Patterico's Pontifications

2/8/2022

California’s ‘Common Sense Party’ Hopes To Qualify As An Official Political Party

Filed under: General — Dana @ 10:22 pm



[guest post by Dana]

From the Orange County Register:

It makes sense, then, that an aspiring new political party – launched by independent former lawmakers, with an aim to appeal to voters and candidates across the political spectrum who are interested in finding middle ground to get things done – would call itself the Common Sense Party.

A coalition of moderate politicians and like-minded activists have been discussing this idea for more than five years. Now, within the next two weeks, they expect to hear from the Secretary of State whether enough Californians have come on board with their mission to qualify them as an official political party, so they can get Common Sense Party candidates on the ballot in the June 7 primary election.

The party’s tagline is “fiscally responsible and socially inclusive.” A set of principles CSP leaders have developed touts support for lower taxes and local governance, for example, while also backing environmental stewardship and acceptance for all sexual orientations.

The nub of the problem in California politics:

The consensus among CSP leaders is that Republicans have become increasingly extreme and irrelevant in California, while Democrats haven’t been making great policy decisions since they no longer need to listen to diverse viewpoints now that they have a supermajority in the legislature.

Breaking up that partisan divide with a competitive third party is a concept most Californians and Americans of all stripes, in survey after survey, say they support.

Does the Common Sense Party stand a chance in their uphill battle given that 46% of California voters are Democrats and 24% are Republicans? The state is so politically lopsided, there is no real need to negotiate or compromise or find the middle ground on an issue. Clearly, those on the right side of the aisle aren’t being represented. Yet surely there are moderate Democrats who are also concerned about how far to the left the state has swung. As a result, residents on both sides of the aisle are being directly impacted by the decisions being made in Sacramento, and at the local level. (See: homeless crisis, violent crime, taxes, etc.)

–Dana

54 Responses to “California’s ‘Common Sense Party’ Hopes To Qualify As An Official Political Party”

  1. I would love to see a serious, moderate political party in California take root.

    Dana (5395f9)

  2. Does the Common Sense Party stand a chance in their uphill battle given that 46% of California voters are Democrats and 24% are Republicans?

    I don’t have high hopes. Here are the numbers that the state reported one year ago:
    Democrats – 46.2%
    Republicans – 24.1%
    No Party Preference – 23.7%
    Other – 6.0%

    I would be interested to know what percentage of No Party Preference voters would join this party. I am officially NPP, though I only vote for a Democrat when there is no other choice. I’m sure there are people registered NPP who vote for Democrats consistently and exclusively, but do not register for that party. So for a new third party to be viable they would have to grab about half of the NPP voters and one-third each of the Democrats and Republicans. That would put them about 35% and would in fact make them the state’s biggest party.

    But how to do that? Can a party pledged to fiscal responsibility get one-third of Democrats to cross over? Can a party which would almost certainly be in favor of pretty much unrestricted abortion and likely fully in favor of allowing teenagers to self-determine their own gender and start taking steps to alter their physical characteristic in that regard hope to win over one-third of Republicans? And just what do NPP voters want anyway, does anyone really know?

    I wish them luck, but I wouldn’t place a bet on their success unless you gave me pretty long odds.

    JVW (ee64e4)

  3. It is fairly easy to get a party accepted. Getting candidates on the ballot is a bit harder. IF you can get party registration of even 1%, it would be a larger party than the LP or Greens.

    There are two ways to get a party “qualified” for ballot access in CA. The voter registration method, and the petition method. The petition method method requires 30 times as many signatures, but the registration method requires, well, registrations which can be harder to come by. But not 30 times harder.

    The final date for 2022 for either method was in January. They could easily qualify as a party for the 2024 primary. Given how the state runs elections, if you aren’t qualified for the (jungle) primary, you are not going to get on the general election ballot.

    Voter Registration Method – Elections Code Section 5100(b) or 5151(c)

    To qualify a new political party by voter registration requires that voters equal in number to at least 0.33 percent of the total number of voters registered on the 154th day before the primary election or the 123rd day before the presidential general election complete an affidavit of registration, disclosing a preference by writing in the name of the political body intending to qualify as a political party. (Elec. Code, §§ 5100(b), 5151(c).)

    These completed affidavits of registration must be submitted to the county elections officials 154 days prior to any primary election (if intending to qualify to participate in the next primary election) or 123 days before a presidential general election(if intending to qualify to participate in the next presidential general election). (Elec. Code, §§ 2187(c)(1), (c)(4).) The completed affidavits of registration should be submitted to the elections official in the counties of the voters’ residences. They may be submitted to the Secretary of State’s office, although this will result in delays to the counties’ receipt of the affidavits.

    154 days prior to the June 7, 2022, primary election is January 4, 2022.
    154 days prior to the March 5, 2024, primary election is October 3, 2023.
    123 days prior to the November 5, 2024, presidential general election is July 5, 2024.

    The Secretary of State must determine, from examining and totaling the reports of registration from the counties, that the political body obtained voter registrations equal in number to at least 0.33 percent of the total number of voters registered on the 154th day before the primary election or the 123rd day before the presidential general election. (Elec. Code, §§ 5100(b), 5151(c).)

    If a political body chooses to use the voter registration method, they can contact the Secretary of State Elections Division to obtain voter registration cards. Any request of 50 or more voter registration cards will require a representative from the political body to complete and submit a “Voter Registration Card Statement of Distribution” form to the Secretary of State.

    Petition Method – Elections Code Section 5100(c) or 5151(d)

    To qualify a new political party by petition, no later than 135 days prior to the primary election or the presidential general election, the Secretary of State must determine if a political body intending to qualify collected petition signatures of registered voters equal to 10 percent of the votes cast at the last gubernatorial election. (Elec. Code, §§ 5100(c), 5151(d).) The current signature requirement is 1,271,255 (10% of 12,712,542, the votes cast at the November 8, 2018, gubernatorial election).

    https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/political-parties/political-party-qualification

    Here is a list of parties attempting to qualify for June, 2022. (addresses omitted)

    American Moderate Party, Steven A. Mercer

    American Solidarity Party, Desmond Silveira

    California National Party, Michael Loebs

    Common Sense Party, Tom Campbell

    Constitution Party of California, Don J. Grundmann

    Peoples Party, Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap

    Rally West Party, Michael Ricotta Jr.

    Obviously any party attempting to qualify has to have submitted all forms by now. Tom Campbell is no stranger to CA politics.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  4. I assume that Campbell chose the registration method, which would require 0.33% of about 22 million (number of registered voters Aug 2021), or 72,600 voters registering with that party preference written in. The petition method would require 1,271,26 signatures.

    As of August 2021 (they had until Jan 4th, 2022), the Common Sense Party had about 19,000 registered voters. For comparison, NPP is 5,105,330 and the American Independent (Wallacite) Party had 700,000. The LP was next with about 215,000.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  5. From the fantastically useful Richard Winger (Ballot Access News):

    The Los Angeles Times has this article about the Common Sense Party. The article says the party submitted about 66,000 registration cards. The article also says the party only needs about 55,000 registered members in order to qualify. The conclusion is not necessarily true; there is an ambiguity in the law about whether independent voters are included in the calculation. The law says a new party needs registration of .33% of the state total, not counting “unknown” voters. The article says that means the independent voters are also not counted when the percentage is calculated, but “unknown” voters are a separate category.

    The story says the Secretary of State won’t reveal whether the Common Sense Party has qualified until February 22, even though state law says she should have made that determination by January 23. It may be the announcement is being delayed to give the Secretary of State more time to decide what the requirement is. Thanks to Michael Feinstein for the link.

    https://ballot-access.org/2022/02/04/los-angeles-times-news-story-on-common-sense-party/

    Kevin M (38e250)

  6. Apparently NPP registrations do not count towards the voter cards needed. so 55,000 or so should work. While petition numbers have large attrition, I don’t think that would be true of voter registration. There is no penalty for a bogus petition signature, but a fraudulent voter registration form is treated more harshly.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  7. https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/political-parties/political-party-qualification

    Just read this crap. And you wonder why citizen storm the castle?! And absolutely NONE of this is in the U.S. Constitution. Which major party hack quilled this bureaucratic monstrosity and rooted it down to the local level? And multiply the mess out across 50 states and assorted territories.

    The two major parties in America are the biggest threat to “democracy” around.

    … and Putin smiled.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  8. Roll another one.

    mg (8cbc69)

  9. Bay Area resident here.

    I don’t know that these are the people to provide it, but I would favor more competition in our races.

    But weirdly, nobody ever seems to think, say, the Mississippi monoparty need competition. If it even comes up, you just hear that competition happens in the primary. Wonder why that is.

    John (f762f7)

  10. Third party registration is a tool of the secret police to identify the harmless. As the British comrades proved in the 1960s, the smart way is to infiltrate your candidates into the establishment parties. Whatever they might accomplish working secretly from within, as little as it might be, it will still be more than as third party candidates consistently losing.

    nk (1d9030)

  11. Does anyone know where a specifically centrist party has prospered and led a nation? Sometmes, a centrist party can throw a government left or right, depending on the party they ally with, but I don’t know where any party has explicitly governed from the center.

    Please educate me or prove me wrong…

    Appalled (1a17de)

  12. So they’re Bloomberg’s “coffee party.”

    Expect the same results.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  13. Doesn’t California now have a jungle primary?

    Does a party men anything now other than fund raising and spending, labeling and networking? (and organizing in a legislative body)

    Sammy Finkelman (46ec7d)

  14. I don’t like the name “common sense”

    Sammy Finkelman (46ec7d)

  15. From the LA Times article:

    The start-up effort to break the two-party orthodoxy is being organized by a pair of former California lawmakers who spent much of their time in office as ideological misfits. Their goal is to appeal to voters who place value in collaboration, compromise and pragmatism.

    “We’re looking for character,” said Tom Campbell, a former state senator and member of Congress who serves as the party’s chairman. “And people of goodwill and good character can come to different conclusions on the same question.”

    Good luck with that. Voters like the extremes. Former State Sen. Quentin Kopp (93), a Party co-founder, was a big spending “independent” who pushed through BART in San Francisco and chaired the California High-Speed Rail Authority.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  16. 11. Appalled (1a17de) — 2/9/2022 @ 6:42 am

    Does anyone know where a specifically centrist party has prospered and led a nation? Sometmes, a centrist party can throw a government left or right, depending on the party they ally with, but I don’t know where any party has explicitly governed from the center.

    Please educate me or prove me wrong…

    Isn;t Macron in France a centrist?

    maybe not quiteL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_R%C3%A9publique_En_Marche!

    Various sources have described the party as being centrist,[73][74][75][76][77] centre-right,[78][79][80][81][82] centre-left,[83][84][85] or a big tent.[86][87] Macron has described it as being a progressive party of both the left and the right.[88] Observers and political commentators have described the party as being both socially[89][90] and economically liberal in ideology.[75][91][92][93] The party has also been described as using anti-establishment, populist strategies and rhetoric, with discourse comparable to the Third Way as adopted by the British Labour Party during its New Labour phase.[94] …..LREM accepts globalisation and wants to “modernise and moralise” French politics,[13] combining social[14] and economic liberalism.[15]

    But:

    Political position Centre

    Sammy Finkelman (46ec7d)

  17. > Doesn’t California now have a jungle primary?

    Yes. But it turns out that nobody who isn’t a Republican or Democrat ever makes it through the jungle primary.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  18. The two-party system is a natural consequence of first past the post voting (Duverger’s Law). Proportional representation would allow multiple parties to participate.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  19. > Doesn’t California now have a jungle primary?

    Yes. But it turns out that nobody who isn’t a Republican or Democrat ever makes it through the jungle primary.

    Fixed.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  20. It is fairly easy to get a party accepted. Getting candidates on the ballot is a bit harder.

    Still easier than splitting California into multiple states.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  21. Rip Murdock, nonsense.

    If you look at the statewide 2018 races in the general election:

    US Senate: 2 dems
    Governor: 1 dem, 1 rep
    Lt. Gov: 2 dems
    AG: 1 dem, 1 rep
    SOS: 1 dem, 1 rep
    Treasurer: 1 dem, 1 rep
    Controller: 1 dem, 1 rep
    Insurance Commissioner: 1 “former republican and former holder of this office”, 1 dem

    I guess Poizner (the former Republican Insurance Commissioner) proves my claim is wrong, but he was an aberration — but Republicans commonly get through to the general election for every statewide race *except* US Senate.

    Locally it varies from district to district.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  22. Sammy, see Kevin’s Comment 4:

    I assume that Campbell chose the registration method, which would require 0.33% of about 22 million (number of registered voters Aug 2021), or 72,600 voters registering with that party preference written in. The petition method would require 1,271,26 signatures.

    Illinois has a similar rule, and also that a petition must be filed in every county (102) in which the candidate wants to be on the ballot.

    nk (1d9030)

  23. The New York Times says there may be as few as 40 competitive House districts this year (defined as a margin between the winner and loser of less than 5%. I think the proper word for that kind of district is tossup. A victory of less than 55%is usually considered competitive, or at least worth a try. That would be a 10-point margin in a 2-way race – a 5 point margin means the victor got less than 52.5% in a two-way race.

    The Republicans this year have most gerrymandered in a way so as to increase the margin in both Republican and Democratic districts, sometimes leaving only one tossup in a big state. The Democrats have tried to capture some seats – they have also, although less attention is being paid to that, moved some leftist areas out of the districts of long term incumbents – more conservative areas ahave been swapped for places “progressives” might be expected to get votes in the district of Carolyn Maloney and probably also Jerrold Nadler. Park Slope was mostly in the Hispanic district, not Nadler’s – I don;t know the boundaries they used yet. They also turned the Staten Island + some of Brooklyn district from a Trump 10% plus district to a Biden 10% plus district.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/06/us/politics/redistricting-competition-midterms.html

    With two-thirds of the new boundaries set, mapmakers are on pace to draw fewer than 40 seats — out of 435 — that are considered competitive based on the 2020 presidential election results, according to a New York Times analysis of election data. Ten years ago that number was 73…In the 1992 election, the margin between Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush was within five points in 108 congressional districts…

    …No state has quashed competition ahead of the midterm elections like Texas. In the 2020 election, there were 12 competitive districts in the state. After redistricting, there is only one.

    Though Mr. Trump won 52 percent of the vote in Texas in 2020, Republicans are expected to win roughly 65 percent — 24 of the state’s 38 congressional seats. (Texas gained two seats in the reapportionment after the 2020 census.)

    The Texas state legislators who control redistricting shored up Republican incumbents including Representatives Dan Crenshaw, Beth Van Duyne and Michael McCaul, but in doing so also drew safer districts for Democrats such as Representatives Colin Allred and Lizzie Fletcher.

    …Democrats did the same where they could. Oregon legislators took the state’s competitive Fourth District and turned it into a seat that strongly favors their party.

    The change was so dramatic that Representative Peter DeFazio, an 18-term Democrat, told reporters last year that he chose to retire because the district is now “winnable by another Democrat.”

    The New York also says that a lack of competitive (or hard fought) local races also hurts the unfavored party in statewide races because there is no local energy and activity to piggyback on (although usually it’s the local race piggybacking on the statewide race especially in states where one party is favored, But then, Reagan did carry New York in 1984.)

    Sammy Finkelman (46ec7d)

  24. Members of this Coalition of teh Shilling deserve being beaten with the jawbone of an ass.

    Preferably their own.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  25. Kevin said in comment number 3:

    Given how the state runs elections, if you aren’t qualified for the (jungle) primary, you are not going to get on the general election.

    So maybe being a member of an officially recognized party makes it easier to qualify to be on the ballot for the jungle primary.

    But I don’t know how.

    The candidate needs fewer signatures? The candidate can be put on the ballot by party officials?

    Sammy Finkelman (46ec7d)

  26. @21-
    I have never liked the jungle primary, the political parties should have closed primaries to select their candidates. In 2018, the Republican candidate was far weaker than the Democratic candidate. There was absolutely no chance that John Cox was going to defeat Newsom, who finished 8 points behind Newsom in the primary. A stronger candidate would have emerged from a closed primary.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  27. There were two points to the jungle primary:

    * it allows the enormous number of decline to state voters a say in the candidate selection process
    * in districts which are overwhelmingly dominated by one party, it allows the centrists of that party and the members of the other party to unite around a more centrist candidate than the candidate who would have come out of the primary in the dominant party.

    in *districted legislative races* the second point appears to be working. in statewide races, it doesn’t.

    > A stronger candidate would have emerged from a closed primary.

    That’s really not clear. In many cases, a more extreme candidate who is further from the center of California politics would have emerged from the primary, and would then have been crushed.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  28. As an example — if the candidates in the recall had been selected by a closed primary, Elder would have won, and he would have been obliterated just like he was in real life.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  29. Sammy @25-

    A candidate must pay a filing fee equal to 2% of the first year’s salary as of the first day on which a candidate may circulate petitions in lieu of filing fees, made payable to the Secretary of State. Currently, the filing fee for Governor is $4,371.12, and the filing fee for Lieutenant Governor is $3,278.34. The filing fee must be paid to the county elections official at the time the candidate obtains their Declaration of Candidacy and nomination papers from the county elections official of the candidate’s county of residence.

    A candidate may choose to submit by February 9, 2022 (E-118), a minimum of 4,750 valid signatures on petitions in lieu of filing fees.

    Source

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  30. Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/9/2022 @ 9:36 am

    A stronger candidate would have emerged from a closed primary.

    A weaker candidate.

    This is certainly true now with s smaller, and a more pro-Trump, Republican Party.

    Sammy Finkelman (46ec7d)

  31. 29. Can any voter sign a petition for any candidate? Is there any advantage as far as ballot access is concerned for a candidate to be a member of a recognized political party?

    Today is February 9. What did the candidates for Governor do? It seems to me the filing fee would be both cheaper and more certain.

    Sammy Finkelman (46ec7d)

  32. California qualifications for running for office exclude poorer people (unless they are being fronted by someone else) and people whose income taxes are not in order.

    There;s a de facto wealth or property qualification for holding public office in California even beyond the practical ones.

    Sammy Finkelman (46ec7d)

  33. Here is a list of declared candidates for California governor. Today is the filing deadline.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  34. aphrael (4c4719) — 2/9/2022 @ 9:45 am

    in *districted legislative races* the second point appears to be working. in statewide races, it doesn’t.

    It probably depends on the party baalance, and also doesn’t have to wr=ork every time, but occasionally.

    Statewide there may also be more candidates.
    .

    Sammy Finkelman (46ec7d)

  35. 29. Can any voter sign a petition for any candidate? Is there any advantage as far as ballot access is concerned for a candidate to be a member of a recognized political party?….California qualifications for running for office exclude poorer people….

    Any California voter can sign a petition. As you see from the link in post 33, anyone can become a candidate, there is no advantage to being in a political party.

    I am sure that wealth is an advantage in any election in any state.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  36. > It probably depends on the party baalance, and also doesn’t have to wr=ork every time, but occasionally.

    Right. It’s not so much that it needs to work every time as it is that if it works *sometimes* then the situation in the legislature — which was horribly busted a decade ago — improves.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  37. Murdock, based on that list:

    * who do you think the jungle primary will select?
    * who do you think a closed republican primary would select?

    my bet is the jungle primary will select Faulconer but the closed primary would select Ose.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  38. my bet is the jungle primary will select Faulconer but the closed primary would select Ose.

    Newsom will lead in the jungle primary, followed by Cox (again, because he has been willing to spend large amounts of his own money). Faulconer is too moderate for the Trump-supporting California Republican Party. I am surprised Ose is running again since he suffered a heart attack and pulled out of the recall race. The problem with Ose is that no one knows who he is since he was a Congressman from Northern California (who lost a very close race).

    The problem with the current list of Republicans is there is no one with star power, just no-names or politicians who have already lost to Newsom. If Larry Elder had decided to run he would have either the jungle or closed primary. If it was a closed primary the list would be different-you might have had any one of a number of ex-Trump officials running.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  39. Former State Sen. Quentin Kopp (93), a Party co-founder, was a big spending “independent” who pushed through BART in San Francisco and chaired the California High-Speed Rail Authority.

    Well, if you’ve ever even thought bout driving in SF, you’d agree that BART was a good idea. Jerry’s train, otoh, not so much. But the alternative was to spend a lot of transit money on Los Angeles, and that was something those SF types would never do.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  40. The problem with the current list of Republicans is there is no one with star power

    It’s rather deeper than that. The state GOP has adopted the “I’m purer than thou” attitude that typifies third parties.

    I don’t think that Tom Campbell et al is the answer though, Tom was always on the outs when the CA GOP was winning elections. His party will be center-left in a state run by the far left, so that’s better, I guess. But not thrilling.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  41. Yes. But it turns out that nobody who isn’t a Republican or Democrat ever makes it through the jungle primary.

    This isn’t true. There have been independents getting into the general election. However, the jungle primary was sold as a way to moderate the extremes, and what it has done has been to exacerbate them.

    And then there’s the gerrymander, which is made all the more effective by removing third-party noise from the election.

    There’s a better way to do this.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  42. The candidate needs fewer signatures? The candidate can be put on the ballot by party officials?

    I can’t speak to the current requirements, but when I ran for the state assembly as a libertarian some time back, you needed a hundred or so signatures from your party in the district OR a smaller number plus a fee-in-lieu. I ended up paying a few hundred dollars to cure a signature shortfall.

    It wasn’t onerous. What was (and is still) onerous is trying to get on the ballot as an Independent. Being part of a “qualified” party helps immensely.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  43. Major party candidates need far more signatures. IIRC, it’s a percentage of those registered in your party in the district.

    Kevin M (38e250)

  44. As you see from the link in post 33, anyone can become a candidate, there is no advantage to being in a political party.

    Apparently a recent change in the law made it much easier to file as an independent candidate. $4K and 100 signatures will get you in for any office, many are cheaper. Getting past the jungle primary is far more difficult however.

    https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/upcoming-elections/primary-election-june-7-2022/2022-california-election-guide

    Kevin M (38e250)

  45. Major party candidates need far more signatures. IIRC, it’s a percentage of those registered in your party in the district.

    Not true, the rules are the same for all party designations. Candidates can identify with any party affiliation. The paragraphs below apply to Congressional races, and the same processes hold true for State legislative races.

    Every candidate must pay a filing fee equal to 1% of the first year’s salary as of the first day on which a candidate may circulate petitions in lieu of filing fees, made payable to the Secretary of State. Currently, the filing fee is $1,740.00. The filing fee must be paid to the county elections official at the time the candidate obtains their Declaration of Candidacy and nomination papers.

    A candidate may choose to submit, by February 9, 2022 (E-118), a minimum of 1,358 valid signatures on petitions in lieu of filing fee.
    ……..
    Each candidate who submits a ballot designation shall file a completed ballot designation worksheet that supports the use of that ballot designation by the candidate. The ballot designation worksheet shall be filed with the elections official at the same time that the candidate files their declaration of candidacy.
    ……..
    Gather between 40 and 60 signatures for filing the nomination papers.
    …….
    All signers must be registered voters in the district or political subdivision in which
    the candidate is to be voted on.

    Source

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  46. 42. 43. Kevin M (38e250) — 2/9/2022 @ 10:34 am & 10:35 am

    I can’t speak to the current requirement

    That;s been completely changed. There are no more political parties as far as ballot access is concerned (I think the party affiliation, if any, of candidates in the jungle primary are identified. So it might make sense to create a party in order to have a slogan next to a candidate’s name. Someone needs to think long and hard about the name. Maybe S school Choice and anti-dogma party.

    but when I ran for the state assembly as a libertarian some time back, you needed a hundred or so signatures from your party in the district OR a smaller number plus a fee-in-lieu. I ended up paying a few hundred dollars to cure a signature shortfall.

    Reading the link to current law, it sounds like the filing fee must be paid by the first day for collecting signatures, and it cannot be used to cure a signature problem. The fee is 2% if the annual salary of the office sought, or about one week’s worth of salary.

    https://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/statewide-elections/2022-primary/2022-governor-lt-governor.pdf

    A candidate must pay a filing fee equal to 2% of the first year’s salary as of the first day on which a candidate may circulate petitions in lieu of filing fees, made payable to the
    Secretary of State. Currently, the filing fee for Governor is $4,371.12, and the filing
    fee for Lieutenant Governor is $3,278.34.

    Kevin M continued:

    It wasn’t onerous. What was (and is still) onerous is trying to get on the ballot as an Independent. Being part of a “qualified” party helps immensely.

    I think that doesn’t exist anymore.

    There are alwqays only two candidates in the ballot in the general election – and any number, up to 25 or 50 in the primary.

    Major party candidates need far more signatures. IIRC, it’s a percentage of those registered in your party in the district.

    This system doesn’t exist any more.

    The only place party affiliation comes in is in primaries for party offices or presidential primaries.

    Sammy Finkelman (46ec7d)

  47. I see that if a candidates petition numbers fall short, a candidate may pay a pro ratio proportional filing fee.

    Each missing signature in a Congressional race costs $1.28 and almost 13 basis points. Was that the system before?

    What’s a ballot designation?

    Sammy Finkelman (46ec7d)

  48. I see that if a candidates petition numbers fall short, a candidate may pay a pro ratio proportional filing fee.

    Each missing signature in a Congressional race costs $1.28 and almost 13 basis points. Was that the system before?

    What’s a ballot designation?

    I don’t know what the procedures were before, but I understand it required the gathering of hundreds of thousands of signatures for non-major party candidates to appear on the ballot.

    The ballot designation (also known as party preference) is what party you want to be identified with. The qualified parties are the: Democratic Party, Republican Party, American Independent Party; Green Party, Libertarian Party; and the Peace & Freedom Party.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  49. @7 states rights. States decide elections and qualifications in each state. Also can change rules at anytime for third party ballot access.

    asset (7832ab)

  50. States decide elections and qualifications in each state.

    Only for state offices. They cannot add to the qualifications for federal offices.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  51. > Well, if you’ve ever even thought bout driving in SF, you’d agree that BART was a good idea

    good idea, questionable execution. the route from the city to SFO is meandering and absurd. the fact that it uses its own unique gauge making it uninterchangeable with *anything* is a monopolist subcontractor’s dream. and *within SF itself* it’s pretty much useless — it’s for getting in and out of the city, not for travelling within it.

    aphrael (4c4719)

  52. @49. Nothing to do w/ validating political parties.

    Who owns them?
    Who runs them?
    Who finances them?
    Who died and decided THEY should control the structure and the process for channeling folks to qualify for placement on ballots to hold public office?

    … and Putin smiled.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  53. @49. ‘The presidential primary elections and caucuses held in the various states, the District of Columbia, and territories of the United States form part of the nominating process of candidates for United States presidential elections. The United States Constitution has never specified the process; political parties have developed their own procedures over time.’ -source, wikiwoodrot.scum

    The two major political parties in America are the ‘source of the Vile.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  54. Every candidate must pay a filing fee equal to 1% of the first year’s salary as of the first day on which a candidate may circulate petitions in lieu of filing fees, made payable to the Secretary of State. Currently, the filing fee is $1,740.00. The filing fee must be paid to the county elections official at the time the candidate obtains their Declaration of Candidacy and nomination papers.

    Why? WHO decided you gotta pay $1,740 to run for office?

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1748 secs.