66 Comments - Deep South - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 1:07 pm: If you’re gonna do politics in Illinois, you have to learn to play hardball. Doesn’t matter what part of the state you’re in. - wishbone - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 1:08 pm: With Republicans working hard to disenfranchise voters all across the country I shouldn’t have any sympathy for these folks, but I do. - collar observer - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 1:10 pm: I always want to ask - “Are you really that afraid to have an opponent?” Don’t tell me it is just about the money! Oh, call me naive - but I pray for the day that folks care about democracy! - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 1:15 pm: ===but I pray for the day that folks care about democracy! === Part of the democratic process is following the law for candidates. - Crime Fighter (fka Honestly) - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 1:15 pm: This stands in stark contrast to policymakers and agency heads dismissing contracts, bidding rules, federal regs, and other processes & laws as “technicalities” that can be ignored. - Endangered Moderate Species - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 1:19 pm: The ILGOP continues to beat the anti-Madigan drum. Moderate GOP Rep. Chad Hays also jumped on the Madigan-bashing-wagon this weekend, with an editorial in the News Gazette. The 2012 GOP campaign message is clear, “Madigan is everything that is wrong with Illinois. A vote for a Democrat is a vote for Madigan”. - A Modest Proposal - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 1:26 pm: I’d say this is a technicality, and the violation should be ignored. As long as they have all the information there on their papers, and the info is legit it should count. - Shemp - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 1:26 pm: For the party always whining about disenfranchising voters…. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 1:34 pm: Shemp, that’s apples to oranges. The courts have historically set the bar infinitely higher for candidates than for voters. - Makandadawg - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 1:39 pm: How about this angle. No candidates ran in the primary and then these candidates filed late. They do not have a strong chance of winning but sure are getting a lot press and sympathy for their situation that they totally created. Politicians are Politicians. Never feel sorry for them. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 1:40 pm: ===The ILGOP continues to beat the anti-Madigan drum. Moderate GOP Rep. Chad Hays also jumped on the Madigan-bashing-wagon this weekend, with an editorial in the News Gazette. The 2012 GOP campaign message is clear, “Madigan is everything that is wrong with Illinois. A vote for a Democrat is a vote for Madigan”.=== Well, it worked so well in the past … To the post … If ya can’t follow the rules, ya can’t play. Hire an attorney, spend a few bucks to get ON the ballot. Dopes! I have no sympathy for candidates who can’t follow simple rules to get on the ballot. An attorney, (’search’ this website for posts on good election attorneys, we have talked about them too many times to mention) will get you filed, make sure you can’t get challeneged, or do their best to prepare against the challenge if you file without their help. This is also not stopping democracy at all. An election without any rules is called ‘anarchy’. You can not do ‘things’ outside the rules, then expect everything to ‘work out’. I have no sympathy, the rules are there, follow them. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 1:41 pm: The above was me … sorry … - Thoughts... - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 1:49 pm: -Moderate GOP Rep. Chad Hays- Gotta get a new keyboard after that one - I’m still laughing. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 1:50 pm: The state Dem and GOP establishments have worked together for decades passing laws to make it difficult for independents, third-parties and amateurs to get on the ballot. Apparently, the state GOP hasn’t been of much help to the Jackson County folks in overcoming the obstacles they helped to create. Time for yet another press release revealing how bad they are at party-building. - Palos Park Bob - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 1:57 pm: C’mon, folks. It’s no big deal to get this sort of thing right. If you’re going through all the trouble of getting a massive amount of signatures on petitions, you contact your GOP County central committee and the state GOP, get a list of all their recommendations and rules, then follow them. You don’t cut corners and “guess”. I recently filed to fill a vacancy and did this. I also filed my 100 pages of petitions in a covered binder, along with Statement of Candidacy and proof of Economic statement submittal. You contact someone at the party who knows what to do, and listen to them. Sure Madigan and Mike Kasper wrote the rules to find ways to kill competition. So what? FIND OUT WHAT THE RULES ARE AND FOLLOW THEM! - Jackson County Voter - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 1:58 pm: Since Representative Mike Bost hails from Jackson County I propose the electoral board incorporate the “Bost Toss” when determining if the petition packets are adequately bound. Throw the respective packets high in the air while taking a swipe at them on the way down. If the packet remains intact they meet muster, if not they are disqualified. Seems fair to me…… - Tommydanger - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 2:03 pm: Having filed many a petition in my day and having successfully booted off a few opponents, I would say the statutes favor people who are familiar with the proces; incumbents. Having said that, I always had other people eyeball all of my papers to make sure I did not miss anything and never trusted anyone to file my petitions on my behalf. The laws may or may not serve an important purpose, but they must still be followed unless and until they are changed. Any county party chairman would/should know that paperclips are a big no no. - downstate hack - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 2:06 pm: “uch sheets before being filed shall be neatly fastened together in book form, by placing the sheets in a pile and fastening them together at one edge in a secure and suitable manner, and the sheets shall then be numbered consecutively.” “ike it or not, paper clips just don’t really cut it under state law.” Reading the law, I don’t think you can arbitrarily assume paer clips are not allowed. Whether they “cut it or not” is an absurd decision and the wishes of petitioners should over ride this decision. While I don’t always agree with the IL. Repubs, I think they have a legitimate here. - OneMan - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 2:15 pm: The paper clip vs. staple vs binder clip is a classic that everyone involved in politics should be aware of. I still think a requirement for everyone to graduate high school (or vote for that matter if I was king) is to spend At least 1 hour sitting through an election board hearing about if a candidate’s papers are valid and if they can appear on the ballot. At least 4 hours in the capital during session. Then again I think the Illinois ballot rules were written by the same guy who wrote USA Track’s tie breaker rules about coin flips http://www.usatf.org/News/Dead-heat-procedures-announced.aspx - ZC - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 2:16 pm: The rules favor incumbents and those with some professional know-how, not inherently Republicans or Democrats. Democrats and independents use these same tactics against other Democrats in Chicago. Google-search around “shoelace case” and “Patrick Levar.” - titan - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 2:24 pm: Standard paper clips probably don’t cut it as “secure” under the current state of Illinois election law - well-fastened staples are at least arguably “secure” - BigDoggie - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 3:01 pm: Every time I read a new political story about something in Illinois, I find that I have to readjust my bar for how incredibly stupid things can be. God, I wish I could move. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 3:05 pm: Riddle me this: To what possible purpose does the Election Code require that petitions be “neatly fastened” in a “secure and suitable manner”? I mean the sheets are required to be consecutively numbered, for crying out loud! - El Conquistador - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 3:07 pm: “Part of the democratic process is following the law for candidates.” So does that mean we can disqualify all of the candidates who illegally place campaign signs in the public right-of-way? - Freeman - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 3:13 pm: Wonder if the State’s Attorney recused himself from the vote to kick his opponent off the ballot? No conflict of interest there. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 3:14 pm: Sounds like the deck was stacked with all Democrats on the board. A good county clerk would have gave some advice to the candiates on the proper binding of the petitons. Where does this leave the people trying to file? Can they appeal to the court for relief or are the out? - Anonymous - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 3:33 pm: “Wonder if the State’s Attorney recused himself from the vote to kick his opponent off the ballot?” The current State’s Attorney is not running for re-election. - Small Town Liberal - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 3:34 pm: - God, I wish I could move. - Go on then, I’m sure it’ll be easy to find a state where anyone can just stroll in the board of elections office and sign up to be on the ballot. I’m sure it’s only Illinois that has these complicated processes that only the blue team can follow. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 3:45 pm: The reason for having them securely fastened is so that petition sheets can’t be added or removed after the petitions are filed, which is also why they are numbered. I’d recommend against using binder clips. - Jake From Elwood - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 4:01 pm: I was witness to a petition challenge where the notion of neatly fastened together was tested by tossing the petitions across the room. They were held together by two rubber bands and the papers scattered. The petitions were rejected. - Election Junkie - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 4:18 pm: The law is to prevent tampering. I believe Acco binders are likewise subject to a challenge as they are easily taken apart and then put back together again. I like cable ties for large packets and staples for lesser packets. I also agree that clerks ought to have a standard that they tell people about. No one should have to get an attorney for these things. The very Clerk who tossed these guys had access to the law that he could have provided to prevent this from happening. Is there case law on this by the way? - BigDoggie - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 4:27 pm: STL - this is not the only issue causing my desire to flee this craphole (politically speaking) of a state. Just the latest in a depressingly long, long line. - Small Town Liberal - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 4:30 pm: - Just the latest in a depressingly long, long line. - If that’s the case, what’s stopping you? - Yellow Dog Democrat - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 4:49 pm: I love listening to Republicans complain about having to follow the law. You’d think the GOP NEVER had a candidate removed from the ballot for failing to follow the letter of the Election Law. - Phineas Fogg - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 5:02 pm: Somehow it seems to me that the “intent” of the law is what should really matter when it comes to one’s ability to vote or run for a political office. Yes, maybe they were actually in violation of the rules but the reality is that they are being discriminated against. And, I would say the same thing whether the candidates who are being kicked off the ballot were Republicans or Democrats. Maybe they should be fined or faced with some monetary punishment for their minor error but they should not be throw off of a ballot. This would seem to be a matter of fairness to me. It almost seems like a tactic that we would read about being used by some despot in some Mideast country. - Past the rule of 85 - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 5:10 pm: I have mixed emotions about this. On the one hand it’s hard to pity a party that’s going out of its way to disenfranchise whole groups of voters. On the other hand one of my pet peeves is not having a choice about who to vote for in many elections. Short of gluing every page together any binding system can be made to fail. I say let them have their day and give people a chance to actually make a choice. - Peter Snarker - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 5:18 pm: Haha… So the constitutional guarantee of pensions… Meh, flexible, right? But staples vs paperclips (neither mentioned in statute)? Well naturally that’s sacred. You guys crack me up. - Jeff Trigg - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 5:50 pm: Thanks Rich. First of all, there are no “rules” to follow for getting on the ballot. There are vague election statutes and scores of court cases which are all interpreted differently every election, from one petition judge to another. Its impossible to know what won’t be acceptable this year that was acceptable last year. What we have now is anarchy, where there are no clear rules, where rules are made up as they go, and the people with the big guns always win. If you have to hire an election law attorney to have a chance to get on a ballot, THAT is anarchy, NOT the rule of law. And its a sure sign we’re doing it all wrong when it comes to ballot access. More than 30 states have filing fees to be on the ballot. Thats it. Filing fees. Anyone care to point to even one state that uses filing fees where they have problems with too many candidates on the ballot? You can’t, there isn’t one. Those states bring in money every election cycle. Illinois flushes it down the toilet. Besides the unequal signatures requirements that have been ruled a violation of the US Constitution, one of the big problems is that there is absolutely no penalty for making frivolous challenges. You can accuse a candidate of forging his/her own signature, even when the signature matches the registration card EXACTLY, and get away with it with no repercussions at all. If that isn’t anarchy, where there is no rule of law to prevent damaging, costly and false accusations, I don’t know what is. Every election cycle I’m tempted to file challenges to every candidate and clog up the system for months. I could do so without any fear of legal consequences, because we have no rule of law for ballot access. I’m seriously going to consider doing that in two years if we don’t change these laws before then. Call Rep. Watson for a bill that would end the insanity of our ballot access laws. Pay 1% of the salary of the office you are running for along with proper paperwork and be done with it. Like most states already do. Bring money into the state instead of wasting months of precious human resources on these childish, bully-tactic petition challenges. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 6:08 pm: ===Maybe they should be fined or faced with some monetary punishment for their minor error but they should not be throw off of a ballot.=== Nope. follw the rules or you are off. If no one challenges you, you are fine, but if someone calls you on it, and its wrong, you should be gone. Get an attorney. If you are SO serious about being the choice of the people, make sure you can stay on the ballot. Geez! - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 6:13 pm: ===I say let them have their day and give people a chance to actually make a choice.=== File correctly and they will have their day … - Mike Huntoon - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 6:16 pm: I know of at least one low income disabled person running for County Board in Rock Island County, I’ve filled out Circuit Breaker applications in his building and met him at a seminar I held there about Circuit Breaker and Medicare Savings Plans. I don’t have any great illusion that a disabled individual living on SSI is going to actually win elected office (living on SSI means he’s surviving on under $9,000 per year) but it warms my heart to see his participation. Ballot fees discourage that kind of citizen democracy, and I find it very refreshing to see an individual living in low income housing take enough interest in making changes in government to be motivated to run for office. - Jeff Trigg - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 6:27 pm: O’Willy, if you can make a list of the top 100 iron-clad “rules” for getting on the ballot, I will shut up about this topic forever. Otherwise, you need to stop lying about there actually being “rules” one can easily find and follow to get on the ballot. There would be absolutely no need for a lawyer if there were actually rules in place that could be followed. Make up your mind, either we do have rules that can be followed, or we need lawyers because we don’t know what differing court case interpretations we may come across this election cycle. Having to hire an election attorney to get on the ballot would be a violation of the 1st and 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. - Jeff Trigg - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 6:33 pm: Mike Huntoon, ballot fees do NOT discourage anyone from running. Nowhere in the 30 plus states that use filing fees has that problem. The bigger problem is that it is MORE expensive to get and protect petition signatures under our current system (at least for non Rs and Ds). Lawyers are more expensive than ballot access fees every time and every state. Its much easier and cheaper to fundraise a couple hundred dollars than it is to get thousands of signatures and hire petition checkers and lawyers. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 6:34 pm: ===O’Willy, if you can make a list of the top 100 iron-clad “rules” for getting on the ballot, I will shut up about this topic forever.=== Here is what I DO know … You file petitions in a way that someone can knock you off the ballot, then you ain’t filing. Get an election attorney. Not just good advice, but Standard Operating Procedure for anyone serious enough to want to run and stay on a ballot. ===Having to hire an election attorney to get on the ballot would be a violation of the 1st and 14th Amendment of the US Constitution.=== Never said you NEED (required), but if you want to be on a ballot, you jump through the hoops. In many instances, for many offices, if you aren’t wise enough to have someone check your petitions, and not wise enough to have an attorney ready for a possible challenge, then … are you wise enough to get my vote… - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 6:36 pm: ===Mike Huntoon, ballot fees do NOT discourage anyone from running.=== And you know this is ABSOLUTE? It DOENS’T? Ever? You are sure? (sniff, sniff) Seems more like opinion than fact … - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 6:49 pm: ===Otherwise, you need to stop lying about there actually being “rules” one can easily find and follow to get on the ballot. There would be absolutely no need for a lawyer if there were actually rules in place that could be followed.=== Golly, check this out … I think everyone, candidates with lawyers, and even candidates without lawyers know where to start to find out what to do … http://www.elections.il.gov/Downloads/ElectionInformation/PDF/2012Canguide.pdf There might even be one or two of those ironclad rules you like so much … “liar” … bit harsh dontcha think? Your Pal, Oswego Willy - too obvious - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 7:28 pm: Well state gop chair Pat Brady is an expert on bullying tactics and disenfranchising people. That much is true. In the past couple of months his organization rejected a better qualified black woman in favor of Brady’s hack employee for the Tim Johnson vacancy, and Pat Brady just ran another divisive and rigged state gop convention that infuriated regular Republicans statewide. Pat Brady needs to stop embarrassing himself. No one likes crybabies or hypocrites. Guy is both. - Jeff Trigg - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 7:44 pm: ===You file petitions in a way that someone can knock you off the ballot, then you ain’t filing. Every petition is filed in a way that can get you knocked off the ballot. There are no iron-clad rules. If there were, then there would be no need for lawyers. Why do you need lawyers? To argue to the boards and courts. Why do you need to argue? Because the only rules we have are vague or arbitrary. Look at the example in this article about clips or staples or binders or strings or whatever. The rules are largely made up as we go in the courts. Its a game, not proper ballot access for a democracy. Look at other cases in recent history. The double US Senate election starring Roland Burris. The Rahm Emanuel Mayor’s race. The upcoming battles about the primary screen-out where you can’t run as an independent or other if you took a partisan ballot in the primary. More than a handful of candidates right now face a law that passed after the primary that might disqualify them. Its all ridiculous, and something most states never have to deal with. Which is more of a burden on the poor candidate Mike Huntoon refers to, paying a 1% fee to run for office, or hiring an attorney and getting the signatures and going through a challenge. I’d guess that poor candidate ran as a D or R and didn’t need much more than 100 signatures. If the poor candidate wanted to run as an independent, well, forget about it. Sure, there might be a few examples in other states of the filing fee burden discouraging someone. Nothing recently from those states. Most states have figured out how to avoid that scenario and allow an amount of signatures during a reasonable time limit that one person can easily achieve. Their signatures are automatically checked, so no need for a private ballot access challenge legal cottage industry. It some states you can declare you are poor and they will reduce or waive the filing fees. There haven’t been court cases where the candidate cried poor in decades that I have found. Those states have pretty much figured it out and don’t have problems, certainly not to the level we have them. Besides, raising money for a filing fee is a better indication of whether a candidate is wise enough to serve in office, rather than an arbitrary ballot access system that doesn’t treat all candidates equally and winds up in the courts every 2 years. Our current system certainly discourages poor people from running more than other states filing fees systems do. Especially for independents and others. We went 25 years without one independent able to get on the ballot for the General Assembly. Its fact that our system discourages people more than other states’ filing fee system and there haven’t been any recent court cases where filing fees discouraged a candidate. Good enough for me. Spend your time and money out meeting people and campaigning for office, rather than consulting an election law attorney about arbitrary and vague election laws that can wind up in the courts. Its hard to justify our current system. Raising some money to run for office is easier, and wiser, than our current system. - Pot calling kettle - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 8:17 pm: http://thesouthern.com/news/local/four-republicans-taken-off-ballot-over-paper-clip-issue/article_4476fd62-bf42-11e1-90b1-001a4bcf887a.html - Jeff Trigg - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 8:21 pm: Good, you found Illinois’ Candidates guide, which is hardly all encompassing or iron-clad. Find the definition of a “valid signature” in that guide. There isn’t even an example of a “valid signature”. I rest my case. Now look at the signature requirements of IL Supreme Court ballot access for all candidates. After you do that, go look at the candidate’s guide for another 30 or so states. NY and Georgia are bad, Missouri is decent, Minnesota, Montana, Maryland, Utah, Kansas are a handful of states that have ballot access figured out better than Illinois. I’m betting half of our GA races are unopposed this year. Its been like that for 30 years. The current system is bad. There is no reason to set the bar so high for getting on the ballot when half of the races are unopposed. Needing a lawyer to get on the ballot is too high of a bar and the unequal signatures needed makes it even worse. A filing fee. Thats it. Simple and done. No courts, no lawyers, no election office employees for weeks on end comparing addresses and signatures, no door to door petitioners needing to collect thousands of signatures for state office, no trips to election boards for voter registration lists and database work to cross reference signatures, no hours in the election offices looking up voter registration data, no going back to the people who signed the petition to get an affidavit saying that they did indeed sign the petition, no more of any of that nonsense. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 8:30 pm: ===I rest my case.=== Yeah You! ===After you do that, go look at the candidate’s guide for another 30 or so states. === Illinois has there own rules. Instead of looking up 30 or more states, spend that time a bit wiser and learn the Illinois rules and laws. That way you can get a better grasp of what might be going on. That bit of advice is free, and you’re welcome! ===NY and Georgia are bad, Missouri is decent, Minnesota, Montana, Maryland, Utah, Kansas are a handful of states that have ballot access figured out better than Illinois.=== In the Name of Willim Jennings Bryant, what are you basing your OPINION on??? Am I, and everyone suppose to take your word that all those are better/worse/same? Pretty high opinoin of yourself to tell me and others what is good and bad, and that is that! ===Needing a lawyer to get on the ballot is too high of a bar and the unequal signatures needed makes it even worse.=== Needing… ain’t requiring … - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 8:34 pm: ===A filing fee. Thats it. Simple and done. No courts, no lawyers, no election office employees for weeks on end comparing addresses and signatures, no door to door petitioners needing to collect thousands of signatures for state office, no trips to election boards for voter registration lists and database work to cross reference signatures, no hours in the election offices looking up voter registration data, no going back to the people who signed the petition to get an affidavit saying that they did indeed sign the petition, no more of any of that nonsense. === Sounds pretty lazy … pay a fee and that is it. I guess having to work for something is … what was it … “nonsense” … That actually made me laugh. The process is nonsense. Cute! - too obvious - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 9:15 pm: Jeff Trigg’s observations and concerns are legitimate ones and he’s a good advocate, but at the end of the day, the GOP loses this case. And if you think about it, it is in fact pretty dumb to use paper clips. That’s beyond a rookie mistake. There is a valid reason for requiring something better than paper clips. I believe there is plenty of precedent on this. This “firmly attached” rule is not even one of the state’s bad election rules for petitions. This one actually has some solid basis. Pat Brady should have done some training instead wasting all his time calling Mike Madigan names and putting on his phony state convention that actually hurt the party. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 9:17 pm: ===Jeff Trigg’s observations and concerns are legitimate ones and he’s a good advocate, but at the end of the day, the GOP loses this case. And if you think about it, it is in fact pretty dumb to use paper clips. That’s beyond a rookie mistake. There is a valid reason for requiring something better than paper clips. I believe there is plenty of precedent on this. This “firmly attached” rule is not even one of the state’s bad election rules for petitions. This one actually has some solid basis.=== Concur. Good Post. - Jeff Trigg - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 10:05 pm: ==Pretty high opinoin of yourself to tell me and others what is good and bad, and that is that! He says as he does the exact same thing day after day right here. I made my case for why your opinions are contradictory or wrong. All you are doing is talking in circles and mocking 30 plus states as being lazy at this point. Its wiser for candidates to work at getting elected instead of vast amounts of work just to get on a ballot where more than half of the races are unopposed. If you can’t tell the difference between a state where they have no problems with ballot access or candidates on the ballot, and a state like Illinois where there are always problems with ballot access and candidates on the ballot, you need to give up arguing about this issue. too obvious, I’m not defending the GOP in this case. I know paper clips don’t cut it, I’ve been through it many times. I’ve even won challenges and was involved in the Lee v. Keith case that ruled our election laws violated the US Constitution. These rules O’Willy is defending have been found to discourage candidates so badly, they violated our 1st and 14th Amendment rights. Thats not my opinion, that is fact. You could say my opinion on our ballot access laws is better than Lisa Madigan’s and most of the GA over 25 years according to the 7th Circuit. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 10:17 pm: ===All you are doing is talking in circles=== Not really, I am still sticking with following the Illinois rules, get a lawyer, and if you can’t get on the ballot by following the rules, then get out. ===If you can’t tell the difference between a state where they have no problems with ballot access or candidates on the ballot, and a state like Illinois where there are always problems with ballot access and candidates on the ballot, you need to give up arguing about this issue.=== When NO ONE can get on the ballot, then there is no access. As far as I can tell, you follow the rules, you get on the ballot. Guess what? There hasn’t been an election yet with NO candidates, so someone is getting on the ballot. ===I know paper clips don’t cut it, I’ve been through it many times. I’ve even won challenges and was involved in the Lee v. Keith case that ruled our election laws violated the US Constitution. === If you know they don’t cut it, then you accept that the rule is there and it need to be followed … so what are you advocating that the rules are NOT eassy to understand? You just admitted that you know that the paper clips don’t cut it? Maybe you are confused. If that rule is easy to understand, and they messed up, how is it unfair if you know, clearly, they broke that rule?? ===These rules O’Willy is defending have been found to discourage candidates so badly, they violated our 1st and 14th Amendment rights. Thats not my opinion, that is fact=== If the rules haven’t been overturned, and, in fact, still exist … then they aint violating those amendments … and are only violating them, according to … you. When the US Supreme court strikes down EVERY Illinois election law regarding ballot access, lemme know. According to you, they ALL seem to go against to Amendments in ALL instances … - wordslinger - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 10:57 pm: –These rules O’Willy is defending have been found to discourage candidates so badly,– The rules certainly are meant to do that, which is what the Dems and GOP have agreed upon over the decades. I guess the Greens broke through and are still in the mix, right? That’s what makes Brady’s complaints so laughable and hypocritical. Do you think he and his crew want to make it easier for candidates to get on the ballot? Those dudes have been fighting a desperate rear-guard battle for years to keep people from participating in their party, much less elections (I know, it makes no sense if you’re trying to build a majority, but they’re content with the scraps). His whining, again, reveals how bad he and today’s state GOP are at playing the game in which they made the rules. Instead of issuing press releases, they should be hiding under a rock. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jun 26, 12 @ 11:52 pm: ===That’s what makes Brady’s complaints so laughable and hypocritical. Do you think he and his crew want to make it easier for candidates to get on the ballot? Those dudes have been fighting a desperate rear-guard battle for years to keep people from participating in their party, much less elections (I know, it makes no sense if you’re trying to build a majority, but they’re content with the scraps). His whining, again, reveals how bad he and today’s state GOP are at playing the game in which they made the rules.=== Brady is NOT helping my party … I am right about that … correct? It is difficult to point to something under the Brady helm that the ILGOP can build on, besides stacks of recycled paper that have dopey press releases printed upon them. Someone … anyone … and honestly … Point to a “good” move, with supporting evidence, mind you, that Brady has made? No Snark … make the case, please. Help me understand. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Jun 27, 12 @ 12:30 am: Willie, speaking for myself, I think the GOP of recent years have lost their minds. I don’t know where they’re coming from, where they’re going or where they’ve been. It’s not like the Dems are great shakes. But at least they’re in the ballgame. GOP “leaders” wallowing in chronic victimization, contempt of knowledge, fear of compromise and unrelenting pessimism on America’s future ain’t exactly a winning game plan. The message is mind-boggling, considering that even in our narcissistic, navel-gazing times, we all still live better and have a better shot at the future than anyone else who ever walked the Earth. The GOP needs a Reagan, Buckley, Goldwater or one of many Bushes (Barbara is the toughest, from my experience) to go upside their heads. Dole, Lugar, Snowe and Simpson might want to get in a couple shots, too. No more whining. Get to work on a real message and a ground game. Illinois is not a “Blue State.” But it’s also not a “Crazy State.” There’s no crying when you’re out-hustled time and again. Get your game on. You can start by standing up to the yabbos and tapping the Independents. Give them someplace to go other than the Dems. - Mike Huntoon - Wednesday, Jun 27, 12 @ 7:31 am: The disabled candidate is on the ballot, he didn’t have to hire an attorney. I believe that the current system works for people who aren’t too lazy to follow a few rules. He never could have run if there was a fee. (Do you think someone living on little more than $8,000 a year can afford anything but basic necessities?) I think there are abuses and injustices under any system, and under the current system I believe that 9 times out of 10 when a candidate is removed from the ballot it’s a result of laziness or inattention to detail. I’ve even taken advantage of the current system as it stands. In 1999 I advised friends to file petitions to have the Bernardin Amendment for health care as a human right on the ballot for an advisory vote in Kane County despite only have about 1/4th of the necessary signatures. We filed our petitions and waited to see if they would be challenged. No challenge was forthcoming, and the advisory question appeared on the ballot in 1999. My ex-wife successfully ran for East Moline City Clerk about the same time, and we had no problems putting her paperwork together to appear on the ballot. I never would have paid a fee for her to run for a job that (on an hourly basis) actually paid less than a job at McDonald’s . . . But to spend all of an hour collecting the necessary signatures and assembling the papers was no problem at all! - Mike Huntoon - Wednesday, Jun 27, 12 @ 7:37 am: BTW - I agree that there should be more fair ballot access for 3rd parties, that’s a flaw in our system that’s glaring. At least I agree on principle. In practice both parties like the system as it is, and I’m not much in the mood for fencing ballot access windmills when hundreds of my low income senior citizen friends loose their pharmaceutical assistance at the end of this week because they don’t qualify for Federal Extra Help who’s income limits are far more strict than under Circuit Breaker. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 27, 12 @ 8:02 am: wordsling, Appreciate your thoughtful response to my plea. I agree wih you, and your assessment, and I can only hope that the ILGOP, while searching for their “soul”, gets back to finding their way to the middle and finding their way through the tedious hard work that needs to be done to be successful. It’s easy to be lazy by claiming members of the party do not “fit”, but the reality is that those candidates DO fit, its just that the ILGOP has made that hole impossible for that peg to fit as it did in years gone by, and thus putting the squeeze on what an Illinois Republican is versus a Republican anywhere elese in the country, because the Reagan Rule is just not followed here. Thanks again, wordslinger. Time will tell if my party’s Don Quixote search will eventually be its downfall, or will someone stop this attacking of the windmills. - cant say - Wednesday, Jun 27, 12 @ 10:13 am: Joe Berrios had someone try to run against him in the primary in the last election. Filed with plenty of signatures. When she learned that her petitions were being challenged, she got a quote from a lawyer. $20,000 was what she was advised it would cost to defend a severely underfunded campaign. She withdrew. Simplify the procedure and let more people on. Tell my again why JeffT isn’t right about filing fees being a simpler better answer. Unless you just like things the way they are. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jun 27, 12 @ 10:18 am: Believe it or not — there’s an appellate court opinion on paper clips vs. staples: Girot made no effort to securely bind the pages of his petition in a way that would prevent tampering. “Fastening” the pages with a paper clip could not meet the purposes of the statute’s requirements. Therefore, Girot’s actions do not constitute substantial compliance with the statute. http://www.state.il.us/court/opinions/appellatecourt/2003/3rddistrict/july/html/3030073.htm - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 27, 12 @ 10:24 am: ===she got a quote from a lawyer. $20,000 was what she was advised it would cost to defend a severely underfunded campaign.=== You are running for office and you can’t get an attorney to either “donate” their expertise to help, or …. and you said this was a “quote” … you can only get ONE quote? Further, If you can’t get money for the petiton challenge, or anythng pre-election, how did she think she was going to beat Berrios? Pixie Dust and Wishing? Nope, you file, yoou get knoocked off, or you withdraw, part of the process. Running is a right, not a guarantee. - wordslinger - Friday, Jun 29, 12 @ 9:17 am: –I do not travel out of state cause of the looks I get with Illinois plates.– Then you should see a team of doctors, because they’re something very wrong with you. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.