Here in NC you have to pay a filing fee to run for office. It can range from $5 to $100 for local offices. Is this common in other states? I think it is.
Has anyone challenged these fees in court? I know I cannot be charged to vote (no poll taxes are allowed) so why can I be charged to run?
I don’t believe it is a charge to run, but a charge to have the elections committees print your name on the literature and ballots.
That is dumb if true - How can I run if they don’t print my name on the ballots? Write in votes are a waste of time except in rare cases.
What’s dumb about it? Consider if there were no fee, and every fool, jokester, and idiot with nothing better to do - and no real intention of serving the office - decided to run as a lark. Heck, they’ve got nothing to lose, not even five bucks. Then you could have hundreds of names on the multi-page ballot, with the printing paid for by whom now?, that just clog up the works and actually interfere with the legitimate political process. Considering all the money that serious candidates spend on their campaigns, the filing fee doesn’t even reach the level of a drop in the bucket.
I believe in some places the ballots are somewhat long - witness Florida in 2000 for president. In those states it is very easy to get on the ballot as a 3rd party candidate.
$5 is not going to keep people off the ballot if they are not serious. If $5 is OK to run, why is it not OK to charge $5 to vote? After all, we don’t want people voting as a joke do we?
To get on the ballot as a third party candidate for US Representative in Indiana (and I suspect a great many other states), you need signatures from 2% of the electorate (determined by the number of people who voted for state secretary of state in the previous election). In my district, that’s almost 4000 signatures.
As a general rule, states are allowed to use methods to ensure that the ballot does not get overwhelmed by everyone who wants to throw his hat in the ring (Bullock v. Carter, 405 U.S. 134, 142–44 (1972)). However, as the Court noted in Bullock, access to the ballot, while itself not a fundamental right, is inextricably linked with the ability to vote for a candidate of choice, which is a fundamental right. So in Bullock, the court applied a modified form of the “strict” test used in equal protection cases to strike down a Texas filing fee scheme that imposed onerous fees upon candidates. Said the Court,
The Court didn’t have to wait long to apply this test to a more reasonable scheme of fees. In Lubin v. Panish, 415 U.S. 709 (1974), an indigent person challenged the scheme of fees for filing for office in the State of California. The Court struck down the fees, applying the test set up in Bullock and saying,
BUT, the Court noted in the next paragraph that this did not mean that other methods could be applied to establish the “seriousness” of a candidacy. One such method the Court mentioned was requiring the filing of a petition of signatures. But the Court expressly disapproved the concept of forcing indigent candidates to utilize a write-in method that didn’t require payment of a fee.
I believe that California took up the Court at its word. When I lived there, and was toying with the notion of running for some local office (school board or county commissioner, I think), I looked up the process. IIRC, the state allowed for filing of a petition of signatures in lieu of a filing fee.
Thus, if North Carolina is actually requiring the payment of a fee, and offers no alternative method of qualifying for the ballot, its scheme is in violation of the Constitution, as determined by the Court in Lubin. However, if they have a scheme of fees, but have some alternative method for qualifying, then their scheme is likely constitutional, because the Court acknowledges that there is an important state interest in limiting the appearance on the ballot to those with serious candidacies.
For 3rd party candidates NC has a very high amount of signatures , I think it’s the highest in the nation. There was a lawsuit to change that but the suit was lost.
The races I mentioned are local and non-partisan. I have never heard of anyone using a petition drive here instead of paying the fees. It maybe be legal to do it that way.
A little Googling indicates that NC does, in fact, allow candidates to file petitions in lieu of filing fees:
Because charging $5 to vote is highly illegal in the United States. The 24th Amendment to the Constitution outlawed such a tax, and there have been court decisions that hold that a poll tax is also a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. I know you were being facetious, but I felt the need to ruin your joke with the facts.
That said, the fees generally go toward the administration of the local board of elections and are paid on the candidates’ behalf by their respective political party. They’re not intended as nuisance fees because the process by which candidates have to follow to get on the ballot in the first place is pretty cumbersome. In Pennsylvania, where I live, candidates have to have a minimum number of signatures on the petition, and those signatures have to belong to qualified voters; for example, a Republican who signs a Democrat’s petition doesn’t count toward that minimum. There are also financial disclosures that must be filled out; missing a single deadline means that you’re no longer on the ballot. In fact, a sitting member of a local borough council just missed a deadline, so he can’t run this time except as a write-in candidate.
I think what DrFidelius was getting at is that it is an administrative fee to defray the costs of running the election. You yourself describe it as a “filing fee.”
I need 10% of voters to sign instead of paying a fee? That’s even worse than the idiotic laws NC has for 3rd parties.
The petition route is supposed to be for poor people who can’t afford the fees but they have to spend all that time to get 10% of people to sign. Do these people live in some kind of alternate universe where 10% of 200,000 people is nothing?
How do you expect to be an adequate lawmaker if you can’t manage/don’t have the time to get a tiny fraction of the amount of votes you need to get elected?
Local elections in off years here sometimes have only 8-10% turnout. So 10% is not a fraction of what I need to get elected it’s actually MORE than what I need.
Your math is way off. A turnout of 10 % refers to 10% of those eligible to vote actually voting; 10% of the voters refers to 10% of those actually voting, which would be (in the 10% turnout scenario) 1% of the electorate.
Nice link, but I said OFF YEAR LOCAL elections which means odd numbered years.
I am well aware that presidential years have very high turnout.
Also I need 10% of REGISTERED voters to sign, not 10% of the 10% who show up to vote.
When did the shouting become necessary?
FYI here is a local election in 2007 with just over 10% turnout.
http://msweb03.co.wake.nc.us/bordelec/downloads/2007OCT_canvass-official.htm
If you are running as a third-party, then this is correct. To run as a Republican or Democrat, there is no other process besides paying the filing fee…