Letters to the editor Ballot injustices
As a member of the Libertarian Party I can relate to the revolting use of raw political power by the Democratic machine to keep Ralph Nader in 2004 and Carl Romanelli in 2006 off the ballot in Pennsylvania ('Nader vs. the System: Democracy at Stake,' April 19 column by Ruth Ann Dailey). The use of public resources is a dual crime against Pennsylvanians -- theft of tax dollars and ballot choices.
In 2008 it was the Libertarian Party facing the Republican machine. We were forced into Commonwealth Court to keep our presidential candidate, Bob Barr, on the ballot.
A Republican committeeman challenged the substitution of our presidential candidate after Mr. Barr won the nomination.
The court rejected that challenge and upheld the authority to substitute in compliance with the election code. There would have been no need to substitute if the election code did not require that our nominee submit 25,000 signatures on nomination papers while the major party nominees required none.
That signature goal changes, and recently has been more than 67,000 signatures for all statewide candidates except Democrats and Republicans. This does not appear to be in compliance with the free and equal elections clause of the Pennsylvania Constitution.
On top of that, the major party nomination process is publicly funded. The Libertarian Party nominee was selected at our own expense.
I cannot understand why it is so bad for Pennsylvania voters to have choices on the ballot when our troops are fighting overseas to put choices on the ballot for others.
MICHAEL J. ROBERTSON, Chairman
Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania
Licking Township, Clarion County
Monday, April 26, 2010
Letters to the editor about ballot access