Category Archives: Ballot Access

Letter To The Editor Calls Out Speaker Shannon For Blocking Ballot Access Reform

by

For years, the Senate had been the primary roadblock to Ballot Access Reform. This year saw a shift from the Senate to a single member of the Oklahoma House, Speaker Shannon. I wrote a letter to the editor to NewsOK.com about his role in the death of this important reform and it was published earlier today. Here it is in it’s entirety. (This letter was also published, with some slightly different edits, at the Tulsa World)

Oklahoma House Speaker T.W. Shannon held true to his word — ballot access reform wasn’t a priority for him this year. Despite two bills being introduced this session, one in the House and one in the Senate, neither bill made it to the House floor for a vote. House Bill 2134, the bill that would have returned the petition requirement to form a new party to the 5,000-signature requirement of 1974, failed to reach the House floor. Despite passing the House Rules Committee, the Calendar Committee refused to hear the bill at the request of Shannon. This quickly killed the best opportunity for real reform in the state.

Senate Bill 668, which would have removed presidential elections from the signature calculations, also failed to reach the House floor. This would have had the benefit of stabilizing the signature requirement between elections. This bill passed the Senate and the House Judiciary Committee. Unfortunately, the Calendar Committee refused to hear the bill.

One must seriously question the priorities of Shannon if providing voters real election choices isn’t one of them. In the last three elections, Oklahoma voters have been the only ones in the United States to be denied more than two choices for president. Oklahoma voters need and want this reform. They’ve been asking for it for decades. If the Legislature and Shannon, specifically, are unwilling to make the change, the people will force it.

Again, We encourage all readers to write letters to both NewsOK and the Tulsa World as well as any local newspapers you read. The more we talk about this violation of voter rights, the better chance it has of passing.

Speaker Shannon Kept His Word; Refused To Hear Ballot Access Reform

by

Earlier in the session, HB2134 died in the House after the Calendar Committee refused to hear the bill and pass it to the floor. During that time, it was made known that Speaker Shannon did not want to hear ballot access reform at all. We had hoped that Speaker Shannon might have only wanted to not hear HB2134 specifically. We then put our hopes on the Senate Bill, SB668, that was not as good, but would pave the way for further real reform. Unfortunately, SB668, despite passing the Senate and the House Judiciary Committee, failed to be heard by the House Calendar Committee. These actions show that Speaker Shannon refused to hear any ballot access reform bills.

It is unfortunate that such needed reform was blocked by a single person in the State Legislature. As I have pointed out many times, all the evidence points to the need for reform. Oklahoma has been the only state in the United States to deny its voters more than two choices for President in the last three elections. The election results for 2012 show that the confusion and spoiler arguments used to fight reform hold no weight. Ballot Access News showed that at least 20,000 voters were denied the opportunity to vote for Gary Johnson. With all that evidence showing the real harm of our current laws toward voters, and the lack of harm to the duopoly parties, supporting ballot access reform, why wasn’t it a priority?

With the death of SB668, Oklahoma voters are no closer to being able to choose the party and candidates of their choice. While the bills are dead for this year, they can be revived next year. However, even if one of them were to pass and signed into law, it would be too late for new parties to form before the Governor elections. But that should not stop us. Getting real reform, as found in HB2134, passed in 2014 will open the door wide for the 2016 election. That would be a valuable change for Oklahoma voters.

So what should we do? We need to raise further awareness of the issue. We need more letters to the editors, more letters and calls to State Legislators. Write your Representative and Senator. Write the Governor. Demand that they bring ballot access reform to Oklahoma voters. More importantly, tell your friends and family about the need for reform. We will continue to bring you the latest news and updates on this important topic.

Letter To The Editor Laments The Death of HB2134, Ballot Access Reform

by

Over the weekend, Anthony Papillion of Miami had a letter published in the Tulsa World in which he laments the death of HB2134. Despite passing out of the House Rules Committee with no issues, HB2134 was never heard by the House Calendar Committee and thus never voted on by the House.

The Oklahoma Legislature had another opportunity this year to give more Oklahoma voters a voice at the polls. House Bill 2134 would have reduced the number of signatures required to get a new party listed on the ballot from its current high count of 5 percent of active voters to the pre-1974 level of 5,000.

Unfortunately, HB 2134 won’t even be heard this year by the Legislature because lawmakers have much more important bills to hear. Those bills include setting a new price for a one-day fishing license, allowing counties to provide incentives for wellness programs, and declaring part of Oklahoma 81 as a historic bike trail. Yes, all those “important” bills were more important than making sure as many voters as possible had the chance to participate in the electoral process.

Oklahoma voters have shown that they want more choice in their ballot. We’ve shown that we are not happy with the current two-party status quo. Why does the Legislature find it so hard to get that message? Perhaps lawmakers are afraid of giving us too much power so that we have a chance to get rid of them when we go to the polls?

As always, writing letters to the editors of the various newspapers in Oklahoma is one of the easiest ways to spread the word about the need for ballot access reform. Keep them coming.

After HB2134’s Death, What’s Left For Oklahoma’s Reform Efforts?

by

Last week, the House let HB2134 die for the year. Had it passed HB2134, the law governing the signature requirement to form a new party would have gone from a 5% of the last general election requirement to a flat 5,000 signature requirement. This would have returned Oklahoma law to how it was prior to 1974. Yet, due to some unwillingness from Speaker Shannon, HB2134 never got a floor vote despite passing the Rules Committee unanimously.

So what is left for Oklahoma voters? There are still two bills alive and kicking that we are keeping our eyes on. The first is a similar bill to HB2134. SB668 passed the Senate unanimously and is now waiting for action from the House. Under SB668’s language, the signature requirements to form a new party would no longer take into consideration the Presidential elections, only the Governor elections. What this would do is bring about consistency between elections, but would not bring about much relief to new parties.

As you look back through recent elections, you will find that in Presidential election years, years in which parties would form based on the last Governor election, new parties were not able to form and gain access to the Presidential ballot. This language is the primary reason why Oklahoma has been the only state in the nation to give its voters only two choices for President for three elections in a row.

Despite these complaints, there is value in allowing SB668 to go forward as currently written. First, recent Legislative Sessions have shown that the Senate is unwilling to pass anything that goes lower than 5%. This stance has prevented a number of bills from going to the Governor to be signed into law. Next, we have Speaker Shannon’s stance that ballot access reform is not a priority. We are not sure if the specific reform found in HB2134 was not a priority or just ballot access reform in general. Letting SB668 go to the House Floor for a vote would show that reform itself is a priority but Speaker Shannon doesn’t support a genuinely lower requirement to form a new party. Finally, passing SB668 as is would open the door to future reform efforts as the Legislature would have a changed mindset toward reform efforts. This psychological opposition to reform would be weakened after the passage of SB668 and any future complaints and opposition would not be as strong.

SB668 has not yet been assigned to a House committee for review. When it does, it will most likely go to the Rules Committee which has shown its support already for reform. After that, it will need to pass the Calendar Committee before getting a floor vote. Hopefully, we will see it pass out of both without issue. Representative Watson, the House sponsor of the bill, is on the Rules Committee so he will most likely be advocating for its passage soon.

The other bill that we are concerned about is SB76. SB76 would double the filing fees for all elected offices in Oklahoma. This fee, as far as we can tell, is not needed in the state. An increased fee to run for office will result in nothing but a reduction in people running for office. In the last election, less than 50% of all Oklahoma legislative seats had a November election. All other seats were either unopposed or settled in a primary election. With so few people running for office, why would anyone support further reduction?

SB76 has already been assigned to a committee for a hearing. It has been assigned to the House Appropriations and Budget committee but will most likely be assigned to one of the subcommittees, either the General Government or the Revenue and Taxation subcommittee. Representative Russ, the House Sponsor of the bill, is on the General Government Subcommittee so it is likely to go there, however, the bill does increase fees so that falls under the purview of the Revenue and Taxation committee. We will likely find more information soon.

That is where we stand at this point in the Legislative Session. What we need from you at this point is to contact your Representatives and ask them to support the passage of SB668 and to oppose SB76.

House Doesn’t Hear Ballot Access Reform Bill; HB2134 Dead For The Year

by

Today is the last day for the State House to hear its own bills and HB2134 is not on the agenda. That means that HB2134 is dead for the year. It could come back again next year, but it will be competing with a whole new lot of bills that will be introduced for that session, reducing the chance that it will be heard.

Earlier this week, it became apparent that the reason HB2134 had not been and would not be heard was because Speaker Shannon did not want it heard. In an email, HB2134 author Representative Hickman wrote:

I made another pitch to one of the floor leaders to try to get HB2134 added to the agenda to be considered by the Calendar Committee at their last meeting at 1130a today. He likes the bill and talked to Speaker Shannon about adding it but the Speaker said no. Sorry we weren’t able to get it heard. I will see what I can do to help with SB668 since it will be coming to the House next week. Thanks again for your interest.

This combined with a recent news report from NewsOK that any bill that doesn’t strictly adhere to the Republican agenda is having trouble being heard doesn’t breed much confidence in HB2134 being heard next year.

On Tuesday March 12, 2013, a good number of people called the offices of Speaker Shannon and Calendar Chair Peterson to ask them to support HB2134 and pass it to the Floor for a vote. I appreciate all the help from those who called and those who wrote letters. Your efforts did not go unnoticed, even if those efforts went unheeded.

On Wednesday March 13, 2013, I had the pleasure of joining Oklahoma Libertarian Richard Prawdzienski in a meeting with Shannon aid Rick about the status of HB2134. While Rick was sympathetic to the plight of new parties, having worked on several petitioning drives in the past, he was plain in stating that ballot access reform was just not a priority for Speaker Shannon. With all the evidence showing just how important this legislation is, you have to really wonder what exactly are his priorities.

At this point, the only hope for reform this year is SB668. SB668 as it is currently written only removes the Presidential elections from the 5% signature calculation. Under this language, new parties will not have any real relief. As you look back over the last three Presidential elections, in which new parties could form based on the Governor election calculation, alternative parties had not been able to gain access to the Presidential ticket despite their best efforts. This shows that even this proposed hurdle is still too high and will continue to deny Oklahoma voters real choice in the elections.

However, there are still advantages to letting it pass as written. Based on recent reform efforts, the Senate is unwilling to pass anything lower than 5% of the last Governor election. While passing the bill with that language won’t provide any real relief, it will change the psychology of the Legislature, making future reform efforts easier. The introduction and passage of reform bills this year and in years prior show that the Legislature recognizes that reform is needed and wants to pass reform. Yet, due to some kind external or internal pressure, they can’t bring themselves to pass anything of substance. Once something like this passes and they realize that it is not the end of the world, future reform would be easier for them to handle.

With The Evidence In Favor, Why Won’t The House Hear Reform Bills?

by

For nearly four decades Oklahoma has had one of the most restrictive ballot access laws in the United States. In 1974, Oklahoma Democratic legislators passed a bill that changed the petitioning requirement to form a new party and gain access to the highest election ticket in the state. This new law increased the number of signatures a new party would need to gather in order to gain ballot access from a flat 5,000 signatures to 5% of the vote cast in the last general election. This new requirement set in motion a series of events that would lead us to today in which Oklahoma has been the only state to limit its voters to two choices for President in the last three elections.

Fortunately, evidence is mounting that this is a failed policy not just in practical reasons but for idealogical reasons as well. As such, it is time for the Oklahoma Legislature to pass legitimate reform now.

Recently, the Federal Election Commission released its official 2012 Presidential Election results. With this report, the facts show that arguments against reform have no merit. The two most common arguments against reform are that voters will be confused and that alternative candidates will create a “spoiler effect” between the duopoly candidates. But when you analyze the election results, you will find that the data shows no evidence that voters were confused. In every state and D.C., the vast majority of voters had no problem finding and voting for one of the two duopoly candidates. On the “spoiler effect” front, no state in the U.S. had margins close enough that a lack of choice on the ballot would have flipped the election. If you look specifically at any one alternative candidate, none of them had enough votes to flip the election in any state.

Other facts show just how limited Oklahoma is with its choice at the ballot. The next lowest number of candidates available in any state is double that of Oklahoma. The average number of candidates on any ballot is eight or four times more than what is available in Oklahoma. Continue reading →

Senate Ballot Access Reform Bill Passes Without A Title

by

On February 27, the Senate heard and passed SB668, ballot access reform, on a vote of 42-0. This bill now goes on to the House for consideration. However, the bill was not amended to change the 5% language it current holds. This means that the inconsistency between it and the House version, HB2134, remains. Senator Rob Johnson did acknowledge that disparity and as such requested that the title be stricken before the vote. Unfortunately, that will not help the effort to bring reform to the state.

Richard Prawdzienski of the Oklahoma Libertarian Party commented.

Striking the title devalues the vote of 42-0.  Without a title, the bill has to come back to the Senate to have the title placed back on if bill gets a pass vote in the House.  If more language is added, it means the bill must be heard in a conference. Many bills in conference die a quiet death.

Having ballot access reform assigned to a conference is one of the fears of many supporters of reform. That had been the fate of all recent attempts that passed the House and Senate. In each of those previous attempts, the Senate part of the conference committee refused to hear the bills and they died.

At this point, we are waiting to hear about progress on HB2134. It has yet to be placed on the agenda for the House. Please contact your Representative and ask them to support HB2134 in its current form.

Lessons Learned From FEC’s Presidential Election Results

by

The Federal Election Commission recently released the official results from the 2012 Presidential Election (PDF). Just this information alone can teach us a lot about the political climate around the country. It also provides us with a few things that we can use to help in our efforts to bring ballot access reform to Oklahoma.

To start off, this report solidifies one fact that we have oft repeated here. Oklahoma is the only state to have limited its voters to two choices for President. This is the third Presidential election in a row that this has happened. The next fewest candidates on any ballot in the US was four candidates. Three states had that low ball, Hawaii, Missouri and South Dakota. That’s right, the next lowest number of candidates on a ballot doubled what was on the Oklahoma ballot.

Here are a few statistics from this report. The median number of candidates on any state ballot counting and not counting Oklahoma is eight. If you look at this on average, the average number of candidates on the ballot, including Oklahoma’s, is 7.92. Without counting Oklahoma, the average number of candidates on the ballot is eight. This means that Oklahoma has limited the number of candidates to a quarter that of the average in the US. The average voter outside of Oklahoma gets six more candidates than we do. That is rather depressing. Continue reading →

HB2134 Passes House Rules Committee Unopposed and Unamended

by

The House Rules Committee voted unanimously to pass HB2134 which would reduce the number of signatures required to form a new party to 5,000. While similar bills have been passed in the House in previous years, this is the first bill to make it out of the Rules Committee with the 5,000 signature language in tact. Previous bills had been amended to change the language to 3% of the last general election or a flat 22,500 signatures. So this is a great start for reform this year.

With SB668 in the Senate having language reflecting 5% of the last Gubernatorial election, we still have some rough times ahead. It is important that the House pass HB2134 unamended and that the Senate either amend SB668 to match the House bill or to drop SB668 and adopt HB2134 when it passes out of the House. Please contact your State Representative and Senator and ask them to support HB2134 and the 5,000 signature requirement is contains.

Senate Rules Committee Passes SB76 On Strict Party Line Vote

by

SB76 is a Senate Bill that would greatly increase the fees associated with filing for candidacy for office. The fee increases range from double to triple (an original version of the bill incorrectly listed the current filing fees, thus leading the misconception that some fees were tripled) the current fees. It what can only be seen as Republican support for fewer people running for office, the Senate Rules Committee passed the bill (PDF) on a strict party line vote. The 14 Republican members of the committee voted to pass the bill while the 5 Democratic members voted against it. This bill now goes on to the Senate floor for a vote.

Please contact your Senator and ask them to vote against this bill. This bill will severely reduce the number of people running for office. With roughly 50% of House and Senate seats going unopposed each election, that is not something that we need. If you are looking for an example of a letter you could send, please see the letter I wrote to Senator Fields.