|
Could it be done?
Friday, Jun 16, 2006 - Posted by Rich Miller I’ve never been a big fan of third party candidates because they whine so much about our (admittedly ridiculously difficult) ballot access laws. If they worked and organized as much as they whined they might get somewhere and force a change in the law. Frankly, it’s been my opinion that most (not all) of these third party types couldn’t make it onto the ballot even if the laws were changed. It’s just an excuse for their failure. It looks like the Greens may - may - know how to work. From a press release: “Illinois politics-as-usual is about to change,” said Jennifer Rose, campaign manager for Green gubernatorial candidate Rich Whitney, as the Illinois Green Party recently collected its 25,000th signature on the way to getting its slate of candidates to appear on the statewide ballot this fall. We’ll see if they can survive a challenge, but what they’ve done so far, if this press release is accurate, isn’t anything to sneeze at.
|
 |
|
|
Pingback IlliniPundit.com » Blog Archive » Greens Statewide - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 6:58 am:
[…] Rich Miller quotes from a Green Party press release that suggests the statewide Green Party is doing well in its bid to slate candidates for state office. With all the problems of the incumbent Governor, this might actually be the year that a third party could get 5% of the vote. I think that in Champaign County they could reach as high as 10%. […]
- Bill Baar - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 7:24 am:
I think this is the Democrats splitting. Either taking over and driving Liebermann to run as an independent in Conn… or leaving and running as independents, or Greens; like here in Illinois.
Expect this to grow unless Dems find a unifier and I think that unlikely.
- Gregor - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 7:37 am:
Greens would certainly attract more former dems than republicans. Last time I seriously looked at their platform, they looked like kooks to me, particularly the european ones, but at least they are not LaRoushies… or are they?
- Heartland Native - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 7:59 am:
Let’s see, Congress has an approval rating of less than 25% with the Presdent’s rating heading that way. Illinois is the “Petri Dish of Political Corruption” regardless of which major party.
YES—The Greens will do well in November getting voters from both major parties on a national level and certainly in IL!
- Unreliable Sources - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 8:41 am:
Whitney couldn’t even get 10% in a state rep race, and now he’s going to be governor?
- Ravenswood Right Winger - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 9:20 am:
Good luck to the Green Party. As I understand it (if I am wrong, I am sure someone will correct me) the IL Libertarians have imploded and do not have a ticket this year. If the Libertarians had a candidate that would really hurt JBT. Is there an American Constitutionalist candidate running?
- Randall Sherman, Secretary/Treasurer, Illinois Committee for Honest Government - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 9:24 am:
Does anyone know where registered voters can still sign their petitions? The more choices the better it is for the people of Illinois!
- Anonymous - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 10:23 am:
“If they worked and organized as much as they whined they might get somewhere and force a change in the law.”
How could a minority party could ever force a change, except through the legal system?
Or are you suggesting that the Greens agree not to run in the Governor’s race in exchange for new and improved ballot access laws?
Why should the Greens trust the Democrats to deliver a new ballot access law, when there isn’t a legislative session till after the election? Or does anyone think the Guv would actually risk the political fallout of calling a special session to change ballot access laws so he could get Whitney off the ballot, especially after the Meeks episode?
“Frankly, it’s been my opinion that most (not all) of these third party types couldn’t make it onto the ballot even if the laws were changed. It’s just an excuse for their failure.”
If the media thinks ballot access laws in IL are absurd and third parties should stop whining, how about doing something besides whining about most third parties being pathetic and actually mount a media campaign to pressure the system to change, so there’s no more excuses for anyone to whine? A media campaign might even give the Guv cover to call a special session on ballot access.
Wouldn’t easier ballot access actually enhance media revenues by expanding public interest in campaigns?
- Bubba-Lou - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 10:35 am:
Hey, you go, Greens!
I hope they make it. But they will draw challenges. (And remember, the 34,000 sigs that Ralph Nader submitted two years ago weren’t enough.)
I was just looking at their website (www.ilgp.org). There are downloadable petition forms and instructions there for anyone who’s interested.
- Phil Huckelberry - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 10:54 am:
In response to Randall Sherman’s question:
Email me - phil@mcgreens.org - if you want to know where we are the next two weekends, or if you want to take a petition out yourself.
and in response to Rich, we’ll be ready for the challenge too - and I strongly encourage you to look into whether Democrats will be pursuing the challenge on state time like Mike Madigan’s people were in 2004 (a major story that went unreported…)
- anon - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 12:38 pm:
Randy Stufflebeam is running for guv for the Illinois Constitution Party.
What’s the chance that Whitney would be included in the debates? If not, how’s come?
- Jeff Trigg - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 12:50 pm:
As chief whiner (and proud to join the ranks of other whiners like Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, Gandhi, King Jr., and Mandela) I hope the Greens do make it on the ballot. (Yes, the Libertarians imploded in Illinois with the workers leaving it to be run by the do-nothings.)
“Outside of Illinois, no other jurisdiction in the world requires petitions for parties or candidates in excess of 5% of the number of registered voters.” - Winger, Editor Ballot Access News
At least a few of us are working at forcing a change in the law, with the 7th Ciruit hearing the Lee vs. Keith case last week and a ruling coming in the next few months. I think you’ll see an organization formed soon to put more pressure on the ANTI-Democrats in Illinois.
Rich, you are partly correct there aren’t many out there willing to work. But I think you overlook just how bad ballot access laws are in Illinois. No independent has made it on the ballot for GA in Illinois since 1980 (25 years), and they may have only made it because they weren’t challenged. The two decades before 1979, when the current laws took effect, more than a dozen independents were on the ballot for GA, including 7 in 1976. Is it really whining when we face obstacles that are the worst in the world?
About the only way Madigan is going to let a favorable ballot access bill out of committee is if the teacher’s unions endorse it or someone throws $200,000 at his campaign accounts.
Trust me, it takes a ton of hard work and organization to get a slate on the ballot for statewide office in Illinos. I’ve done it. And that’s hard work and organization that can not be done for other things like campaigning or getting election laws changed, which is a huge reason why these laws are so unfair that is too often forgotten. It would be like forcing you to type your blog entries on a typewriter, taking them to a notary, having a service enter them into a computer file, and then taking them to another service to enter them onto your blog. Then I suppose you’d be whining when your competition beats you to the news, nevermind the obstacles you have that your competition doesn’t.
Phil is absolutely right about the challenge. The lazy, whining media shouldn’t be missing stories like that. In 1998, more than 70 George Ryan Secretary of State employees worked to kick the Libertarians off the ballot, with more than a dozen on the clock. One story ran about that. In 2002, state workers from Topinka’s office in Chicago were working to kick the Libertarians off the ballot along with employees from DNR in Springfield. In 2004, employees from Madigan’s staff were working to kick Nader off the ballot. What does that tell us about these third parties compared to the Rs and Ds if they have to use government employees to deny democracy against third party volunteers? And what does it tell us about the media that ignores the worst in the world ballot access laws and questionable campaign tactics using government employees to kick candidates off the ballot?
Third parties have to do about 30,000 times the work just to get to an even playing field with the Rs and Ds for each individual race, over and over and over, year after year. Can you blame them for whining and not being able to compete with the Rs and Ds who just put more than 35 candidates on the ballot for the GA without having to get 1 petition signature?
Rant over, carry on. Go Greens and Constitution Party!!! Point some video cameras at the government employees working on the challenge.
- Lovie's Leather - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 2:00 pm:
So, will this effect the liberal white vote? Maybe downstate? But I don’t think Speaker Big Papa would allow the Greens on the ballot. He would find some flaw… some irregularity… he always does… then Little Miss can deny them ballot access…. That would prove Illinois politics has become nothing more than a sick “bring your daughter to work” day.
P.S. I know many out there think that Big Papa wants Blago to lose so Little Miss can run for gov. But then she would have to run against an incumbent Topinka…. She wants an open race in 2010 when Blago decides to run for president. Don’t think it couldn’t happen….
- Kiyoshi Martinez - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 4:11 pm:
Odd, I got this same press release in my e-mail. I’m wondering how I got on their e-mail list. Is the Green Party compiling lists of Illinois bloggers?
- Anonymous - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 4:53 pm:
If the Greens succeeded in getting on the ballot this year and voters cast a pox on both parties, then the Greens might have automatic ballot access in 2010, when our AG hopes to run, hurting her chances of winning an open election. Rest assured MJM will fight very hard to stop the Greens and the liberal media certainly won’t challenge him.
Obviously, the biggest concern about broader ballot access is the spoiler effect.
However, if better access became law, it might quickly be followed by instant run-off elections (ie. rank the candidates) to prevent spoilers, making the regular election a lot more interesting and saving taxpayers a lot of money by eliminating the need for restrictive primaries with consistently abysmal turnout.
- Anonymous - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 4:58 pm:
If ballot access is really, really easy wouldn’t the spoiler effect impact both parties about equally?
- SangoDem - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 5:32 pm:
Both major party candidates have low approval ratings among members of their own party. This is the year for a third party candidate. I wonder if Meeks realizes what a great year this would have been for him to run. I can’t imagine there will be another time soon when both parties have candidates with such high negatives.
My question is this, if Whitney gets on the ballot, and Topinka and Blago continue to be unpopular, how long with the media continue to ignore Rich Whitney, as they always ignore third party candidates? What will their excuse be? If the Greens get fair press coverage, they’ll get their 5% and more.
- Lovie's Leather - Friday, Jun 16, 06 @ 6:42 pm:
3rd party candidates getting any press coverage??? They would either be Nazis or Communists….
- GreenieGirl - Saturday, Jun 17, 06 @ 8:52 am:
The Greens have been sending out press releases throughout this whole campaign. The media has continued to ignore us, though. Just look at the coverage Meeks got and compare. The Greens were always more serious than he was, but once he dropped out, the media was saying “So much for a third choice!” Um… hello, over here! Besides, Meeks was never a third choice - he’s still a Democrat.
As a young person, whose first voting experience was in 2000, I think we’ll attract a lot of people who otherwise would not vote. A lot of people my age are very disgruntled with the way politics works. If they see a chance for change, as I do, in the Greens, they’ll vote this time around. The biggest challenge, after the ballot access, will be getting them registered.
If you want to help get involved, or just find out where to sign the petition, sign up for updates at ilgp.org or whitneyforgov.org.
- Jeff Trigg - Saturday, Jun 17, 06 @ 12:44 pm:
From the Sun-Times editorial today, of all places.
“Seventy-four percent say they are ‘’dissatisfied'’ with the way things in the country are going, the highest in 13 years, and 72 percent say they’d like a wider choice than just the GOP and Democrats in 2008.”
Well, it’s time the media gave their customers what they want.
- NW burbs - Saturday, Jun 17, 06 @ 6:42 pm:
It’s kinda funny to see the conservatives try to comment on Greens, Lieberman and other issues of the left.
You kids stick to your sandbox — we’re playing in our own just fine over here on the left.
Greens are Greens. More often than not the Greens I know vote for Dems only because there isn’t a Green on the ballot. But from the folks I’ve met and talked to it’s typically an issue of Greens crossing over to the Dems rather than the reverse.
And Lieberman has proven time and again that he is looking for Joementum and little else. The people promoting his consideration of an independent run are either earning a paycheck thanks to him, are personal/lifelong friends, or are incumbent Senators working the Incumbent Protection Plan.
Joe’s going to do what Joe wants to do, not necessarily what his constituents (let alone his base) want him to do — and he has for a while now.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Sunday, Jun 18, 06 @ 11:41 pm:
Jeff -
If the Ban Gay Marriage/Burn Witches at the Stake folks can collect 345,000 signatures, I don’t understand why the Libertarians or any other Third Party is having such a tough time.
If you had just one volunteer in every County outside of Cook, one in every suburban Cook township, and one in every ward in Chicago, and they each collected just 20 signatures a week, you would have 50,000 signatures. What’s so hard about that?
- SangoDem - Monday, Jun 19, 06 @ 1:57 pm:
What a great qoute Jeff Trigg. This is one more example of how the corporate media directs and controls the political process, rather than just reporting on it. Funny how the people who get the most coverage are the candidates with enough money to buy lots of advertisements.
- Jim Senyszyn - Tuesday, Jun 20, 06 @ 3:09 pm:
In 2004 Nader protested the short time window for gathering signatures and the outrageous number of signatures required after getting thrown off the ballot. The lawsuit we filed was rejected for being too late— the judges said the lawsuit should have been filed earlier. I would recommend that if you think you are going to eventually file a complaint about the time window for gathering signatures and the number of signatures required it behooves you to file now rather than later.
- Jeff Trigg - Tuesday, Jun 20, 06 @ 6:32 pm:
YDD - Referendums can petition for a year or even longer as I read the statutes. Candidates have 90 days. Indepedents have 90 days from Sept. to December when it’s cold. If it’s soooo easy, as you suggest, why has no independent candidate for State Senate, Rep. or US House met the requirements in the last 25 years at least? If it’s sooo easy, as you suggest, why can’t the Democrats and Republicans follow the exact same requirements? If it’s sooo easy, why does Illinois have the most severe requirements IN THE WHOLE FRICKIN DEMOCRATIC WORLD? Why have only less than handful of US House candidates in the entire history of America been able to get on the ballot when they faced requirements of more than 10,000 signatures? Illinois’ average for US House is 14,080 in 90 days for “others”. Rs and Ds average for US House is 782.
YDD, why do you endorse political discrimination? Why are you afraid of political competition? If you don’t like choices on the ballot, I’d suggest Cuba and North Korea would fit you well.
What makes it soo hard is because any “other” political group has to go through the same exact thing every two years for every office. To run for county executive positions, they have to run someone for every position, not just one. Same for county board districts. They can’t petition to run in every state rep. district, they have to do it individually. It would take almost 4 million signatures in 90 days to run for all the partisan races in Illinois, and that would have to be repeated every two years. You keep doing that every two years and you’ll experience a lot of burnt out volunteers. Give me a break YDD.
Next door in Missouri and Wisconsin they can turn in 10,000 signatures to run for every partisan office in their state, so why does the same thing take 4 million in Illinois? 25,000 for statewide isn’t all that difficult but that doesn’t mean it is at all necessary and doesn’t include all the other races. But you have to look at the bigger picture that makes it almost impossible to build from the ground up because they can’t even run for lower partisan offices. They can’t even have precinct committeepersons and they can’t get lists of registered voters.
Change your 20 signatures a week analogy to 6,400 signatures per week per person and you are starting to get on the right track. And let me ask you this, which is a better sign of support for an “other” candidate, petition signatures or votes? Almost everyone would say votes is absolutely a better measure of support than a petition signature. So why can’t they become an established party if their candidate for a statewide office gets more than 25,000 votes? Why do they have to get 5% for Governor, instead of 25,000 votes? Why not 50,000 votes like New York? Why not 1 or 2% of the vote like in Illinois before 1940? Why not any statewide race instead of just Governor? You know the Greens could win every statewide race except Governor, could win every Illinois US House race, could win the Presidential vote and US Senate vote in Illinois, but if they didn’t get 5% for Governor they still wouldn’t recognized as a political party in Illinois? If it’s sooooo easy for others, why can Reps and Dems put candidates on the ballot WITHOUT GETTING A SINGLE PETITION SIGNATURE? Let’s see the Democrats get 4 million signatures in 90 days. How about it? It’s soooooo easy to do afterall.
- Jeff Trigg - Tuesday, Jun 20, 06 @ 6:35 pm:
Jim Senyszyn - there is already a case pending in the 7th Circuit challenging the deadline and the signature requirements.
http://randomactofkindness.com/comments.php?id=1196_0_1_0_C
- Criminal Enterprise Called Illinois - Wednesday, Jun 21, 06 @ 3:27 am:
Go Green! Yea! Rich Whitney is a great guy. Honest, thoughtful, full of integrity….oh ya, I forgot, this is Illinois. Why on earth would anyone vote right? Stranger things have happened, so I hope he wins! A reason to believe again….Off to the site to download petitions. Green is Good.
- Greensschafer - Wednesday, Jun 28, 06 @ 12:09 am:
As to how the ” Ban Gay Marriage/Burn Witches at the Stake” folks can collect 345,000 signatures, how about that they can have an announcement from the pulpit or a table in the entrance, so that everyone in the church signs on the way out on Sunday. A month of Sundays, a few hundred churches, a handful of volunteers, and they’re done. I saw it happen firsthand in a neighboring state and have every reason to presume it was happening here.
To get our Green Party signatures, I gave up my personal life for 3 months, standing in front of ballparks, walking through parks, standing in front of theaters, etc. I would get 20 - 40 signatures/hour, working hard (and having sort of a gift at this, I guess). Most volunteers did likewise, but 10 - 15 signatures/hour was the norm. It takes time to ask, most folks are suspicious of anyone who has to go out in public and ask for signatures, not understanding the process and requirements in the first place. Many won’t sign anything, ever. The whole process has to be explained. Those 39,000 signatures took some 200 volunteers nearly 4,000 hours, plus transportation time, etc! That’s not to mention the coordination and compilation.
In short - 345,000 marriage admendment signatures, a piece of cake.
40,000 Green Party signatures, a Herculean task.
- Patriotic Jones - Thursday, Jun 29, 06 @ 10:52 am:
You know what’s so pathetic? I have not heard Rich Whitney or Randall Stufflebeam once “Whine.”
But I certainly have heard the Republicans and Democrats whine, bawl, yell, scream, throw tantrums at what they elected out of the primaries.
All I’ve seen is Whitney and Stufflebeam working their asses off to get signatures to compete against those you all are whining about. Oh yeah… and all that whining about how one or the other will tip the scales so that the lesser of two evils might have a stronger chance to win or is that the greater of two evils? Who cares? They are both evil and all of you wish they weren’t the ones running and yet, you did nothing to champion someone will to run against them.
So why not stop with the hypocrisy??? You bunch of whiners!
I’ll send a basket of cheese to go with all the whine that will be showing up here in November.
- UISgreenboy - Friday, Jun 30, 06 @ 2:20 pm:
Go Green! I hope that this is a sign of great things to come. In time, people in this state will realize the the two-party system is corrupt and needs to stop. Just study politics for five minutes and you’ll realize that both sides are equally as bad. Let someone else have a turn.