change her order to an easier procedure.


ILLINOIS U.S. HOUSE BALLOT ACCESS CASE

The oldest ballot access still pending in the trial court is the Illinois lawsuit against the 5% petition for independent candidates for U.S. House, Gill v Scholz, c.d., 3:16cv-3221. It was filed in 2016 by independent candidate David Gill. On August 25, 2016, U.S. District Court Judge Sue Myerscough issued an injunction putting him on the ballot. But on September 9, the Seventh Circuit stayed her decision, although it did not explain why. The order consisted of only one sentence.

Then, while the case was pending for declaratory relief before Judge Myerscough, another U.S. District Court Judge in the Central District of Illinois, Colin Bruce, lost his pending criminal caseload, because of an ethical lapse. The chief judge of the district then reassigned many civil cases to Judge Bruce, to give him some work. Among the reassigned cases was Gill v Scholz.

On December 18, 2018, Judge Bruce upheld the Illinois 5% petition, but he made some factual errors. On June 18, 2020, the Seventh Circuit noted the errors and send the case back to Judge Bruce.

On August 24, 2021, Judge Bruce recused himself from the case, without explaining why. So now the case will be assigned to another U.S. District Court Judge. Possibly it will go back to Judge Myerscough.


UTAH INITATIVE FOR TOP-FIVE

Proponents of a top-five system in Utah have begun to circulate an initiative to implement that system. Like top-two in Washington state, and top-four in Alaska, the initiative makes it more difficult for parties to remain qualified. In Utah, a party is a group that got 2% for any statewide race at either of the last two elections, but top-anything deprives parties of party nominees, so that method won’t work any more, except for president.


ALASKA STATE COURT UPHOLDS TOP-FOUR

On July 29, an Alaska state trial court upheld the top-four initiative passed by the voters in 2020. Kohlhaas v State, 3AN-20-9532. The only political party plaintiff in that case is the Alaskan Independence Party, which is Alaska’s only ballot-qualified third party.

The twenty-page decision barely mentions the strongest precedent against the system, Green Party of Alaska v State. In that case, the Alaska Supreme Court said that protection for freedom of association in the state Constitution is so strong, that if the Green Party and the Republican Moderate Party (the plaintiffs) wanted to have a blanket primary, they could do that, even though the legislature had abolished the blanket primary.

The same principle, as applied to the Alaskan Independence Party in the top-four case, ought to mean that if the Alaskan Independence Party wants to have its own nominee on the general election ballot, it should be able to insist on that.

Under the top-four initiative, party labels are on the ballot, but parties don’t have nominees. No one can be on the November ballot except the four candidates who got the most votes in the primary.

The plaintiffs in the top-four case expect to appeal to the State Supreme Court. Meanwhile, proponents of the top-four system are trying to persuade the court to order that the plaintiffs must pay attorney fees incurred by the intervenors. California top-two proponents did the same thing in California in 2012.


TEXAS ACCESS BILL

On August 9, eleven Texas Democratic State Senators introduced SB 58. It makes ballot access easier. It abolishes the laws that say voters who voted in a primary can’t sign ballot access petitions for independents and new parties.


OHIO LIBERTARIANS APPEAL CASE ON EXCLUSION FROM ELECTION COMMISSION

On August 13, the Ohio Libertarian Party asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear Libertarian Party of Ohio v Crites, 21-226. The Sixth Circuit had upheld the composition of the Ohio Elections Commission, which by law includes three members of each of the two largest parties, and one person who is not a member of any party. Therefore no member of a third party may ever serve.


CANADA 2021 ELECTION DEBATES

On August 15, the Canadian government announced that there will be a parliamentary election on September 20, Monday.

On August 21, the organization that sponsors debates among the leaders of the various parties announced the rules for inclusion in the debates. A party leader may participate if his or her party has at least one member of Parliament who was elected under the party name. Also a party leader may participate if his or her party is at 4% in the polls. Finally, a party leader may participate if his or her party polled at least 4% of the national vote in the previous Parliamentary election.


MOST CROWDED GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT FOR U.S. HOUSE

The chart below shows the most crowded general election ballot for U.S. House, for regularly-scheduled elections, in each state’s history. Note that Georgia has never had more than three candidates for U.S. House, in a regular election, in the entire history of government-printed ballots. This shows how exaggerated Georgia’s fear of overcrowded ballots is. The chart also shows that even states with easy ballot access requirements for that office need not fear overcrowded ballots.

State & District No. of Candidates Year Requirement

Alabama 5

6

1968

hold a convention

Alaska at-large

5

2006

3,128 signatures

Arizona at-large

5

1912

66 signatures

Arkansas 1

4

2012

2,000 signatures

California 22

6

1996

10,188 signatures

Colorado 1

6

1896

100 signatures

Connecticut 4

6

1914

hold a convention

Delaware at-large

6

1976

2,431 signatures

Dist. of Columbia

8

2020

250 signatures

Florida 1

5

1912

hold a convention

Georgia 5

3

1982

4,039 signatures

Hawaii 2

6

2020

25 signatures

Idaho 1

7

2018

500 signatures

Illinois 9

6

1912

591 signatures

Indiana 1

6

1932

200 signatures

Iowa 3

6

2018

375 signatures

Kansas 3

5

1914

2,693 signatures

Kentucky 3

6

1934

400 signatures

Louisiana 3

12

2016

Pay $600

Maine 2

5

1914

359 signatures

Maryland 3

6

1914

200 signatures

Massachusetts 9

5

2016

2,000 signatures

Michigan 16

7

1936

hold a convention

Minnesota 5

7

2010

1,000 signatures

Mississippi 1

9

2010

100 signatures

Missouri 15

6

1916

hold a convention

Montana 2

5

1932

hold a convention

Nebraska 2

7

1932

200 signatures

Nevada 3

7

2018

100 signatures

New Hampshire 1

6

1896

250 signatures

New Jersey 13

11

1958

100 signatures

New Mexico at-large

5

1932

hold a convention

New York 23

7

1934

3,000 signatures

North Carolina 11

4

2020

5,436 signatures

North Dakota at-large

5

1900

300 signatures

Ohio 20

6

1900

299 signatures

Oklahoma 5

6

1976

pay a fee

Oregon 3

8

1934

meeting (100 attendees)

Pennsylvania 6

6

1936

1,020 signatures

Rhode Island 1

5

1996

500 signatures

South Carolina 1

7

2010

10,000 signatures

South Dakota 1

5

1932

20 signatures

Tennessee 9

11

1996

25 signatures

Texas 23

5

2010

500 signatures

Utah 2

6

1998

100 signatures

Vermont at-large

8

2006

250 signatures

Virginia 3

6

1904

file declaration of candidacy

Washington 3

6

1914

meeting (no minimum attendance)

West Virginia 1

5

1914

552 signatures

Wisconsin 5

6

1932

1,960 signatures

Wyoming at-large

5

2012

4,018 signatures


2022 PETITIONING FOR STATEWIDE OFFICE

STATE
REQUIREMENTS
SIGNATURES OR REGIS. OBTAINED
DEADLINES
Full Party
Cand
Lib’t
Green
Consti
Peoples
Party Due
Indp. Due

Ala.

51,588

51,588

*23,000

0

0

0

May 24

May 24

Alaska

(reg) 10,821

pay fee

*(rg) 6,846

*(rg) 1,479

*(rg) 667

0

May 3

June 1

Ariz.

31,686

(est) #40,670

already on

*2,600

0

0

Nov 25 ‘21

May 4

Ark.

10,000

10,000

*already on

0

0

0

Dec 24 ‘21

May 2

Calif.

(es) (reg) 74,000

65 + fee

already on

already on

*(rg) 193

(rg) 567

Jan. 4

March 11

Colo.

(reg) 1,000

#8,000

already on

already on

already on

500

Jan. 14

July 14

Conn.

no procedure

#7,500

already on

already on

can’t start

can’t start

– – –

Aug. 10

Del.

(est.) (reg) 750

(est.) 7,500

already on

*726

*(rg) 278

0

Aug. 23

July 15

D.C.

no procedure

#3,000

already on

already on

can’t start

can’t start

– – –

Aug. 10

Florida

0

pay fee

already on

already on

already on

0

April 29

May 6

Georgia

72,336

#64,354

already on

0

0

0

July 12

July 12

Hawaii

833

25

already on

already on

already on

0

Feb. 20

June 7

Idaho

17,348

1,000

already on

*0

already on

0

Aug. 30

March 11

Illinois

no procedure

#25,000

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

– – –

*July 13

Indiana

no procedure

#44,935

already on

0

0

0

– – –

June 30

Iowa

no procedure

#1,500

0

0

0

0

– – –

in court

Kansas

21,102

5,000

already on

*750

0

0

June 1

Aug. 1

Ky.

no procedure

#5,000

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

– – –

Aug. 9

La.

(reg) 1,000

#pay fee

already on

already on

(rg) 267

0

Aug. 19

Aug. 19

Maine

in court

#4,000

in court

already on

0

(rg) 300

in court

June 1

Md.

10,000

10,000

already on

already on

0

0

Aug. 1

Aug. 1

Mass.

(est) (reg) 45,500

#10,000

(rg) 19,097

(rg) 5,709

(rg) 370

0

Feb. 1

Aug. 2

Mich.

42,506

30,000

already on

already on

already on

0

July 21

July 21

Minn.

163,859

#2,000

0

0

0

0

April 30

May 31

Miss.

be organized

1,000

already on

already on

already on

0

March 1

March 1

Mo.

10,000

10,000

already on

*1,000

already on

2,000

July 25

July 25

Mont.

5,000

#16,959

already on

0

0

0

March 7

May 31

Nebr.

6,980

4,000

already on

0

0

0

Aug. 1

Sep. 1

Nev.

13,557

250

already on

(reg) 2,274

already on

0

*April 27

May 13

N. Hamp.

23,798

#3,000

0

0

0

0

Aug. 9

Aug. 9

N.J.

no procedure

#800

0

0

0

0

– – –

June 7

N. M.

3,483

10,260

already on

0

0

0

June 30

June 28

N.Y.

no procedure

#45,000

in court

in court

can’t start

can’t start

– – –

*???

No. Car.

13,757

82,542

already on

*4,000

*1,000

0

May 17

March 8

No. Dak.

7,000

1,000

0

0

0

0

April 11

Sep. 5

Ohio

57,630

5,000

0

0

0

100

July 6

May 2

Okla.

35,592

pay fee

already on

0

0

0

Feb. 28

April 15

Oregon

27,960

23,737

already on

already on

already on

100

Aug. 30

Aug. 30

Penn.

no procedure

5,000

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

– – –

Aug. 1

R.I.

18,758

#1,000

0

0

0

0

Aug. 1

July 15

So. Car.

10,000

10,000

already on

already on

already on

0

May 8

July 15

So. Dak.

3,393

3,393

already on

0

0

0

July 1

April 26

Tenn.

56,083

25

0

0

0

0

Aug. 10

April 7

Texas

83,435

83,435

already on

already on

can’t start

can’t start

May 15

June 23

Utah

2,000

#1,000

already on

0

already on

0

Nov 30 ‘21

March 15

Vermont

be organized

#500

already on

0

0

0

Dec 31 ‘21

Aug. 18

Virginia

no procedure

#10,000

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

– – –

June 21

Wash.

no procedure

#pay fee

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

can’t start

– – –

May 20

West Va.

no procedure

#7,610

already on

already on

0

0

– – –

Aug. 1

Wisc.

10,000

#2,000

already on

0

already on

0

April 1

June 1

Wyo.

5,418

5,418

already on

*0

already on

0

June 1

Aug. 28

TOTAL STATES ON
*33
*15
*13
0
~ ~

#partisan label permitted.
"WK FAM" = Working Familes Party.
(rg.) = registered members.
*change since April 1 2021 BAN.


PROGRESSIVE PARTY WINS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL ELECTION

On August 17, Burlington, Vermont, held a special election to fill the vacancy on the City Council, ward three. Progressive Party nominee Joe Magee won with 47.1%. An independent endorsed by the Democratic Party received 39.4%, and the Republican received 13.5%. The Progressive Party had won the previous election for the same office in ward three.


RICHARD LAMM DIES

Former Colorado Governor Richard Lamm died on July 29, at the age of 85. He had sought the Reform Party presidential nomination in 1996. After he declared, Ross Perot also declared, and they were the only candidates in the party’s postal presidential primary ballot. Perot defeated Lamm by 32,145 to 17,121. Lamm only carried Alaska, Colorado, Minnesota, and the District of Columbia.


MARKHAM ROBINSON DIES

Markham Robinson, acting chair of the American Independent Party, died on August 25. Under his leadership, the party did some unorthodox actions. In 2016 it nominated Donald Trump for president, so that Trump was listed on the November ballot as the nominee of two parties. This was the first time California had seen a "fusion" presidential candidate on the ballot since 1940. Also, in 2020, it nominated Rocky De La Fuente for president and Kanye West for vice-president. That ticket received 60,160 votes in California.


WORKING FAMILIES NOMINATES NO ONE FOR NEW YORK CITY MAYOR

The Working Families Party has decided not to nominate anyone for Mayor of New York city. The election is November 2, 2021. The party has been ballot-qualified since 1998 and this is the first time it has not nominated for that office.


INCARCERATED MAN ELECTED TO PUBLIC OFFICE IN D.C.

On June 15, the District of Columbia held a special election to fill a vacancy on an Advisory Neighborhood Commission. That particular Commission district is dominated by the city’s prison, which has 1,400 inhabitants. All five candidates were inmates of the prison. The election was won by Joel Caston, who holds zoom meetings with constituents.


COFOE HOLDS ANNUAL MEETING

On August 22, the Coalition for Free & Open Elections (COFOE) held its annual board meeting, via zoom. COFOE was founded in 1985 and is a loose coalition of many of the nation’s nationally-organized parties, as well as some organizations that are sympathetic to their election law problems, such as FairVote. The minutes of the meeting can be seen at cofoe.org.


VIRGINIA USES SAME BALLOT LABEL FOR LIBERTARIAN PARTY AND LIBERATION PARTY

Virginia elects its statewide state officers, and the lower house of its legislature, on November 2, 2021. The Liberation Party is on the ballot for Governor. The Libertarian Party is on the ballot for several legislative races. The Virginia State Board of Elections only prints a single letter on general election ballots, to identify party nominees (except that for the presidential part of the ballot, the full party names are printed). This year the Board is using "L" for both the Liberation Party and the Libertarian Party.

The only other state that uses just a single letter to identify parties on ballots is Hawaii. However, Hawaii printed "Rf" for Reform Party nominees and "R" for Republican nominees. Back when the Republican and Reform Parties were both on in Virginia, in the 1997 gubernatorial election, Virginia did not print any party labels on the ballot, except for president, so the issue didn’t arise in Virginia in 1997.


SUBSCRIBING TO BAN WITH PAYPAL

If you use Paypal, you can subscribe to B.A.N., or renew, with Paypal. If you use a credit card in connection with Paypal, use richardwinger@yahoo.com. If you don’t use a credit card in conjunction with Paypal, use richardwinger@yahoo.com.

Ballot Access News is published by and copyright by Richard Winger. Note: subscriptions are available!


Go back to the index.


Copyright © 2021 Ballot Access News

Comments

September 2021 Ballot Access News Print Edition — 38 Comments

  1. In retrospect, it appears to me that Ross Perot never intended for the Reform Party to be anything but his own personal electoral franchise.

  2. Princess Blanding’s Liberation Party has an “LP” designation, the Libertarian Party candidates are just “L”.

  3. The Libertarian Party white males will help homogenize the situation everywhere with Google’s approval voting system in conjunction with Facebook and BAN.

  4. Sounds good to me other than facebook and Google which are communist. White Males reigning supreme under God, Jesus and TRUMP is the way it ought to, and will and shall be, FOREVER, EVERYWHERE.

  5. The LNC is about 82% white Electors with male names. The remaining 18% whites with female names, along with whites with non-binary gender names, are fighting to see who can stop the non-white and outsiders from getting anywhere in the LNC. Us white males have the 100% power on future LNC Prez candidates under the LNC one-party dictatorship insider control.

    More about the examples of systemic racism in California Libertarian Party coming soon!

  6. Trump will disband the FEC in the name of JESUS during his triumphant return to power in his second term. Btw did u know you can’t even spell TRiUMPhant without TRUMP? PRAISE JESUS, AND PRAISE TRUMP!!!

  7. My uncle LARRY is not a troll. He is the Prophet and Patriarch, and a Sheriff’s Deputy. HE is a veteran, father, grandfather, and a true Prophet of God, Jesus, and Trump. If you came face to face with him, you would shake in your boots in fear and bow down. EVERYthing he says is GOD’s GOSPEL TRUTH.

  8. Ted Brown [Libertarian] left the white male stamp on the Los Angeles County and California Libertarian Party with ranked choice voting just like in SF what the Green and Libertarian Parties approved around 1992 when they asked the vote counter James Ogle [One] to step aside.

    That, after I James Ogle, had used the correct math for Citizens for Proportional Representation (CPR) in around 1993.

    Unfortunately they and “FairVote” implemented a one-party voting system in SF to kick off the Democrat Party power grab under Willie Brown.

  9. Ad revenue from the spam sites he spends all his time spamming out. So jewgle is not just a nutjob, troll and a moron. He’s also a full time professional commercial spammer.

  10. Reply to Q;

    “I’ve been a self employed artist with natural talent since I first went professional at age 18 and that’s been about 45 years of moving dirt on paper or moving clay to cast in bronze using natural talent.
    Thank you.”

  11. I make my art for free.

    The Google identity theif had to pay artists to copy my logo art for their business, to copy my logo style back in 1997, when they copied my work and launched off our juice and did that when they were only a few hours drive north of me. It was a quick drive down to my shop “Art and Jazz Studios Over the Row” from Stanford.

  12. All bogus one-party and two-party voting systems should be avoided unless our back is against the wall and we have absolutely no other alternative.

  13. Censorship, systemic racism, communist-style elections, double standards and gerrymandering (Los Angeles County LP Regions 62, 63, 64 and 65) has set back the three-party system for 27+ years starting with BAN in 1994 and including our work from 1983 with Environmentalist Party the censorship started earlier than that. It wasn’t until using DOS in 1992 to 1997 before Google launched that there was no censorship in Usenet for a very short period when we couldn’t be stopped.

  14. Google stole my identity while trying to cover up their footprints. I never wrote that they stole my art. The artistic theme was a change they made after the changed their site from backup dot com in October 1997.

  15. I was present there in 1997 when they announced “I just named my search engine Google dot com” in my conversation I launched in 1992.

    In 1996 I ran for President and my filings with FEC incluse the merging of Environmentalist Party and Green Party under one “PAC” the US Parliament PAC.

  16. Words have many meanings. To clarify, the founders of Google copied my name and the same colorized letters I designed at my business and since they changed the J to G in my email address in 1997 technically they didn’t qualify for identity theft because one letter was different.

    They didn’t know that I was using the Sainte Lague parliament seat distribution system with ranked choice voting. I was using that as a civil rights improvement in a movement where Lani Guinier was slandered by the establishment as a “quota queen”.

    Much like the same slander others use who purposely oppose a positive change for the greater good of the whole. There are plenty of people who block the progress and since we cannot see any positive changes from their positioning we can only assume that they remain opposed to the three-party system.

  17. Google = write in and “click the box” (plurality vote)

    1Libertarian = write in and “click the 1” (algebra, pure proportional representation)

    I was flattered that they got the idea from my name until I learned that they deleted all my work when they bought DejaView News.

    They set the three-party system back by 24 years and maybe more.

  18. If jewgle makes (f)art for free, it’s by definition not an answer to Q. Therefore A still stands.

  19. News flash; moving doodoo or dirt on paper after a (sh)art is not a profession or job, jewgle.

  20. Casting your sharts in bronze for free is also not what jewgle does for a living. Getting ad revenue from the fantasy politics sites he spends the vast majority of his waking hours spamming out is his only known source of income. A is correct.

  21. Lani Guinier is accurately called a quota queen, you commie punk bitch joooogle the turd.

  22. What does jewgle the turd do for a living? Ad revenue from the fantasy politics spam sites he spends almost all his time spamming out. So jewgle the punk bitch commie turd is not just a troll, moron, nutjob piece of shiite. He’s also a full time professional commercial spammer.

    Jewgle the turd punk bitch commie also has a useless hobby where he moves dirty p00p from his sharts across toilet paper or casts it in bronze. But by his own admission he gets no money for this, so it has nothing to do with what he does for a living.

    Like all the incorrect math he has spent decades spreading for pay, the sharts and j1zz he spreads for free mean nothing. He has no case against his fellow California commies at Google and he knows it, which is why he has not sued them. They probably have a good defamation / slander case against him, but he’s too insignificant, and they probably don’t want to give him the unearned publicity.

  23. He sounds gay when he talks but I heard he had sexual relations with the ugly nigress Tiffany Briscoe and masturbates himself while thinking about Roseanne Barr.

  24. James Orlando Ogle Sr. Is probably rolling over in his grave because of this punk commie bitch spammer turd carrying his name.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.