Press "Enter" to skip to content

Arkansas Green Party Petition Found To Be Valid

The Arkansas Green Party petition was validated by Arkansas’ Secretary of State today. Richard Winger reports that this is the third time in a row that their petition has succeeded.

The Arkansas Secretary of State has checked the Green Party’s ballot access petition and found it sufficient.  The party needed 10,000 valid signatures and submitted 14,207.  The Secretary of State says there are 11,505 valid signatures, for a validity rate of 81.0%.

This is the third election year in a row that the Green Party has successfully completed this petition.  The only other party that ever completed it was the Reform Party, in 1996.

Arkansas did not require any petition for a party to appear on the ballot until 1971.  Parties merely had to hold a nominating convention and certify the names of the nominees to the Secretary of State, before 1971.

The Arkansas Green Party is currently in court, not against the 10,000 signature petition, but against the state law that says a party should lose its qualified status after a presidential election if it doesn’t poll as much as 3% of the vote for President.

The Arkansas Green Party is considered to be one of the strongest state affiliates of the national Green Party, having elected a member to the legislature in recent years and made strong showings in two way races.

8 Comments

  1. George Phillies July 4, 2010

    Sorry, that was supposed to attach elsewhere.

  2. George Phillies July 4, 2010

    OK, Here is a more complete list of numbers, from which you can choose your own start and end dates.

    I believe these are all members, not members+donors

    2008 with no following decimal is the start of the year

    1972,12
    1984,6600
    1985,5160
    1986,5500
    1987,5575
    1988,6218
    1989,8125
    1990,8895
    1991,9191
    1992,11337
    1993,9565
    1994,10664
    1995,13473
    1996,21662
    1997,22915
    1998,30065
    1998.5,32000
    1999,33000
    1999.3,33000
    2000,32922
    2000.75,32193
    2000.82,32830
    2000.92,33261
    2001,32982
    2001.08,33252
    2001.17,33028
    2001.25,32118
    2001.33,31850
    2001.4,31490
    2001.5,30692
    2001.58,30334
    2001.67,30132
    2001.75,29720
    2001.83,28574
    2001.92,27754
    2002,27770
    2002.08,27370
    2002.17,26626
    2002.25,26162
    2002.33,25997
    2002.42,25811
    2003.83,19968
    2003.92,19708
    2004, 19410
    20084.08,19084
    2004.17,18826
    2004.25,19276
    2004.33,19107
    2004.42,19306
    2004.5,19834
    2004.58,19982
    2004.67,19747
    2004.75,19830
    2004.83,19913
    2004.92,19929
    2005,20283
    2005.08,20299
    2005.17,20247
    2005.25,20537
    2005.33,20392
    2005.42,20131
    2005.58,18936
    2005.66, 18936
    2005.75,18538
    2005.83,18082
    2005.92, 17830
    2006, 15896
    2006.08,14795
    2006.17,14097
    2006.25,13664
    2006.33,13620
    2006.41,13168
    2006.5,12541
    2006.58,12047
    2006.66, 11504
    2006.75,11145
    2006.83,11350
    2006.92, 11196
    2007, 11014
    2007.08, 11344
    2007.17,11921
    2007.25, 12144
    2007.33,12333
    2007.41,12692
    2007.5,13133
    2007.58,13359
    2007.66, 13551
    2007.75,13492
    2007.83,13149
    2007.92, 13309
    2008, 14181
    2008.08,14171
    2008.17,13908
    2008.25,13809
    2008.33,13579
    2008.41,13820
    2008.5,14121
    2008.58,14581
    2008.66, 14970
    2008.75,15378
    2008.83,16099
    2008.92, 16079
    2009, 15358
    2009.08,15178
    2009.17,15004
    2009.25,14892
    2009.33,15059
    2009.42,15068
    2009.5,14566
    2009.58,14303
    2009.67,14094
    2009.75,13787
    2009.83,13618
    2009.92,13963

  3. After taking a couple days off, Wayne Slater of the Dallas Morning News is back covering the Green Party.

    This one’s a funny story. Cute really for us veterans of Green Party politics.

    A “environmental organization” (that never supports Green Party candidates, and really is just another of many fronts for one of the two larger parties) has complaints about the Texas Green Party.

    Per Slater this group is unhappy with how the Green Party –amazingly – collected almost 100,000 signatures to get on the Texas ballot..

    What hoot..

    here’s the tall tail about the Green Party – caution – it’s all spin from one of the larger parties…

    You are, of course, shocked…just shocked…

    http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/07/environmental-group-blasts-gre.html

  4. The Arkansas Green Party continues – year after year – to do outstanding work.

    Arkansas Green Party succeeds – in part – and has such impressive results I suggest because they are a big tent.

    Their last U.S. Senate candidate, a gifted attorney, Rebecca Kennedy received about 20 per cent of the votes.

    Meanwhile in New York WICZ TV is also covering Green Party candidates tonight.

    http://www.wicz.com/news2005/viewarticle.asp?a=14825

  5. Michael Cavlan RN July 1, 2010

    Good for them.

  6. Nate July 1, 2010

    Good for them. This strengthens their case that the 3% for governor/president should not be the deciding factor for determining whether a party has a modicum of support.

Comments are closed.