Upcoming third party lawsuits for better ballot access and other easings of restrictions

Richard Winger's Ballot Access News reports several state third party court cases coming up in the next couple of months by COFOE (Coalition for Free & Open Elections). Third parties have historically had difficult hurdles in most states in gaining access to general election day ballots for their respective candidates, one among a myriad of other hardships. Of course, most states in the union include legislators, and judiciary, almost exclusively from both the Republican and Democratic parties.

Several lawsuits against repressive ballot access laws are likely to be filed in February and March, some of them with financial support from COFOE, others not. They include a lawsuit to be filed against the Ohio law that bans circulators for independent candidates unless the circulators are registered voters in Ohio; a lawsuit against Illinois law on the number of signatures for unqualified parties and independent candidates for US House; a similar lawsuit for independent candidates for US House in North Carolina; a similar lawsuit for independent candidates for US House in Alabama; a lawsuit against New Hampshire’s refusal to permit presidential substitution; and a lawsuit against the new March petition deadline for independent candidates (for office other than president) in Montana.

Sphere: Related Content

Check your state for electoral reform bills in legislation

FairVote has "Roadmap for Reform - 2007", a page of bills introduced in the states in 2007 on electoral reform. Many of these bills are still in the legislative process, so check out your own state to see how your state is doing; then, call on your state representative and state senator to make your own opinions heard.

Sphere: Related Content

Study assesses each state's campaign disclosure laws and programs

Grading State Disclosure is a study of the Campaign Disclosure Project, which seeks to bring greater transparency and accountability to money in state politics through assessments of state disclosure laws and programs.

Some states provide better and more complete access to information about the money that fuels campaigns than others, through both a strong campaign disclosure law and high-quality Internet access to disclosure reports. The purpose of the Campaign Disclosure Project’s Grading State Disclosure 2007 study is to provide an overview of how each state measures up to a set standard for disclosure programs, as well as to show how each state compares to others around the country. Check how your state is doing!

Sphere: Related Content

NTU releases taxpayers ballot guide for 2007

The National Taxpayers Union (NTU) has released their ballot guide for 2007. They’ve identified 29 measures in seven states that concern taxpayers. For example, Oregon’s Measure 50 would boost the state cigarette tax from the current $1.18 per pack to $2.025 per pack. Proceeds would be funneled toward health care for uninsured children and smoking prevention programs, but the impact of the tax on cross-border sales could result in lower-than-expected revenues. California, Idaho, and Nevada would levy significantly lower cigarette taxes.Another interesting one: Texas’ Proposition 11 would stipulate that each vote on the final passage of most bills must be recorded and made publicly available on the Internet for a minimum of two years.Check out the guide to see if your state has a taxpayer-related ballot measure.

Sphere: Related Content

Government Reform-Related Databases

We've added a new list on the left panel of this page, called "Government Reform-Related Databases". It is a links list of user-friendly search engines for money in politics data.

Developing internet technology has enabled public interest groups such as the Sunshine Foundation to make government data more accessible to the general public. As more come online, I will add them here.

Sphere: Related Content

Incumbent protection scheme degrades democracy

The Corruption Chronicles blog, a favorite of mine from Judicial Watch, writes that legislators in the Pennsylvania House use taxpayer funds to pay their staff for re-election campaign work. This includes House Majority Leader Bill DeWeese.

On the federal level, many of our representatives employ at least one full-time staff person for nothing but campaign work; but most presumably use their campaign funds. Judicial Watch's story pertains to the state of Pennsylvania legislature; who knows how many other state officeholders around our country employ the same tactic?

Using public funds to pay campaign workers is illegal; PA's state attorney general has launched an investigation into the taxpayer abuse. State legislators have a great responsibility to conduct themselves in an ethical manner, for thousands of voters entrust them with their leadership every two years. Incumbent protection schemes such as this degrade our democracy, and the fairness of our electoral system.

Sphere: Related Content