Ballot Access Denied - Write-In Candidate for Freeholder
Well, the signatures to obtain ballot access were not very forthcoming and I will not be on the Ballot for Mercer County Freeholder. All the hours it takes to collect the signatures, people who cannot think outside of the two party system, and a pledge buried in the petition stacked the odds against obtaining ballot access. It was an interesting experience, but I am not sure I would recommend it to anyone.
I was surprised by the number of hours it would take to gain ballot access and be listed as a candidate for Mercer County Freeholder. It takes so long because of the reluctance of people to talk to others and the dominance of our two party system. When someone leaves the library/store, they want to head home. Many people avoid responding to you at all by walking as far away as possible, not caring what you want. Others are willing to take a moment and say "not now", or "later," like I would ever see them again. Some are willing to stop and talk for a few, but they do not want to support anyone who is not in the same party as them. A few will actually sign the petition after talking with you or, more rarely, without even asking a single question. If we had more of the latter or a change in the laws, we would have more choices on our ballot.
I am also surprised that people, in our educated society, would so willingly plug themselves into a political category like Democrat or Republican. I cannot recall a person I agreed 100% politically, let alone a political party. People who asked what I stood for seemed to like what I had to say, but most people asked for my party affiliation and that kept them from signing my petition to get on the ballot. I plan on ordering a book from Amazon.com, "The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies", written by economist Bryan Caplan, which may shed some light on the issue. I have also wondered if I were an independent candidate, instead of a libertarian, if I would have received a more favorable response.
On the second to last day of petitioning, a voter flipped over the petition to the front page and read the whole page. What she discovered, surprised me, and actually gave me something to think about. Buried in the petition is a pledge to vote for the candidate petitioning. I read the petition a long time ago, but that phrase didn't stand out to me. I quickly thought of a response and told her I didn't agree with placing that requirement on signors. It really is absurd. What if I was hit by a bus, are the signors still pledged to vote for me? What if a candidate flip-flops, does something stupid (like a DUI)? I believe the signors of the petition should have the right to make the best choice based on all the candidates campaigns from June to November. The signors of the Democratic or Republican petitions do not have to pledge to vote for the candidate in the general election. I hope this gets fixed fast. It would be best if the petition read that the signor would like the opportunity to vote for the candidate in November.
I think Congressman Dr. Ron Paul, 2008 Presidential Candidate, summed it up very well last night on the Daily Show, "We’re overseas spreading the message of democracy, but here, if you’re in a third party, you can’t get on ballots…you spend all your time getting on ballots…you have to be a Ross Perot to get on all the ballots…The two parties are very much in control of the system, and they exclude individuals who aren’t in that mold." (Quoted from Ballot Access News)
