The Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania - Forum

I don't have a copy & I can't find it online, but I'm told that the Inqy put up a piece about the hearing yesterday that highlights the R POV. Section B page 3.

For what it's worth my Mom, who attended the hearing, sent this LTE to the Inqy about this:

About the article, "Libertarians Tricked Voters, Court Told" - September 6, 2008:

The headline and first paragraph are extremely misleading. I am a Democrat who firmly believes that the minority parties play an important role in politics and should not have "impossible to overcome" obstacles put in the way of ballot access. Pennsylvania is one of the states whose laws are an attempt to do just that.
 
I sat through the entire 4 hours of the "fraud" hearing on Fri. 9/5, as did a member of the Green Party. The truth is that all minority parties must resort to "placeholder" candidates in order to meet the stringent regulations placed on their members to achieve the number of signatures on the "nominating" petitions. They all do this in a very transparent, open way. They have always done it this way and had no challenge in the past. There is no other way to do it. It takes many, many months and many tired, dedicated people trudging door to door throughout the state for as many as 37,000 signatures. Those signing the petitions know that they are signing to allow ballot access, not nominating a candidate of a party of which they are not even a member, no matter what the petitions are "titled".
 
The fact that Democrats and Republicans feel they have a right to challenge in court to keep certain candidates off the ballet that they are afraid will siphon votes from their candidates, cannot be disputed. Their tactics should be evaluated, but not their right to sue. But the fact that the Republicans sued only one party and only for this election is telling. After all, Bob Barr is a much more public figure than past Libertarian candidates.
 
What is in question here is whether Pennsylvania in the name of fairness to all of its citizens, should change the rules and regulations that are obviously  in favor of Democrats and Republicans maintaining total power in the state. That the charge of fraud can be brought against those who are struggling to follow the rules to the letter of the law is the problem.
 
Hey, Dems and Republicans! Why not have the courage to stand up openly and fairly to the competition of the minority parties. After all, isn't that what this country is all about - or should be!

Good Job Mom!

Wow!  That is a good letter!

Mom's cool. 

Here's the article as it appeared in The Morning Call:

Lawyer: Libertarians tricked voters

GOP official wants Bob Barr removed from Pennsylvania presidential ballot.

 By Joann Loviglio |  Of The Associated Press
    September 6, 2008

The Libertarian Party's presidential candidate should be taken off the Pennsylvania ballot because the party tricked voters and broke state election law when it gathered the signatures for its nominating ballots, an attorney argued Friday in Commonwealth Court.

(snip)

http://www.mcall.com/news/local/all-a6_libertarian.6578409sep06,0,2620424.story (http://www.mcall.com/news/local/all-a6_libertarian.6578409sep06,0,2620424.story)

OK, Now that I've seen the article, here is my response to the Morning Call (and the Philly Inquirer, substitute article title and paper):

Dear Editor:

In response to your article "Lawyer: Libertarians Tricked Voters" (Morning Call Sept. 6, 2008), the lawyer should be aware that the Libertarians followed state election law when placing Libertarian Presidential candidate Bob Barr on the ballot.

Under Pennsylvania election law, the Libertarian Party is not a recognized political party, therefore must gain ballot access as a "political body". The Libertarian Party began gathering signatures for access to the November 2008 election ballot in February with duly nominated candidates as authorized by the Pennsylvania Election Code.

The only mechanism to substitute a candidate available to political bodies under the election code is for the nomination papers to be filed, the candidate to withdraw in the allotted time frame, and the Committee to Fill Vacancies to certify a substitute candidate, just as was done in the case of Bob Barr.

This Committee to Fill Vacancies was clearly identified on every nomination paper circulated, and to say there was any intent to trick electors is simply preposterous. The filer of the objection to the substitution clearly wants the Libertarian Party to be treated differently than any other political body in the Commonwealth.

It would be absurd for the Election Code to declare that the Libertarian Party is not considered a political party and then assess penalties for not being considered a political party. Part of the problem is the way the election code is currently structured, which does not conform to the "Elections shall be free and equal" clause of the Commonwealth Constitution.

This objection to the placement of Bob Barr on the Pennsylvania ballot by the GOP is a thinly veiled attempt to remove a political rival from the ballot, and should itself be considered a subversion of the electoral process. It is a shame the voters of our Commonwealth should be subject to such abuse.

Sincerely,

Michael J. Robertson
Chair, Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania