Updating Prop. 14 and the Death of Minor Parties
Last year I wrote a number of posts about the impact of Prop. 14 on California’s minor parties. These musings ultimately led to an article, which was published in the California Journal of Politics and Policy, about the minor parties’ experience post-Prop. 14 (gated version; revised, ungated version). Since the June election is now just weeks away, I thought I would update some of the tables and figures with data from this election cycle.
Overall, 2014 is a continuation of the pattern observed in 2012–there are fewer minor party candidates contesting fewer districts this election cycle compared to prior cycles. The 2012 cycle saw a historically low number of minor party candidates–just 17 (compared with 77 in 2010). In 2014, there are only 14 minor party candidates contesting 12 districts. Table 1 shows the number of minor party candidates and the number of districts contested for each of the three types of legislative districts in California. In general, 2014 looks an awful lot like 2012.
In my article, I argue that the decline in minor party candidates principally comes from three factors (in order of increasing importance):
- Candidates, knowing they were likely not be one of the top two vote getters and therefore would not make the November election, chose not to run.
- The Legislature significantly increased the costs of filing for office for minor party candidates after Prop. 14, changing what had been an essentially costless act into a very costly one. As a result, fewer minor party candidates chose to file for office.
- Most importantly, party leaders–especially in the Libertarian Party–no longer recruited candidates as they once did in the face of (1) and (2).
I really want to emphasize the importance of #3 in understanding the impact of Prop. 14 on California’s minor parties. Most of the decline between 2010 and 2012, as shown below, was located in the Libertarian Party. (There was a little controversy over the following chart. See here then here.)
Unlike the other minor parties (with the exception of the Natural Law Party when it existed) the Libertarian Party has historically relied on a centralized candidate recruitment effort. Moreover, as shown below, until the last two election cycles its number of candidates has largely tracked its statewide party registration numbers. In 2012, though, the person responsible for recruiting Libertarian candidates chose not to repeat the effort. In an email exchange with me, the person specifically identified #1 and #2 as reasons for no longer recruiting candidates. (While I haven’t talked with the person this year, I would be very surprised if there was a recruitment effort in 2014.) As a consequence, while the Libertarian Party’s registration numbers have been ticking upward in the state–reaching a modern high in 2014–the number of Libertarian candidates filing for office has collapsed. Only five candidates filed for office this year. The Libertarian Party now looks like the other minor parties in California.
It wouldn’t be a post about Prop. 14 and minor parties if I didn’t speculate about what these numbers mean for California’s minor parties, so here goes:
There are two primary ways in which California’s minor parties maintain the ballot qualification status. First, one of their candidates receives at least 2 percent of the November vote for a statewide office (e.g., Governor, Lt. Governor, Insurance Commissioner, and Attorney General). Historically, this has been the principal way in which parties have maintained access to the ballot. Given that none of the parties’ candidates will make it to the November election for these offices, none of the parties will maintain their ballot status this way this cycle.
The second way to maintain ballot status is by having 1 percent of the total gubernatorial vote registered as party members. The minor parties are really lucky that the governor’s race is so very boring this year. Turnout is likely to be low, which will make it easier for the parties to stay on the ballot. The magic number after the 2010 contest (which had relatively high turnout–44%!–because of the Brown-Whitman contest) was 103,004 registrants. Given current registration numbers and an assumed turnout rate closer to 2006, the American Independent, Green, and Libertarian parties should be able to maintain their ballot status. The Americans Elect (a failed “third way” party organized for the 2012 presidential election) and the Peace & Freedom parties, however, will likely lose their ballot status.
(The parties can also gather petition signatures equal to 10 percent of the gubernatorial vote in order to stay on the ballot. Given the expense of doing so, though, I don’t see either party trying this route.)
Leave a comment Cancel reply
Our Contributors
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
Categories
- Alumni
- American Political Science Association
- Applying Political Science
- blogs
- CA
- California Politics
- Canadian Political Science Association
- Conservatism
- Constitution Day
- Courses
- Dave Brubeck
- Department Events
- Elections
- Faculty
- Federal Budget
- Feminism
- Foreign Policy
- Fred Thompson
- Governing
- Honors
- International Relations
- Internships
- Karen Hanretty
- Media Appearances
- Mitt Romney
- Model House of Representatives
- Opportunities
- Pi Sigma Alpha
- Podcast
- Political Campaigns
- Political Science
- Political Theory
- Religion and Politics
- Research
- Ronnee Schreiber
- San Joaquin Valley
- Scholarship
- social networking
- Southern Political Science Association
- Speakers
- Stockton
- Student Opportunities
- Students
- Supreme Court
- Syria
- Teaching
- Uncategorized
- University of the Pacific
- Washington Semester
- Web 2.0
Blogroll
- Inter-University Consortium on Political and Social Research
- Jacoby Center for Public Service and Civic Leadership
- Pacific Legal Scholars Program
- Pacific Political Science Association
- Pacific Political Science Department on Facebook
- Pacific Political Science Department Website
- Pi Sigma Alpha
- University of the Pacific Podcasts on iTunes U
- Washington Semester Internship Programs
A bill in the legislature would, if passed, change the rules for staying on the ballot. AB 2351 (introduced by Richard Gordon) would change the vote test from 1% of gubernatorial turnout to 1/3% of total registration and would move the 2% vote test from November to June. It will be up for a vote on the Assembly floor soon, probably this week. It is supported by the Secretary of State, Californians for Electoral Reform and at least two of the minor parties affected.
These changes would keep the existing minor parties (except Americans Elect, which doesn’t care) on the ballot. But they would not make it any easier to recruit candidates and pay filing fees. So the bill is only a first step. But it is a crucial first step.
Thank you for your continuing coverage of this critical issue.