Greens working for better election laws

Members of the Green Party work daily recruiting candidates, educating voters, lobbying their local and state governments, serving on local boards and city councils, and lately, challenging obstructive and unequal election and campaigning laws in court. Below is a round-up of some the latest legal moves and victories won by state Green Parties across the country. Read on for news from Arkansas, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Florida, and Connecticut about how Greens are working for better election laws.

Arkansas
The Green Party of Arkansas, with the assistance of the American Civil Liberties Union, filed a complaint in U.S. District Court against the Secretary of State of Arkansas. Even though the party elected a member to the state legislature and won more than 20% in several federal races, the state has moved to decertify the party for lack of support. The lawsuit states that the “state’s decertification statute violates rights guaranteed to [the Green Party of Arkansas] by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution”.

Mark Swaney, Coordinator of the Green Party of Arkansas, emphasized the importance of ballot access for the Green Party in Democrat-dominated Arkansas, noting that “we are quite literally fighting for freedom and democracy against a conservative Democratic party machine that can, and usually does, see to it that the people of Arkansas have no say whatsoever on election day”.

New Mexico
In May of this year, the New Mexico Green party filed suit against the state, which had ceased recognizing the Green Party as a qualified political party. The GPNM’s lawsuit claims, among other points, that “The State has no justifiable interest in limiting voter choices to the candidates of the major [Republican and Democratic] parties,” that the state has “no constitutional authority to limit the time available for minor party candidates to obtain petition signatures for the office of U.S. Representative,” and that state law “Unconstitutionally discriminates in favor of major parties and against minor parties in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution”.

Pennsylvania
The Green Party of Pennsylvania joined with the Constitution and Libertarian Parties of Pennsylvania to file a lawsuit challenging several aspects of election law. According to Ballot Access News, the lawsuit challenges “Pennsylvania’s unique system of charging candidates and parties for the costs of checking their petitions…It also challenges the careless way in which some counties count write-ins and others don’t, and the arbitrary manner in which the state tallies write-ins for some candidates and not others, and finally it challenges the requirement that a party have approximately 1,000,000 registered voters before it can be on the November ballot without having to petition for its nominees.”

This lawsuit is a result of Carl Romanelli’s disqualification from the race for U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania’s 2006 election. After turning in many thousands of signatures to win access to the ballot, his petition was rejected and he was charged $85,000 by the state for attempting to qualify to run for public office. Carl Romanelli has continued to try to convince the court to drop this fee, last filing a new petition with the court in August of this year.

The hearing for the Green Party’s follow-up lawsuit is scheduled for later this month.
Florida
The Florida Green Party is uncovering a case of potential abuse of the political system through a lawsuit to uncover the backgrounds of the “Florida Five”. In 2008, five registered members of the Florida Green Party filed to run for state legislature, despite being unknown to the Green Party. Suspecting that these mystery candidates were acting in coordination with the Republican Party, Florida Greens filed lawsuits to probe the campaign finance records of the mystery candidates, in order to trace the source of their filing fees.

Earlier this month, the court began calling the five mystery candidates to depositions to begin piecing together the background behind their campaigns. With the court’s help, the Florida Green Party continues to probe the events of the 2008 elections and seek the truth about the candidates that appeared on the Green Party ballot line.

Connecticut
The Connecticut Green Party recently won a significant decision against Connecticut’s public campaign finance system, which the court ruled was unfairly awarding public finances to major party candidates while burdening the Green Party and other parties with inordinate obstacles to public funds.

A U.S. District Court judge ruled that Connecticut’s public financing scheme had created a “discriminatory burden” for minor parties and had unfairly inflated the public campaign funds that major parties were awarded. “We’re very pleased”, said Mike DeRosa, co-chair of the Connecticut Green Party, that “the court ruled that real campaign finance reform requires a level playing field.”

0 thoughts on “Greens working for better election laws

  1. Robert Milnes

    Greens would really rather go through all this riggermerrole & gobbledygook than simply ask the LP to coordinate their votes & win? I know the libertarians are self righteous assholes but even still, just ASK! Jeeze!

  2. Dave Schwab Post author

    Robert – you would be better off joining efforts to pass instant runoff voting. If Libertarians and Greens are really so close, then IRV would give them a chance to support each other over Ds and Rs.

  3. Robert Milnes

    Dave Schwab, perhaps. But once again that tactic puts third party/independent activists in the begging position. When is this IRV supposed to happen? EVER? Beg the reactionaries to change the voting type. Beg the reactionaries to allow medical marijuanna. Beg the reactionaries to end the war. I’m sick of it. Have been for decades. No, the Progressive Libertarian Alliance Strategy allows third party/independents to take control of the situation. To determine their own destiny as the saying goes. To think outside the box. To act outside the box. To do something EFFECTIVE & highly efficient. Instead of begging the reactionaries, vote them the fuck OUT. ACTIVISTS-DO SOMETHING! The November elections are coming quick. You all know you all are going to lose-by a LOT. Why not try something different? You’ve got nothing to lose but to lose again!

  4. B

    Robert,

    Maybe winning elections is less important to us Greens than promoting our values. If I were elected Vice-President (or President) with a Libertarian Vice-President (or President) then in a strong position to push a pro-business, corporate, anti-regulation agenda I would be very sad. Although I have some Libertarian buddies that I work with on ballot access issues and a few other things where we agree, I don’t like the Libertarian agenda and I don’t want Libertarian candidates to win elections. So, I don’t support a strategy that would help them get into office. My Green values are more important than getting into office if I have to drag the personal liberty agenda in with me. Building a national political power will take longer than this or next November. I’m not willing to take shortcuts like lifting up an opposing party whose fundamental values I disagree with.

    -B

  5. Robert Milnes

    B, thank you for your reply as a Green activist. Well then IMO you are screwed. & I can assure you libs have similar antipathy towards you socialist pinkos. & face it, socialism just doesn’t work. Longterm you are going to continue to lose with 27% of the vote possible. Maybe if things get really bad a socialist or green could get elected, Chile circa 1972. But that would be close with the counterrevolutionary party(CP). & then you are looking at a possible coup d’etat. OR if enough of you get together you could try to take over the government. Good luck with that. Make sure your life insurance is paid. So there are your possibilities that I can see. Have fun.

  6. B

    Robert,

    I find your analysis dubious. I fear it is based on little empirical evidence and theories which are not well-regarded.

    Good luck to you.

  7. Mik Robertson

    Governments *are* corporations. It is silly to love one and hate the other carte blanche. Private corporations tend to have to think of the bottom line, not necessarily the people who might be affected by their actions. Governments are simply corporations that are supposed to have the concerns and securing the rights of the people as their primary objective, but tends to be corrupted by special interests.

    Sometimes they both deviate from their tendencies.

  8. Dave Schwab Post author

    Mik, that’s partially true, but corporations tend to be especially harmful because they openly serve the interests of the few without regard to the welfare of the rest. Governments tend to be less abusive in proportion to how democratic they are. I know that might sound untenable considering some of the US government’s recent actions, but compare it to modern European states, which I consider much more democratic than the current US government.

Leave a Reply

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