tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7481330.post111926843574518189..comments2023-10-24T11:05:25.288-04:00Comments on Mark Rauterkus & Running Mates ponder current events: Planning ahead for future races, i.e., 2006Mark Rauterkushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17157914569686528007noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7481330.post-1119320779067221522005-06-20T22:26:00.000-04:002005-06-20T22:26:00.000-04:00Ken K from the easter part of PA wrote in part: I ...Ken K from the easter part of PA wrote in part: <I>I don't think we'll be needing the statutorily-required 67,070 signatures to get on the statewide ballot next year. There's a court case, Patriot v Mitchell, which says that you can't ask for more signatures for an inferior election than you do for a higher office.<BR/><BR/>Since our requirement for president last year was 25,697, the 2006 requirement can't be any higher than that. I've been speaking with attorneys at the election board in Harrisburg over the last two weeks, and they are looking into the matter for us. Their from-the-hip, unofficial guess is that they will likely use either the 2004 presidential number (25,697) or the 2002 gubernatorial number (21,028). I just spoke with their attorney again this morning, and he say they should have an answer for me by today or tomorrow.</I>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com