Deadlines to Put New Parties on the Ballot for 2018 Have Already Passed in Five States

Ballot Access News:

Already, deadlines for certain procedures to get new parties on the ballot for 2018 have passed in five states. With two exceptions, no new party qualified in these states.

In California, the deadline for a new party to obtain approximately 60,000 registrants, and thus be on the 2018 ballot, passed on January 2. No group came close to qualifying. This deadline had been struck down in 2015, but the decision was interpreted only to apply to presidential election years.

In Arkansas, the petition deadline for new parties was also January 2. No group submitted a petition. The only three ballot-qualified parties are Republican, Democratic, and Libertarian.

In Maine, the deadline for a group to show that it had 5,000 registered members was also January 2. No group tried. The four ballot-qualified parties are Democratic, Republican, Green, and Libertarian.

In Utah, the deadline for a group to submit a petition for party status was November 30, 2017. The Green Party met this deadline, and earlier in 2017 the United Utah Party did as well. The other qualified parties are Republican, Democratic, Libertarian, Independent American, and Constitution.

In Vermont, the deadline for one method to get a new party on the ballot, that it have town committees in ten towns, was January 1. The only group that met that requirement was the Green Mountain Party. Parties that were already on the ballot were Democratic, Republican, Progressive, Working Families, Libertarian, and Liberty Union. Groups that didn’t make the January 1 deadline can still appear on the ballot in 2018 if their nominees submit petitions by August 7, 2018.

5 thoughts on “Deadlines to Put New Parties on the Ballot for 2018 Have Already Passed in Five States

  1. D Frank Robinson

    Deadlines for market entry have passed? Why does any voter have to ask permission from other other voters (petition) to select a candidate?
    Free the ballot from content censorship. Let all voters write-in their choices without censorship by the two self-entrenched and state-sponsored parties. Just print a content neutral ballot like the Federal Write-in Absentee Ballot. No petitioning and deadlines, no filing fees, no vote quotas for parties, no compulsory candidacies for parties to sponsor candidates.
    Yes, a ballot can still be anonymous if the voter chooses, but the voter has a First Amendment right to publish their ballot before and after it is cast (selfie) just as they did before 1888.

  2. D Frank Robinson

    Gee, would you like to chisel you vote on a stone tablet, George? We do have technology to sort the names and months after an election before a person takes office to adjudicate typos and misspellings.
    C’mon, George. Who handles the FWAB? Why is the FWAB practical for citizens overseas, not not domestically?

  3. George Phillies

    You do not have the technology to read the names. You do not have voters, all of whom can write English words. If you have a handwritten vote for John Smith, you don not know which John Smith it is. Even America does not have enough attorneys to handle the resultant litigation. Your ideas are simply implausible.

  4. D Frank Robinson

    Gosh damn! How did our ancestors ever manage to conduct elections before 1888 with all the insuperable obstacles? Must have been mind readers back then.

    Seriously, consider that the incumbent politicians still have the final say on who can take office and if a person should be expelled or impeached. Let the voters vote and then let the incumbent politicians answer to those voters for who they reject as “unfit to serve.” Election ballot access laws are prior content censorship.

    Looking forward to the next scoffer.

Leave a Reply

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