The Constitution Party has been suing to get on the Pennsylvania ballot. An update from Ballot Access News:
On September 12, at 6:30 p.m., U.S. District Court Judge Yvette Kane denied injunctive relief to the Constitution Party of Pennsylvania. She said that it is possible the legislature had delegated authority to the State Elections Department to write a regulation setting a filing deadline. She also said that even if the Elections Department did not have authority from the legislature to do that, that setting aside the August 1 deadline would restore the old unconstitutional May deadline, and that would injure the other petitioning groups this year. The case is Baldwin v Cortes, 1:08cv-1626.This lawsuit will have been beneficial, despite this disappointing outcome. Since the case only denied injunctive relief, not declaratory relief, it is still alive. It is very likely that regardless of what happens next in the lawsuit, the legislature will now understand how important it is to pass a bill setting a constitutional deadline. As noted in earlier posts on this matter, the old deadline was invalidated by two federal courts in 1984, and the legislature has ignored those 1984 decisions and has never replaced the old May deadline.
For the legally challenged among us (myself included), here are a few definitions that might help you to understand what the judge’s decision means.
- Injunctive relief:Â A situation in which a court grants an order, called an injunction, telling a party to refrain from doing something–or in the case of a mandatory injunction, to carry out a particular action. Usually injunctive relief is granted only after a hearing at which both sides have an opportunity to present testimony and legal arguments
- Declaratory Relief:Â A court decision in a civil case that tells the parties what their rights and responsibilities are, without awarding damages or ordering them to do anything
Not necessarily. There are a number of different PR systems.
I prefer voting for the candidate rather than the party, and there are systems like that – that allow independents to win as well.
But wouldn’t you be voting for a party in that system, rather than a representative?
Ross,
Proportional representation is the form elections take in the parliamentary democracies of Europe. Parties are represented in the various parliaments according to their proportional share of the vote and blocs or alliances between them are negotiated to bring a governing majority. Lets say that that system were to come about here, for example. An election might give the Greens 5% of the vote and the Democrats 42%, the Republicans 48%, the Libertarians 3% and the Constitution Party 2%. An attempt to form a coalition of Republican, Libertarian and Constitution Party parliamentarians would most likely occur with cabinet portfolio distributed according to prearranged agreement. The government would last as long as the parties to the coalition could agree, other wise it would fail and new elections would be called. Minority interests have much more clout in such an arrangement. It is measurably superior in that respect to what we have in place here where third parties are relegated to obscurity. I’ve had enough of the present dictatorship and see the prospect of war and economic collapse as an opportunity to institute such an arrangement. The present Constitution has been evicerated and is now beyond recovery. Root and branch systemic change is our only hope and that, thankfully, would involve a new constitution.
darolew,
Well, by the time the McCain/ Palin Administration, together with its shadow component, a fully co-operative Democratic Party in full control of the Congress, has imersed us as fully in Afghanistan as we are now in Iraq, has us teetering on the edge of hostilities with Iran, and has stuck its finger enough in the eye of Russia to have that nuclear power basing bombers in Venezuela and retargetting its missile at Warsaw and Prague, we will have tasted a good bit more of the financial disaster that is about to engulf us. Great Depression level conditions, and perhaps worse, are not out of the questions inside of the next four years. That fact and the complicity of the so-called “opposition” Democrats will make ripe a movement or party, perhaps built around Paul’s four principles, that might be well enough positioned to urge the trashing of the present constitution and its replacement with something more amenable. Should that fail owing to the strength of the existing regime, further economic deterioration and an increased likelihood of war might bring about a collapse of the system, showtrials and sentencing for its operatives, and the imposition of a new constitution out of necessity. I can see something akin to the 1917 abdication of the Tsar in prospect, actually, and not without the enormous street demonstrations either. Something along those lines could easily take place inside of ten years. Can we hope?
What exactly is proportional representation?
And are you sure it’s 33,000 people per Rep? Because as I’ve been looking at Congressional districts this year it seems like it’s about 600,000 people per district. Unless it’s just changed with the times.
“It’d take quite the constitutional overhaul to implement it here though”
No, it wouldn’t.
The Constitution says nothing about Congressional districts or how we elect the House of Representatives.
It only mentions the number of citizens per Congressman. (33,000 people per Rep, I believe).
Nothing stopping PR, save political will. You can keep the same system we currently have, just elect the reps differently.
You don’t need to switch to a parliamentary system to implement PR. It’s compatible what the system we have now.
Pennsylvania has terrible ballot access laws. John Murphy is lucky to have made it onto the ballot – now that I’ve seen all of these cases of people getting kicked off, I’m really impressed that he’s done it two elections in a row.
I didn’t think that the Constitution Party was going to win this case. Too bad.
Proportional representation has worked out fairly well for minor parties in Europe. It’d take quite the constitutional overhaul to implement it here though, and I’m unsure how that would turn out…
This is what happens when you live in a dictatorship. I’m all for chucking our present electoral arrangements and going with proportional representation. I’m sick and tired of having no voice in the political life of this country.