Posted on 12/25/2011 4:41:06 PM PST by smoothsailing
December 25th, 2011
There are currently many news stories and blog discussions about the Virginia presidential primary ballot access law. Some large blogs, such as Red State, have over 300 comments about the story. Some defend the current Virginia ballot access laws on the grounds that in past presidential elections, a fairly large number of Republican presidential primary candidates managed to qualify.
But what has not been reported is that in the only other presidential primaries in which Virginia required 10,000 signatures (2000, 2004, and 2008) the signatures were not checked. Any candidate who submitted at least 10,000 raw signatures was put on the ballot. In 2000, five Republicans qualified: George Bush, John McCain, Alan Keyes, Gary Bauer, and Steve Forbes. In 2004 there was no Republican primary in Virginia. In 2008, seven Republicans qualified: John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, and Alan Keyes.
The only reason the Virginia Republican Party checked the signatures for validity for the current primary is that in October 2011, an independent candidate for the legislature, Michael Osborne, sued the Virginia Republican Party because it did not check petitions for its own members, when they submitted primary petitions. Osborne had no trouble getting the needed 125 valid signatures for his own independent candidacy, but he charged that his Republican opponent’s primary petition had never been checked, and that if it had been, that opponent would not have qualified. The lawsuit, Osborne v Boyles, cl 11-520-00, was filed in Bristol County Circuit Court. It was filed too late to be heard before the election, but is still pending. The effect of the lawsuit was to persuade the Republican Party to start checking petitions. If the Republican Party had not changed that policy, Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry would be on the 2012 ballot.
The Democratic Party of Virginia has been opposed to the strict law on primary ballot access, and has been in the habit of collecting signatures for all Democratic presidential candidates recognized by the party. In 2008, the state party collected 7,300 signatures for all its candidates, thus easing the burden on them and requiring them to collect only 4,000 to 5,000 on their own.
Any Virginia freepers know about this Michael Osborne court case?
I don't know if this is true. If it is, Gingrich and Perry have a legitimate case for having their names placed on the ballot.
FYI. I don’t know if this is newsworthy or not, but if true it may be helpful to the Gingrich and Perry campaigns.
If this report is true, then every single argument from the “rules are rules” crowd is totally blown out of the water. Every single one of them.
And yes- if this report is true - then Newt and Perry would certainly have a case and maybe the others as well.
But what has not been reported is that in the only other presidential primaries in which Virginia required 10,000 signatures (2000, 2004, and 2008) the signatures were not checked.
>> But what has not been reported is that in the only other presidential primaries in which Virginia required 10,000 signatures (2000, 2004, and 2008) the signatures were not checked.>>
And in 04 there wasn’t even a primary I might add. So basically this “long tradition” that “many many candidates have had no trouble meeting” is really only in its third primary cycle and the first one when anyone bothered to check the signatures.
Where are the rules are rules folks tonight? Not looking so smart.
The other question is: What purpose does the Virginia ballot access process serve (the answer is obvious)? Other states only require registration and the payment of fee.
He's already had sit downs with Romney.
Guess he's doing a flip flop from Conservatism to baby killing and give aways to the illegal aliens, plus a little more Fascism in the vending of medicine.
Ken Cuccinelli probably ought to check out the Governor's real relationship to this situation ~ maybe get him booted out of office so the Lt. Governor can move up ~
Here’s an article on this fellow Osborne and his lawsuit...
I’m no lawyer, but it looks like an equal protection issue.
>> Virginia’s Governor is currently a Republican. He can DO SOMETHING ~ but he’s not lifting a finger. >>
You may be right about your suspicions on this, but it is Christmas weekend so I’ll hold a wait and see on this.
We’ll see if McDonnell stays on the sidelines over the next week. Yes I know about his ties to Romney - but the test will be what he does or does not do or does or does not say about this during this week.
Cuccinelli is who I’d be speed dialing if I were Gingrich or Perry.
I agree it could be an equal protection issue - something some lawyers on FR have also stated. I think it’s a terrible PR issue for the Va GOP whether or not it is legitimately an equal protection issue. The application of the law is obviously open to criticism of being arbitrary and capricious.
If this report is true, then every single argument from the “rules are rules” crowd is totally blown out of the water. Every single one of them. And yes- if this report is true - then Newt and Perry would certainly have a case and maybe the others as well.Come on now... You know that matters not a wit...
>> What matters is the narrative that this provides the media and the establishment. This will provide multiple news cycles worth of fodder to beat Newt over the head with. >>
In their minds, yes, but this will make it backfire. They thought they had a legitimate organizing issue or competency issue here, and it turns out all they had was BS vapor. It will likely backfire. They’ll go away just like ALL the rules are the rules trolls from this forum yesterday have.
Hear it? Crickets...........
It looks like the VA GOP got spooked by the Osborne lawsuit and decided to show an appearance of good faith prior to trial by applying a new standard to Republican candidates at all levels of government, be it state or federal.
We'll have to see O'Donnell get up and publicly denounce Romney to believe otherwise.
bob mcdonnell ~ please to excuse. The guy misspells the name ~ just shows you how horribly illiterate some of the highlanders were in the good old days.
In the numbers game... Virginia doesn’t really matter, unless it comes down to the wire at the end.
Where it matters is in the perceptions game - especially in how it can be used to sow doubt in someone’s campaign.
I wondered today if the ignorant masses would know the difference between not being on the ballot in VA for the primary and not being on the ballot in VA for the general. What do you suppose will go through the minds of the great unwashed if they get the notion that Newt has already forfeited one state if he goes up against Obama?
Newsworthy all right, if it’s true.
Here’s a confirming report on it:
Delegate hopeful Michael Osborne files lawsuit
Oct 25, 2011
Excerpt:
BRISTOL, Va. – Claiming the state’s election laws treat independent candidates like himself unfairly, Michael Osborne filed a lawsuit on Monday challenging how Virginia reviews its candidate petitions and asking a judge to remove his opponent’s name from the ballot in next month’s election.
“The way [state election officials] deal with the signatures on those petitions is discriminatory to independent candidates,” said Osborne, an independent candidate who is running for the Virginia House of Delegates 5th District seat in the Nov. 8 election.
In the lawsuit, which Osborne filed in the Bristol Virginia Circuit Court, the independent candidate asks a judge to issue an injunction removing Republican Israel O’Quinn’s name from the ballot because the review process Boyles conducted of his qualifying petitions was inadequate.
Osborne’s lawsuit also asks a judge to bar the defendants, 5th District Chairman Brandon Boyles and Donald Palmer, secretary of the Virginia Board of Elections, from certifying any candidates until they have developed “a standardized qualification process that can be checked to ensure fair and equal application of the law.”
According to the state’s election laws, candidates seeking a seat in the state house of delegates must collect signatures from at least 125 registered voters who live in the district they hope to represent to get their names on the ballot in an upcoming election.
But the rules independent candidates must follow when reviewing their petitions differ greatly from those party-affiliated candidates like Osborne’s opponent, Republican Israel O’Quinn, must follow in order to get their names on the ballot. It’s this difference that lies at the heart of Osborne’s suit.
According to the law, independent candidates must submit their petitions to the local registrar’s office so that a person can review them and make sure each signature came from someone who lives inside the district and is registered to vote.
Any signature that fails to meet either one of these qualifications is disqualified, as are any signatures that have been collected by someone who lives outside the district or isn’t registered to vote. The names of candidates who fail to meet the 125-signature-requirement after this review are not placed on the ballot.
However, people seeking the Republican or Democratic Party’s nomination for a particular office must simply turn their petitions over to their local party officials who are then responsible for reviewing each signature and making sure it follows the rules.
Any candidate who submits a set of petitions to the local party chairman, in this case 5th District GOP Chairman Brandon Boyles, deems legitimate is added to the ballot in a primary election. The winner of this primary is then declared the party’s nominee and is added to the ballot in the general election.
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.