Posted on 12/28/2011 7:17:08 AM PST by Kaslin
When I managed Pat Buchanan's presidential campaign in 1996, I learned that some states conducted fair and honest caucuses and primaries and that some did not.
Iowa, historically the first caucus state, and New Hampshire, historically the first primary state, conducted their political business fairly. New York did not.
Today Virginia's political system is beginning to resemble New York's in 1996.
To get on the Republican primary ballot in New York that year, a candidate needed to submit signatures from 1,250 registered Republican voters in each of the state's 31 congressional districts or signatures from 5 percent of registered Republicans in a district if that number were less than 1,250.
But that was not all. Only a registered Republican living in the district or a notary public could collect signatures; they could gather signatures only between Thanksgiving and Jan. 4; and signatures could be challenged by opposing campaigns.
As The New York Times reported then, petitions could be disqualified for technicalities -- for example, if they were bound "with paper clips instead of staples."
Early in 1995, virtually the entire New York Republican establishment -- including then-Gov. George Pataki and then-Sen. Alfonse D'Amato -- endorsed then-Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole of Kansas for the Republican presidential nomination. They made clear that they wanted to lock other candidates out of New York's primary and award Dole New York's delegates without giving the grass roots of their own party any say in the matter.
"New York State's party chairman, William Powers, vows to have the party's full complement of 33,000 committee people out circulating petitions for Mr. Dole, which will make it hard for other candidates to find Republican field workers," The New York Times reported March 30, 1995. "Candidates who try to provide voters with a choice by circulating nominating petitions will also be tortured by ballot-wise lawyers ready to raise every nit in New York's nitpicking election law to get their petitions declared invalid."
This confronted Dole's rivals with a strategic dilemma.
On the one hand, attempting to get on New York's ballot would carry enormous costs. A candidate could either pay massive sums to hire people to circulate petitions or build a massive grass-roots army of in-state volunteers. The first means would take money that a non-establishment candidate could not readily spare from earlier contests. The second would drain operatives and institutional focus from those contests.
On the other hand, a candidate who failed to qualify for New York's ballot not only would lose any chance at winning some of New York's delegates but also might sustain a momentum-draining public relations hit -- just a few weeks before the all-important initial contests in Iowa and New Hampshire. The press and opponents could say: "He is not a serious candidate. He did not even get on the ballot in New York."
Some major candidates -- including then-Sen. Phil Gramm and former Tennessee Gov. Lamar Alexander -- decided not to compete in New York.
Buchanan and Steve Forbes did.
The Buchanan Brigades built a grass-roots army of 800 volunteers backed up by field organizers the campaign diverted from early primary and caucus states, notably Iowa.
When the Jan. 4 deadline came, Buchanan submitted sufficient signatures to qualify in 17 congressional districts. Forbes qualified in all 31.
Then the Dole campaign started challenging Buchanan's and Forbes' petitions.
A federal appeals court ruling eventually allowed Forbes to remain on the ballot in 31 districts and gave Buchanan access in 23.
The night of that 1996 primary, according to the New York Daily News, Sen. D'Amato said, "To those Republicans who felt the process could have been a fairer one, you were absolutely right."
"In hindsight," D'Amato said, "I probably should have asked the Legislature to consider opening up the primary system and consider making it easier for a legitimate candidate to get on the ballot."
Nowadays it is easier to qualify for New York's presidential primary.
But in Virginia, according to a law the Virginia State Board of Elections says was enacted in 1998, a candidate must submit at least 10,000 signatures from registered voters who intend to vote in the primary. Among these there must be at least 400 from each of Virginia's 11 congressional districts. The signatures must be gathered after July 1, submitted by Dec. 22 and certified by the state chairman of the party in question.
Facing these criteria, only four Republican presidential candidates -- former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Rep. Ron Paul, Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich -- submitted signatures in Virginia.
On Saturday, Virginia Republican Party Chairman Pat Mullins announced that only Romney and Paul had met the requirements.
I spoke with Mullins about the process Tuesday. He said that in certifying the candidates, he consulted with his general counsel and set up a process to faithfully follow the election law as it is written. Representatives from each of the four campaigns who had submitted signatures were present when volunteers reviewed their submissions. The media were welcome to witness the process.
But, Mullins said, "I was not happy at all in signing that certification with only two names on it."
He would like to see the Virginia law changed so that it strikes a balance between keeping frivolous candidates off the ballot and allowing all serious candidates access.
I would loosen it further: Let anybody on the primary ballot who meets the constitutional qualifications for president. Let voters decide whom they want their party to nominate.
Virginia's current system is designed to take power away from voters and give it to party bosses and establishment candidates who can raise massive amounts of money early in a campaign. It is wrong.
That may be in other states and in other circumstances... but the fact remains that in, at least, the 1996, 2000, 2004, and 2008 elections... that was not done. Nor is it a requirement by VAGOP regulations for primaries on national-level offices. (it is for local and state offices, however)
They applied that standard to Romney and Paul... but then applied the state/local standard to all the rest of the candidates. Of which, only Newt and Perry met the VAGOP criteria as it is written and as it was applied in prior precedence.
And that's the crux of the matter. Two simple things:
1. they did not apply the same standards to all candidates
2. the standard used for everyone except Romney and Paul was not the standard written into VAGOP regulations
The only option is to apply the standards *AS IT EXISTS IN REGULATION* and *AS THAT STANDARD WAS APPLIED IN PRIOR PRECEDENCE*.
---
The rules on the books is that any candidate who submits 10,000 or more names of registered Virginia voters, with 400(?) coming from each district... will get on the ballot.
Perry and Newt both submitted more than 10,000.
That the VAGOP supposedly checked the names is not a requirement. It is for local and state elections, but not for national elections. Furthermore, the VAGOP did not apply that standard to all candidates, selectively choosing to not do so for Romney and Paul.
That is an unequal application of law and is contrary to equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
As precedence has already been set in past elections (ie: the non-checking of submitted names... in all previous Presidential primaries), then that is the standard they must uphold for all, not for some (Romney and Paul).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It’s pretty cut and dry here. The VAGOP disregarded it’s own rules and precedents, following them for Romney and Paul... but ignoring them for the rest.
10,000 what? Registered Virginia voters? We have no evidence that they submitted petitions signed by 10,000 Registered Virginia voters. If you have such evidence, please produce it. If you can't, your rantings are for naught.
Good thing they didn’t axe me, ‘coz I’d tell ‘em that the Almighty State has no business organizing and carrying out and funding internal elections by private political parties. Let’s start out by reforming this absurdity.
But supposing Romney turned in 17,286 and Paul turned in 18,884 and the general disqualified signature rate was, say, 6%, then not sampling the signatures may have been statistically justified.
Further, if Perry turned in 10,380 and Gingrich turned in 10,651, then it would most certainly be prudent to examine their petitions since they are within the statistical disqualification rate range.
I really can't say from the information given. Thus, if the Virginia GOP can show that standard statistical sampling techniques were used and no political bias was involved, then there is ample justification for tossing the suit out.
However, another report is saying the Virginia GOP is requiring voters to sign a loyalty pledge to support the eventual GOP nominee. If so, that would certainly weaken their case since there is no precedent for doing it before.
The state statute requires 10,000 signatures with at least 400 from each of the congressional districts. For federal office there is nothing in the statute requiring verification, only for state and local (2 different statute sections.) At some point the RPV said there would be no verification if a 15,000/600 number was reached anything below would require verification, nothing said about sampling. My understanding is the RPV made this announcement very late in the game.
I live in an area totally ignored by TPTB - heck one of the GOP primary candidates for Governor in ‘09 didn’t even include this part of the Commonwealth on the map he used for his letterhead. I know no one that was approached by any candidate or the party itself to sign a petition by any candidate.
I gave up on the RPV quite a while ago and knew they were and would push for Romney, but did at least expect the other candidates on the ballot just like in ‘08, even though they were pushing for mcCain.
Here, I'll repost it for you. I know you'll probably not be able to read it, as you missed it already, but for those who can make use of it...
The rules on the books is that any candidate who submits 10,000 or more names of registered Virginia voters, with 400(?) coming from each district... will get on the ballot.
---
Selective editing to omit already posted, pertinent facts is exactly what we've come to expect from the MSM. How could a conservative stoop so low?
It's sad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.