Libertarian Bruce Majors challenges Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton

11-term incumbent Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D), Washington D.C.’s non-voting representative in the U.S. House of Representatives has a sole challenger, and that is Libertarian Bruce Majors. While he is running for the seat, he admits he doesn’t have a platform, because he doesn’t believe he can win.

So why is he running, if he doesn’t expect to win? Two words: ballot access.

Majors says if he can get more than 7,000 votes, he believes he will have enough votes to gain permanent ballot status for the Libertarian Party, which would then be recognized along with the Democratic, Republican and Statehood Green Parties.

”The purpose of my running is to give people a choice,” Majors says, citing the recent political scandals that have plagued the District. ”D.C. in general needs a new party.”

Read the rest at Metro Weekly: Gay Libertarian Challenges Holmes Norton

Bruce Majors, a long time DC resident, is running as the Libertarian Party candidate for Delegate to Congress.

34 thoughts on “Libertarian Bruce Majors challenges Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton

  1. JD

    Does a candidate for a delegate seat really need a program or platform to run on? They dont vote and cant initiate legislation. I think the whole delegate system is rather wasteful personally.

  2. Al Abrams

    From the article you link to:

    “No Republican is running for the seat, and Majors doesn’t see D.C. Statehood Green Party nominee Natale Lino Stracuzzi as a threat to Norton”

  3. NewFederalist

    This should be interesting! African-American woman vs gay white man. The Green MUST have some distinguishing credentials as well (perhaps Cosa Nostra connection?). Oh goody , goody, goody! Only in America!

  4. Reed E

    Good luck. This would be a good step for the Libertarian Party and would save the Party a lot of Ballot Access trouble in the future.

  5. Alan Noyes

    NF

    I have many Italian-American friends, and a few Italian from Italy friends – Sicilian, even – and yet as far as I know none of them are even remotely connected with Cosa Nostra. Is there something you know here or just guessing?

  6. Nick Kruse

    JD: Does a candidate for a delegate seat really need a program or platform to run on? They dont vote and cant initiate legislation. I think the whole delegate system is rather wasteful personally.

    Me: You are right that they don’t vote, but they can initiate legislation. They also can vote in committee meetings.

  7. zapper

    He will need a platform of some kind and a campaign in order to gain 7,000 votes in DC.

  8. Jill Pyeatt

    Bruce Majors is quite active on Facebook, and is quite personable (and funny) in person. I hope he manages to get into a debate or two.

  9. paulie

    First step is ballot access for this election.

    In Maryland now. I’m not in the part of it that is right near DC but if someone gets me the petition I will get any district voters I may run into to sign it. If we can get a big enough stack of different paying petitions for people to sign we might venture into the District.

  10. paulie

    @BAN

    http://www.ballot-access.org/2012/06/29/libertarian-party-will-attempt-to-gain-status-as-a-party-in-district-of-columbia/

    Libertarian Party Will Attempt to Gain Status as a “Party” in District of Columbia

    The Libertarian Party has never been a ballot-qualified party in the District of Columbia. The law defines “party” as a group that polled at least 7,500 votes for a partisan office. Elections for “Shadow U.S. Senator” and “Shadow U.S. Representative” don’t count. This year, Libertarian Bruce Majors will attempt to gather 3,000 signatures to appear on the November ballot as the Libertarian nominee for Delegate to the U.S. House, which does count.

    So far, there is no Republican running for that position, although there is a Green, Natale Stracuzzi. No Republican ran for that office in this year’s Republican primary.

    Only once before has the Libertarian Party placed someone on the November ballot for Delegate. That was in 2000, when Rob Kampia received 4,594 votes, in a four-party race that included both major parties and a Socialist Workers Party nominee.

  11. wolfefan

    DC is a jurisdiction where an organized and thoughtful Libertarian effort could make some inroads. Since DC residents were denied the vote for so long, a network of local offices that were within their control grew up. Neighborhood councils and boards that in other cities are kind of like PTAs or something have genuine authority in DC, and are often a springboard to City Council. There is also an opportunity in that DC voters are prohibited by law from having a Council made up of members from all one party – there must be independents or members of another party on the Council. While Democrats often circumvent this by declaring themselves independent, this rule has allowed Republicans and Independents to get seats that they otherwise might not.

  12. Nick Kruse

    @18: “There is also an opportunity in that DC voters are prohibited by law from having a Council made up of members from all one party – there must be independents or members of another party on the Council.”

    If that is true, I am very surprised it hasn’t been ruled unconstitutional. A law should not be able to tell voters how many candidates of one party can be elected. Voters should be able to decide for themselves if they want a one-party system or not. A law like that is unconstitutional.

  13. paulie

    Money for the petition was approved on the LNC exec comm call tonight and two petitioners have reportedly agreed to the below market rates being offered.

  14. Paulie

    There are two petitions – Bruce’s and the presidential ticket – and it’s a $3 package deal with 2.00 on one and 1.00 on the other. Not sure which is which.

    I’m assuming that is OK for me to say here since the minutes of the call will be published, but if that part is considered more confidential I apologize.

  15. wolfefan

    Hi Nick @19 – it’s not unconstitutional because per the Constitution DC residents are ruled (literally) by Congress. Congress can override any DC law it doesn’t like, set up and remove various governing bodies at it’s whim, and pretty much do whatever they want. DC residents were not allowed to vote in presidential elections until 1960, and even now are taxed without representation in Congress and prohibited from taxing income at it’s source as all other large cities do.

  16. Nick Kruse

    @23, I don’t understand what you mean. Just because Congress controls the District of Columbia, doesn’t mean it is constitutional for there to be a law saying voters cannot decide for themselves if they want one party rule.

  17. Bruce Majors

    I am on the ballot. Here’s my 100 words for the DC Voter’s Guide

    Delegate Norton and her party damage DC with corruption and runaway spending.  They send kids to jail for selling pot or to endless foreign wars.  They built an expensive convention center and give high salaries to government administrators, but we get bad schools and old power lines that leave people without power for days.  She brought you problems; she can’t fix them.  She turns a blind eye to the crimes of their friends.  A vote for me creates a new party for more freedom of choice for all DC residents.

    Bruce Majors
    Libertarian for Congress
    majors.bruce@gmail.com
    202 704 6401

  18. wolfefan

    Hi Nick @23 –

    I just saw this – sorry for the long delay in replying. Congress, per the Constitution, has exclusive jurisdiction over the District of Columbia. Congress established the rules allowing DC to have any local government at all, and can change those rules at any time for any reason. Congress could totally eliminate DC’s local government tomorrow if it wanted to and appoint whomever it wanted to run the District. Residents of DC have no constitutional right to elect anyone at all, and if Congress wants to say they must elect members from eight different parties or all one party then that’s what they must do. I think Bruce can confirm this – BTW Bruce, nice statement! Good luck in the coming election! FWIW, here’s Wikipedia on DC Home Rule – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_home_rule

  19. Nick Kruse

    I read the article from Wikipedia and it said nothing about the city council having to have members from more than one party on it. I understand that congress has complete authority over the city, but I also understand that the constitution has complete authority over congress. I would be unconstitutional for congress to demand that more than one party was on the city council.

  20. Jill Pyeatt

    LOL, Nick…we all KNOW that no one in Congress ever does anything unconstitutional–

  21. Nick Kruse

    I just looked through the more information about D.C. and I did find that 2 members of the council can’t be Democrats. I still don’t understand how that hasn’t been ruled unconstitutional…

  22. just American

    It’s not unconsitutional because Congress, per the Constitution, has exclusive jurisdiction over the District of Columbia. Congress established the rules allowing DC to have any local government at all, and can change those rules at any time for any reason. Congress could totally eliminate DC’s local government tomorrow if it wanted to and appoint whomever it wanted to run the District. Residents of DC have no constitutional right to elect anyone at all, and if Congress wants to say they must elect members from eight different parties or all one party then that’s what they must do.

  23. Be Rational

    Hi Bruce, Congrats on getting on the ballot.

    On your statement, if it’s not too late, I would not include the name of your opponent in your own statement.

    “Our city has been damaged by the corruption and runaway spending of one-party rule… “

  24. wolfefan

    Hi Nick –

    I don’t disagree with you – just saying the way it is. As a practical matter, people who have been democrats all their lives suddenly declare themselves independetns in order to be elected, so it doesn’t really help third parties as much as it could. David Catania was elected as a Republican, but he moved to independent as the GOP became more conservative. Carol Schwartz was the last Republican to really have a shot on her own. The Statehood Party had a council member for many years (I think it was the Statehood PArty, and I think it was Hilda Mason) but they never really built a viable party around her and when she got too old to be a vaible candidate there was no one ready to step up as a replacement.

Leave a Reply

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