From Richard Winger at Ballot Access News:
On February 26, the Attorney General of South Dakota wrote a letter to attorneys for the Libertarian and Constitution Parties. Those two parties are currently suing South Dakota over the March 29 deadline to submit a petition for party status. The letter says the parties, or any parties, don’t need a petition if they just want to be on the general election ballot for President and for statewide state executive positions other than Governor (i.e., Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, Public Utilities Commissioner, etc.)
Until this letter arrived, virtually everyone had believed that a group could not become a qualified party in South Dakota unless it submitted a petition of 2.5% of the last gubernatorial vote, which, this year, is 6,936 signatures.
In South Dakota, parties nominate by convention for some offices, and with primaries for other office. The letter says that parties can be on the general election ballot, with no petition, for all the offices in which state law says parties use conventions. That includes presidential elector, of course. The 6,936 signatures are only needed if the new party wants to nominate for Governor, U.S. Senate, U.S. House, or state legislature.
I’ll post an update in a bit, just didn’t have time before.
http://ballot-access.org/2016/02/29/south-dakota-now-says-parties-that-want-to-be-on-for-president-need-6936-signatures-due-july-11/
BAD NEWS. The South Dakota Attorney General on February 29 said a petition is still needed, although at least it isn’t due until July 11. The reason for the confusion was that the previous week the Attorney General said a party only needs a “declaration.” I thought “declaration” meant a simple letter, but the A.G. used the word “declaration” but really meant petition.
IPR should probably re-word the title of this blog post.
Rich,
Thanks, thought there were 2. And sorry for that autocorrect
The subject of the referendum is SB 69, which moved the petitioning period for primary petitions, and moved the deadline for a new party petition 4 weeks earlier. Those are separate issues.
Rich,
There appears to be a referendum on in ’16 to change that.
Can you research that closer?
And Please send an accurate list of requirements for Independent Candidate for President and New party for President to that research firm that was trying to get a Conservative on that you posted about? You have no idea how important that may be…
The one flaw in South Dakota’s new position is that parties that don’t submit the 7,000 signatures can’t have a primary, and only a primary enables a party to nominate for Governor, Congress, and state legislature. But parties with no petition can be on for president, and the 8 statewide constitutional state offices, because all parties nominate for those by convention.
But party status can last forever, even without polling 2.5% for Governor, because when a party goes off the ballot for failing to get 2.5% for Governor, it can get back on the next day with a letter. Anyway Governor isn’t up until 2018. Probably the 2017 legislative session will rewrite all these laws anyway. Right now they are not rational. If a party has enough voter support to be a qualified party, it makes no sense that it can’t run for certain offices.
I think there is a vote test to retain ballot access in South Dakota that applies to the office of Governor, so it makes sense to run somebody for that office.
This is huge. To clarify, any party can place a presidential ticket on the ballot just by registering with the state and holding a convention. All minor parties fielding presidential tickets need to take advantage of this.