Ballot laws hurt democracy
N.C. obstructions thwart third parties, independents
By: Editorial Board
Issue date: 7/17/08 Section: Opinion
Any analysis of the strength of our American democracy must consider an oft-ignored element of our free speech: ballot access.
There's a powerful and inspiring political ideal that rings out from phrases such as "land of opportunity," and that's expressed by children when they say they want to grow up to be president of the United States.
It's the simple notion that elected office (even the highest office) should be open to all, regardless of color, creed or, perhaps most important, cash flow and that the only barrier should be the public's opinion of you.
But in North Carolina, our American notion of fairness is preached and not practiced. As a state, we have some of the most obstructive ballot access laws in the country.
Any independent candidate seeking the presidency must collect 69,734 signatures of registered voters and turn them in to the State Board of Elections by June 12 to qualify. For a party to be guaranteed ballot access, it needs 104,601 signatures.
By contrast, Massachusetts requires 10,000 signatures, while Louisiana requires $500 for a candidate to be on the ballot, and many states don't ask that the petitions be submitted until the middle or end of July.
As if this weren't bad enough, the application of these laws exacerbates the injustice.
To ensure ballot access, third-party candidates routinely have to submit petitions well in excess of the required number as a precaution against legal challenges.
Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader has had ample experience trying to overcome these election laws.
Because of legal complaints, often filed by Democrats (the party with whom he most heatedly competes for votes), his campaign needs to submit twice the required number of signatures, as many will be discounted on allegations of being faked or otherwise ineligible.
At a campaign rally July 12 in Raleigh, Nader announced he will not be on the ballot in North Carolina. The estimated cost of collecting enough signatures - more than $250,000 - was simply too hefty.
And Nader's campaign must submit 500 signatures to even have his write-in votes counted.
State election laws should not obstruct candidates from gaining access to the ballot, nor should they deny voters the chance to vote for the third-party candidate of their choice.
Further, North Carolina should work with other states to standardize ballot access requirements.
It's only fair.
There's a powerful and inspiring political ideal that rings out from phrases such as "land of opportunity," and that's expressed by children when they say they want to grow up to be president of the United States.
It's the simple notion that elected office (even the highest office) should be open to all, regardless of color, creed or, perhaps most important, cash flow and that the only barrier should be the public's opinion of you.
But in North Carolina, our American notion of fairness is preached and not practiced. As a state, we have some of the most obstructive ballot access laws in the country.
Any independent candidate seeking the presidency must collect 69,734 signatures of registered voters and turn them in to the State Board of Elections by June 12 to qualify. For a party to be guaranteed ballot access, it needs 104,601 signatures.
By contrast, Massachusetts requires 10,000 signatures, while Louisiana requires $500 for a candidate to be on the ballot, and many states don't ask that the petitions be submitted until the middle or end of July.
As if this weren't bad enough, the application of these laws exacerbates the injustice.
To ensure ballot access, third-party candidates routinely have to submit petitions well in excess of the required number as a precaution against legal challenges.
Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader has had ample experience trying to overcome these election laws.
Because of legal complaints, often filed by Democrats (the party with whom he most heatedly competes for votes), his campaign needs to submit twice the required number of signatures, as many will be discounted on allegations of being faked or otherwise ineligible.
At a campaign rally July 12 in Raleigh, Nader announced he will not be on the ballot in North Carolina. The estimated cost of collecting enough signatures - more than $250,000 - was simply too hefty.
And Nader's campaign must submit 500 signatures to even have his write-in votes counted.
State election laws should not obstruct candidates from gaining access to the ballot, nor should they deny voters the chance to vote for the third-party candidate of their choice.
Further, North Carolina should work with other states to standardize ballot access requirements.
It's only fair.
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
Brian_H
Brian
posted 8/17/08 @ 10:46 AM EST
Libertarians have made good ground in North Carolina, at least. Munger for Governor in 08, for sure. They're an example of how much of an impact a third party can have, even if Bob Barr is a displeasing candidate to me. (Continued…)
Tom Terrific
posted 8/18/08 @ 9:08 AM EST
While third party ballot access is a laudable goal, at some point in time too many parties could lead to fractious elections with a party for virtually every race, creed, hair color, hobby and vocation. (Continued…)
Post a Comment