California has bill which proposes to make it illegal to pay people to collect voter registrations on a per registration basis

Ballot Access News:

On March 15, at 1:30 pm, in room 3191, the California Senate Elections Committee will hear SB 205. This bill makes it illegal for anyone to pay anyone else to register voters, if the payment is made on a per-registration card basis. The bill is authored by Senator Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana), chairman of the Elections Committee.

The only feasible way for a group to become a qualified party in California is to persuade 103,004 voters to change their voter registration, so that the record lists them as members of that new party (the 103,004 figure is 1% of the number of voters who voted in November 2010). No party has used this method for getting on the ballot in the last 50 years without paying canvassers to get out on the street and persuade voters to change their registration. Experience shows that it is necessary to pay these canvassers on a per-registration basis. SB 205 provides that if the payment is made “willfully”, the person who pays must not only be fined, but sent to prison for six months.

The Senate Elections Committee will also hear SB 168 by Senator Ellen Corbett (D-San Leandro) to make it illegal to pay anyone “directly or indirectly” to gather signatures on an initiative, referendum, or recall petition on a per-signature basis.

17 thoughts on “California has bill which proposes to make it illegal to pay people to collect voter registrations on a per registration basis

  1. paulie Post author

    Of course, he might be singing a different tune if the courts ever return control of the AIP ballot line to the anti-war Constitutionalists.

  2. Mark Seidenberg

    paulie

    You stated my “remarks on a past story make it sound like his (sic) for this travesty”. Please explain what you mean by this remark?

    Under SB 6 there will be two types of affivitate
    of registration effective on January 1, 2011 in
    the open registration. One class is those “declared their intent to affilate with a
    political party” and those give “a preference
    for a political party”. The first is deemed to
    apply to second, but the second is not deemed
    to apply to the first. Therefore, with open
    registration under SB 6, a class of electors do
    not count as “has declared their intention to
    affiliate with” a political party, but have stated
    a political party preference.

    Therefore the second group can not be counted
    for the purpose of getting the 1/15th of one percent mark. This is another way to keep new
    third parties of the ballot and reduce the current
    third parties. How many electors will understand which type of registration form they
    are using.

    The Peace & Freedom and Libertarian Parties
    are in real trouble and it will be in 2012. I see
    trouble far earlier than 2016 as Richard Winger does. Even though
    Peace & Freedom is far lower in registration number that
    Libertarian, The LP is more in trouble, because
    they are not included in Division 7 of the California election code for ballot access., The
    Green Party has the registration above 103,004
    but weight and see what will happpen if electors
    in all of the 3rd parties when to get involved
    in voting in either the Republican or Democratic
    Primary and re-register back in the format that
    just gives a party preference and not a declaration their intent on affiliate with the
    third party after the primary.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    American Independent Party.

    Please note that with the February 10, 2011 count, AIP made major party status in two California counties.

  3. paulie Post author

    What’s there to explain? I can see the same tome in the very same comment above, #4. You seem to be looking forward to other parties getting knocked off the ballot.

    As for 2012, I’ll go with Richard Winger’s interpretations that existing parties are grandfathered in.

  4. Mark Seidenberg

    paulie

    Please understand the Libertarian Party structure is not set up in Division 7 of the election code, so they can get removed far
    easier from ballot access than the four
    quilifed parties in Division 7. That would also
    apply to the Green Party.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg,
    Vice Chairman, American Independent Party.

  5. Mark Seidenberg

    paulie I have never seen a comment by Richard Winger
    that states any of the 6 qualifed parties are grandfather in to 2016 as related to the 1/15
    of one percent rule. Please let me know where
    Richard Winger posted.

    Please note I was active in open political process
    access before you were born, I went to the United State Supreme Court three time on open
    access. I worked with William Shearer on open
    access issue years before I ever joined the
    Ameican Independent Party.

    I am not happy about SB 6 and Prop. 14, but unlike Richard Winger I am not going after wind
    mills.

    I believe that the 1/15th of one percent issue could kill a political party and it could happen
    prior to 2016.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman,
    America Independent Party

  6. paulie Post author

    paulie I have never seen a comment by Richard Winger
    that states any of the 6 qualifed parties are grandfather in to 2016 as related to the 1/15
    of one percent rule. Please let me know where
    Richard Winger posted.

    2012, not 2016.

    I know he told me this by phone and/or email conversation.

    There may have also been posts and/or comments on BAN. If so, I have no idea where, and I am not going to look it up.

    You could ask Mr. Winger to comment here, or he might do it himself.

    I am not happy about SB 6 and Prop. 14, but unlike Richard Winger I am not going after wind
    mills.

    No windmills involved. And the question is whether you are happy about/support this proposed bill that we are commenting on now.

    I am pro Peace / anti war and see no conflict in the California American Independent Party.

    The main disagreement between Keyes and Baldwin, and between CP and A’sIP, is on the issue of interventionist foreign policy.

  7. Mark Seidenberg

    paulie

    Wow! So you believe the issues within the AIP
    is related to interventionist foreign policy. You
    are so wrong.

    I though when you were talking about War and
    Peace, you had an issue with Prince
    Petr Ivanovich Bagration and the way Tolstoy
    discribed him.

    It is more simple than that. The issue was does
    the State Central Committee of the American
    Independent Party or the Executive Committee
    of the National Constitution Party control ballot
    access in California. State Central Committee
    won and the Executive Committee of the National Constitution Party lost.

    Remember both Ed Noonan and Jim King were
    for Alan Keyes at the April 2008 Constitution
    Party Convention in Kansas City. 80% of the
    California delegation back Alan Keyes at that
    convention. At the first delegation counting
    two votes short of 20 % went for Chuck Baldwin.
    The remaining two votes were split between
    Jerome Corsi and Don Grundmann.

    Don Grundmann had no other support at that
    convention other than himself. He demanded
    that he was the favorate son of California and
    every delegate had to vote for him. I was the
    elected head of the delegation and told him
    that was not going to happen. Thereby, I
    started almost three years of vile name calling
    by Dr. Don Grundmann for telling him “no way”.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg
    Vice Chairman, American Independent Party

  8. paulie Post author

    Mr. Seidenberg,

    1. What is the position of Alan Keyes on foreign policy, intervention, and military spending?

    2. What is the position of America’s Independent Party on foreign policy, intervention, and military spending?

    3. What is your position on foreign policy, intervention, and military spending?

    4. You’ve said before that you find the platform of the America’s Independent Party to be better than that of the Constitution Party. What, specifically, do you believe is better about it?

  9. Mark Seidenberg

    Paulie

    It is late and I am tired, however I will answer question number 4 now.

    I believe that the American Indians have the right to operate casinos under there own right of sovereignty, not controlled by the gaming laws of the several states. The platform of the Constitution
    Party wants to take way Indian tribal sovereignty.
    I believe they should keep it. If the socialist Obama
    health plan goes into place, cutting edge medical help will move to the Indian Reservations and gaiming profits may help pay for these new and modern hospitals.

    Since I have duel citizenship. I would like the United States Goverment keep its promisses
    under XI Articles of Confederation. CP wants
    to do away with that XI Article of Confederation.

    Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg,
    Vice Chairman, American Independent Partyt

  10. Barretta P diddy

    someone using my name barretta, cody asshat I presume. Thats fine, you were busted Cody psychopath. On to you now. You sick ugle slob. Paulie busted you. Ha the truth is out you freak.

  11. paulie Post author

    Baretta,

    Thanks, I didn’t catch it this time.

    Fixed now.

    Cody, stop doing that, or I’ll have to start erasing your comments and adding your IPs to the blacklist.

    You can use your real name or you can use a screen name, but if you use a screen name, pick one that nobody here is already using, and don’t make it the real name of someone who could reasonably be expected to post here.

    That’s a pretty simple rule, and I think you can manage that.

  12. Mark Can't Spell

    Mark @ 4: “but weight and see what will happpen if electors”

    It’s “wait” not “weight.”

    This is not a typo (which is a mechanical error) but a misspelling (i.e., an error stemming from ignorance).

    Most so-called “typos” are actually grammatical or spelling errors. But people plead “typo” because that sounds less stupid.

    And “happpen” should only contain two p’s. I’ll give you a “typo” on that one.

  13. Barretta P diddy

    Shut up fraud Cody Quirk. get a real job you immature loser! Man up you wuss! Did you make that appointment with a therapist yet? You truly need help. You might see a plastic surgeon too, your mug is U G L Y!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *