FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Breaking Out of the Duopoly: Ballot Access and Third Parties

shutterstock_202903039

Most Americans take it for granted that they can vote for who they want on election day, but that’s not always the case.  When you get inside the polling booth, often you’ll find only two candidates listed: a Democrat and a Republican.  This isn’t because of a lack of candidates or political parties.  There’s are many of both.  The problem is they can’t get on the ballot.  Ballot access restrictions vary from state to state, but they have one thing in common and that is to prevent people other than Democrats and Republicans from getting on the ballot.  Many of these laws have been on the books for a long time.  State legislatures can change them, but frequently don’t and it takes a court challenge to get them removed.  Americans generally assume that apathy on the part of voters to organize a challenge to the two-party duopoly is responsible for the lack of parties on the ballot.  When the ballot access restrictions that hinder the candidacy of any third-party are demonstrated, people tend to think these are results of the activities some overzealous, nameless, faceless bureaucrat instead of what they are:  A coordinated effort by the two major political parties to hinder any challenge to their preeminence.

If somebody actually makes some inroads into this system, retribution from the major parties starts.  A good example of this is the Ralph Nader candidacy on the Green Party ticket in 2000.  Before the election, the Democratic Party propaganda campaign against Ralph Nader began.  After the election, the campaign went into high gear and it still goes on today.  How often have you heard the myth that Ralph Nader is to blame for Al Gore’s loss?  Propaganda wasn’t enough for the democrats.  They decided to augment this with petty vindictiveness and challenge his future ballot access.  Nader’s attempts to get on the ballot in 2004 were challenged in over 20 states.

In Pennsylvania, the vindictiveness turned into something of a vendetta, when Ralph Nader was forced to pay over $80,000 because of violations of Pennsylvania ballot access laws.  The vendetta continued in 2006 when the Green Party candidate for senator was also forced to pay over $80,000.  Their crimes?  They had their signatures challenged by the Democratic Party and had to pay the Democratic Party lawyers.   The law that both candidates were accused of violating was on the books since 1937, it was revised in the 1970s,  but these were the first times monetary damages were assessed against candidates who attempted to gain ballot access.  The Green Party had allowed Ralph Nader on their ballot line and they must be punished.   Green Party candidates for office withdrew their candidacy in 2006 and 2010 because of the financial burden they would receive if their candidacy didn’t pass the challenges.  Challenges that included: voiding signatures that were collected by nonresidents of PA and providing people to help review the nominating signatures.  These parts of the law  have since been declared unconstitutional, but others remain, including one that requires anybody to get ten times the number of signatures that the law requires of Democrats or Republicans.

Pennsylvania isn’t the only state with ballot access restrictions, they vary from state to state, but they have one thing in common:  to dissuade other candidates and parties from appearing on the ballot.    Parties must spend time and money on lawyers to challenge these laws, instead of getting out their message.  The laws aren’t for the protection or benefit of citizens but are legal barriers erected to prevent anyone except Democrats and Republicans from getting on the ballot.  Restrictions that have deliberately put in their way by Democrats and Republicans in government.  Since they are governmental regulations, they have the patina of legitimacy.

The Democratic Party would have you believe they are the only thing from stopping whatever troglodyte du jour is running.  Nixon, Reagan, Bush.  The problem is never with the Democratic Party or its policies, the blame is with Eugene McCarthy, John Anderson, or Ralph Nader.  This year, their bete noir is Donald Trump, but they haven’t decided who to blame yet if they lose:  Bernie Sanders or Jill Stein.  The Democrats would have you believe that anybody who doesn’t share their point of view is a Republican, as if there is no Libertarian Party or no conservatives opposed to Trump.  The Democrats and Republicans act like their parties have the only practical candidates, but the emperor wears no clothes and people are starting to see this.  Stop voting for one of the two major parties!

Jill Stein and the Green Party present a viable alternative to both the Democrats and Republicans, but their message is not being heard and Democrats are going out of their way to make sure it isn’t.  As in past years, the Greens are spending time and money to overcome ballot restrictions.  As Jill Stein has said:  “Forget the lesser evil and stand up and fight for the greater good.”

More articles by:

Weekend Edition
December 14, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Andrew Levine
A Tale of Two Cities
Bruce E. Levine
The Ketamine Chorus: NYT Trumpets New Anti-Suicide Drug
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Fathers and Sons, Bushes and Bin Ladens
Kathy Deacon
Coffee, Social Stratification and the Retail Sector in a Small Maritime Village
Nick Pemberton
Praise For America’s Second Leading Intellectual
Patrick Cockburn
The Yemeni Dead: Six Times Higher Than Previously Reported
Nick Alexandrov
George H. W. Bush: Another Eulogy
Brian Cloughley
Principles and Morality Versus Cash and Profit? No Contest
Michael Duggin
Climate Change and the Limits of Reason
Victor Grossman
Sighs of Relief in Germany
Ron Jacobs
A Propagandist of Privatization
Robert Fantina
What Does Beto Have Against the Palestinians?
Richard Falk – Daniel Falcone
Sartre, Said, Chomsky and the Meaning of the Public Intellectual
Robert Fisk
The Parasitic Relationship Between Power and the American Media
Stephen Cooper
When Will Journalism Grapple With the Ethics of Interviewing Mentally Ill Arrestees?
Jill Richardson
A War on Science, Morals and Law
Ron Jacobs
A Propagandist of Privatization
Evaggelos Vallianatos
It’s Not Easy Being Greek
Nomi Prins 
The Inequality Gap on a Planet Growing More Extreme
John W. Whitehead
Know Your Rights or You Will Lose Them
David Swanson
The Abolition of War Requires New Thoughts, Words, and Actions
J.P. Linstroth
Primates Are Us
Bill Willers
The War Against Cash
Jonah Raskin
Doris Lessing: What’s There to Celebrate?
Ralph Nader
Are the New Congressional Progressives Real? Use These Yardsticks to Find Out
Binoy Kampmark
William Blum: Anti-Imperial Advocate
Medea Benjamin – Alice Slater
Green New Deal Advocates Should Address Militarism
John Feffer
Review: Season 2 of Trump Presidency
Frank Clemente
The GOP Tax Bill is Creating Jobs…But Not in the United States
Rich Whitney
General Motors’ Factories Should Not Be Closed. They Should Be Turned Over to the Workers
Christopher Brauchli
Deported for Christmas
Kerri Kennedy
This Holiday Season, I’m Standing With Migrants
Mel Gurtov
Weaponizing Humanitarian Aid
Thomas Knapp
Lame Duck Shutdown Theater Time: Pride Goeth Before a Wall?
George Wuerthner
The Thrill Bike Threat to the Elkhorn Mountains
Nyla Ali Khan
A Woman’s Selfhood and Her Ability to Act in the Public Domain: Resilience of Nadia Murad
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
On the Killing of an Ash Tree
Graham Peebles
Britain’s Homeless Crisis
Louis Proyect
America: a Breeding Ground for Maladjustment
Steve Carlson
A Hell of a Time
Dan Corjescu
America and The Last Ship
Jeffrey St. Clair
Booked Up: the 25 Best Books of 2018
December 13, 2018
John Davis
What World Do We Seek?
Subhankar Banerjee
Biological Annihilation: a Planet in Loss Mode
Lawrence Davidson
What the Attack on Marc Lamont Hill Tells Us
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail