What’s Happening In The 32nd District?
I was just checking the state elections website and now the 32nd representative district is starting to look like a free-for-all. As of today there are 3 candidates for the seat: Libertarian, Republican and Democrat William McVay (I guess he really wants the seat), Democratic incumbent Brad Bennett and Republican Beth Buzzell Miller. Do any of our readers have insight into this district?
Tags: General Assembly, RD32
Shazzam. That is a complete head-scratcher.
Even were he allowed by law to do this, (and I’m pretty sure he isn’t), doesn’t it mean that he would have to pay 3 filing fees in order to be on all three lines?
edited…I thought I was in a different comment thread! How’d I get in here?
‘Bulo, I just assumed he had paid all the filing fees. I heard that the Libertarian party doesn’t have a filing fee.
El Som – You’re wrong. Sorry.
Recall Karen Hartley-Nagle’s 2006 campaign for Congress. She ran in the general as an IPOD and in the Democratic primary as a Democrat. She lost to Spivack in the primary, but if she’d won, she would have been on both the D and I lines. Same applies to McVey.
There was a bill to ban fusion candidacies a few years back, but it didn’t pass. It was in response to KHN’s fusion attempt, if I recall correctly.
We are not an open-primary state when it comes to voter registration, true. But if someone wants to run on two or three tickets and has the money and wins the primaries, God bless ’em!
UI – I think there is a form that has to be signed and notorized by the minor party chair (or exec committee) that an official meeting of the party (I would say convention, but the IPoD fiasco with a certain someone in ’08 changed the definition of ‘convention’) convened and selected so-and-so as their candidate for that office. That’s statewide, tho, so not sure about the local spots. You are right, tho, no filing fee. That is a thing of the major parties.
As far as filing for a major party, not of your own, isn’t there some form of sworn statement that an affiliation change will happen with that filing? Just asking, don’t know for sure.
anon – I think El Som is referring to someone running in both major parties, not the fusion of a minor and a major party.
Smitty – There’s no functional difference between a major or minor party. Everyone who makes it to the ballot line gets treated the same.
I was going to ask that question anon -how would we tell the difference between major and minor line on a ballot.
So, it sounds like as long as McVay got some official to sign off he can run on any of these lines. I assume if he won one and wanted to accept he would have to join that party.
Who knew that it was easier to be a candidate on the Democratic party line than to join a Democratic committee.
anon, KHN ran on the IPOD line because there was no primary for IPOD.
after the filing deadline passes each party can fill empty slots by whatever process they choose.
From Ginger Gibson’s post:
Ishmael,
The reason she ran on the IPOD line doesn’t matter. What’s your point?
What matters is that it can and has been done, El Som’s unsupported claims to the contrary.
my point is not the “why” but the “how”.
“it” (running in two party primaries at one time) has never been done in Delaware.
While Comissioner Manlove waits for the lawyers to weigh in, let me predict the future:
If it is not illegal today to run in multiple party primaries for one seat or multiple seats simultaniously… it will be next year. The loophole will be closed.
It hasn’t been done in a primary. Of course you can be on two lines in the general. The same thing happened with the ‘Working Families Party’.
I still believe that you have to be an affiliated member of a particular party in order to run in their primary.
Paul Falkowski used to switch his party registration seemingly every election cycle to give himself (what he thought) was his best chance to win. And there are numerous other examples as well. But that’s different from filing to run in a party primary where you’re not even a member of the party in question.
El Som – Fine that you believe it, but where’s it say that?
Read through Title 15 carefully. McVey can’t vote for himself in the D or R primaries, but there’s nothing excluding him from being a candidate in multiple party primaries.
Primary rules are generally the domain of the parties, not state law. That’s why, for example, filing fees go to the party, not to the state. The party MAY return filing fees if it chooses to do so, but it is not obligated to.
These are, after all, party primaries we’re discussing.
Wait until the parties weigh in before making a final judgement. Maybe Rebecca’s already got some word from John Daniello.
Comparing KHN to this situation is like apples to oranges. KHN was a registered Democrat running in a Democratic primary who also was the endorsed candidate by the IPOD for the general election.
Will McVay is a registered Libertarian (I believe, because he is the Kent County Libertarian Party chair) who is the endorsed candidate by that party for the general election while trying to primary a Democrat AND a Republican. NOT the same situation.
Primarying someone as a registered member of your party while being endorsed for the general election by another party (KHN) is one thing. That is the fusion candidate we’re all familiar with. This is unprecedented… and it’s unclear whether it’s legal.
Everyone likes to point to the Margaret Rose Henry example as a reason why someone can be registered with one party and endorsed by another, but she never primaried someone on a different ticket. (El Som can expound on that some more.) Again, completely different.
Whether it’s legal or not is something for the attorneys to work out. Point is that it hasn’t happened before, so there is bound to be a lot of intrigue to this.
I know Will from high school…..interesting guy, and, as we say down here, “smart as a whip.” He’s probably done his homework on this and done it well. Smart and creative is a potent combination. Keep an eye on this – could be an interesting ride.
The Margaret Rose Henry situation was unusual, to say the least. She indeed was a registered D when she was chosen. That was for a Special Election following the death of Sen. Herman Holloway, Sr. Hence, there was no primary, and the candidates were selected by the respective parties. The D’s chose Herman Holloway, Jr., aka ‘Herman the Lesser’, one of the oiliest characters I’ve ever come across.
I think (but I’m not sure) that this took place during one of those periods where voter registration was ‘frozen’, i.e. during a time when one couldn’t switch their registration. Henry did switch her registration to R when she could. And, a couple of years later, in an act that destroyed the R’s best chance to take over the Senate, she shocked Sen. Minority Leader Myrna Bair by announcing that she was crossing the aisle to join the D’s.
I was actually ordered to leave Dover that day right after the press conference, and to go to Wilmington to ‘secure her papers’. Amazing stuff.
Oh, bullshit. El Som and whoever the Straight Scoop is, you’re both at least mildly delusional and far too up the butts of the major parties to see clearly.
The major parties abdicated their ability to dictate the rules of their primaries when they turned the mechanisms over to the state and let the law rule. They cannot simply change their minds in mid-stream now that they encounter a situation they don’t like. If the parties paid for the cost of the primaries, or just held conventions to pick their nominees, that’d be one thing, but they don’t. They have no legal recourse or even ability to “weigh in.” It’s in the hands of Elaine Manlove now, and tough shit to Daniello and Ross if the ruling goes against them.
As best I’ve been able to determine, the law is silent on this issue. So if it’s not prohibited, then it’s allowed. Simple.
If you can find something in Title 15 that bans such a practice, please post it here. Otherwise, you’re wrong.
I contacted the Democratic Party and asked if this was legal. The answer I got was “we’re looking into it.” I think the most we can say is that so far it’s not illegal, at least on first glance at the state law.
BTW, I think this is a pretty clever way for William McVay to get his name out there and name recognition is everything in politics.
Even so, UI, what could the party do if it determined it was illegal but the DOE said it was OK? Sue the state, which is carrying the cost of the entire political primary system that should be paid for by the parties themselves?
I assume the parties are working with the Dept. of Elections. I doubt the party would sue but I think they have to be worried now about shenanigans. There’s still time for others to file multiple party if this is allowed.
FTR, this is completely looking like what I referenced earlier, but 100% botched the name: Earl Warren (former Gov of CA and former Supreme Court Justice). Even though I read in much further detail of this guy’s method to get elected, here is an excerpt from Wikipedia on Earl Warren:
Anon wrote: “…you’re both at least mildly delusional and far too up the butts of the major parties to see clearly.”
Don’t think you’ve been reading my stuff for too long if that’s what you think. Your description of me defines the term you used earlier: ‘unsubstantiated”.
And, FWIW, I’m not upset about McVay’s gambit at all. I love the theatre, especially the low comedic aspects of it, that is Delaware politics.
UI – What gives the parties the ability or right to work with the DOE? They turned the conduct of their primary elections over to the state. The only thing they can control is the filing fee. Tough shit to Daniello and Ross.
ES – Really? Then why all the protestations that this just simply MUST be illegal?
anon,
You kinda need to chill. We’re just asking questions trying to find out if this will stand. It’s not mine or ‘Bulo’s fault that the primary system is the way it is. Yes, I think it’s weird that the money goes to the party and the state pays for it.
UI,
I’m not the one going around shooting my mouth off about how McVey’s triple-threat candidacy must be illegal, or chattering about how the parties are investigating, without doing any sort of research or critical inquiry to find out more. You mention “the primary system being the way it is,” apparently without having even examined the law that governs the primary system!
Sorry if I offended either of you, but I have a strong dislike for people who uncritically parrot the party line without doing any sort of digging or taking five minutes to look at independent sources.
Kind of comical that the impression (although I am sure not the intent) is that anon is the only one who has the right to be offended. How offensive that anyone else here feel offended! 😛
Back to this thread, though…I just read the link that delawareonline published this morning to Ginger’s update. If, for nothing else, one thing this has accomplished, this is one hell of a genius PR move. Granted, I believe it’s deeper than that and I think ballot access has some motive, but the free PR is great for him right now.
Anon,
Please re-read my earlier post. Nowhere did I say that it WAS illegal, just that this is a situation that hasn’t happened in Delaware politics before, so therefore there’s no “test case” to base this off. Any comparisons to KHN or Margaret Rose Henry aren’t entirely the same.
You might be completely right (having read both chapters 31 (primary election) and 33 (nominations of candidates) of Title 15) that absence is permission. And if that’s the case, it’s a loophole that likely will be closed come January. Again, no one said you were wrong. But until there’s a definitive answer from the AG’s office, all we have is our individual readings of the laws and our interpretation of the intent of the primary system.
There’s no reason we can’t have a calm discussion about this and marvel at witnessing something truly unique in Delaware politics.
RSmitty – What do the party hacks have to be offended by? They screwed up by not having their tools in Leg Hall write the laws with specification. They apparently thought they were untouchable because of their “major party” status and protections in the law.
I’m all for opening up ballot access to make it easier for everyone. Unfortunately, the way state law is written, you have to jump through a thousand and one hurdles to get on there if you’re not a D or R. If you do sell your soul to the big parties, however, you can get on as easy as pie, with just some cash.
Did you know that no other parties are allowed to use the words Democrat or Republican in their names in Delaware? Title 15, Section 3302(b). Their very identity is protected by law. Tell me that’s not wrong! Sorry, Democratic Socialists; sorry, Log Cabin Republicans. If you wanted to form a political party, it’s not allowed.
OK, here’s something from the Delaware Code that might shed some light…
Title 15, Chapter 31 (Primary Elections)
3106(a)(2) Candidates for all other offices:
a. All candidates for county or countywide office, members of the General Assembly and/or municipal office for any municipality holding its election at the time of the general election shall notify the county chair, or the county chair’s designee, in writing (or the city chair, or the city chair’s designee, if applicable for municipal candidates) of their respective political party in their county of residence on forms prescribed by the State Election Commissioner on or before the deadline set forth in § 3101(1) of this title.
Let’s strip away the excess language and get to the heart of it:
All candidates for non-statewide office shall notify the county chair of their respective political party in their county of residence before the deadline. (emphasis mine)
This is an extremely rudimentary reading of the code, but doesn’t that imply that to be a candidate in a primary election, you must be a member of that political party?
Also, the next subsection says that filing fees must be “payable to the county committee of the candidate’s political party…”
Again, a direct reference to the candidate’s political party in a primary. I’m not an attorney, but I have to imagine that adds fuel to the debate. And it accommodates Anon’s request to read the code and post a specific example that might this candidacy.
Feel free to discuss…
Thanks for posting that part of the code. I’m no lawyer but I see that as a bit inconclusive. I guess it depends on how the rest of the code is worded.
I agree with anon that this is a genius PR move, and a win-win for McVay. He’s probably gotten more attention with that spend than he would have gotten with mailings and yard signs. I think it also puts Bennett and Miller on notice that he’s got money to spend. (That’s my interpretation anyway.)
UI
you are correct! McVay scores a major earned media coup. Regardless of the final outcome, he is likely to get national media attention.
if the Elections Dept./AG ultimately reject his aplication for the D & R primaries, he will get his money back which makes all the publicity free.
This is an oddity, but it will ultimately mean absolutely nothing. Neither the Dem nor the Rep will waste any money on these primaries and will still win them easily. One of those two will then win the general election.
as for the “1000 and one hurdles” to gain ballot access.
HA!
can you say “Blue Enigma Party”?
getting on the ballot in delaware is practically a drinking game.
I agree with anon1. Anon seems to think that this brilliant coup will pave the way for some kind of fusion candidacy and victory. It won’t. Even if it turns out that he has found this loophole and successfully exploited it, it’ll be pointless. Maybe the loophole was there, if indeed it is there, b/c it was just assumed that nobody would do something that stupid. A Libertarian running in both D and R primaries will get the votes, and only the votes, of Libertarians who switch their registration. Which likely isn’t what the Libertarian Party wants.
And, to make it clear, I don’t CARE whether this guy runs in two primaries of which he is not a member. He will have no impact in the primary or in the general election.
So, other than getting some pub during the portion of the summer when the fewest people are paying attention, except for political junkies like us, what exactly has he accomplished?
The problem is that even if you believe the code gives preference to members of that party, which I think it does, that would only affect the Democrat primary. The Republican happens to be unaffiliated in her registration.
To the EL comment, wrong if the the man keeps campaigning like he has been all year he will get votes in both primaries. I doubt that he will win, but I promise you that he will gain double digit percentage in the votes maybe over 10 to 25%. If they ignore campaigning, then anything can happen. Unlike most Libertarians this guy is actually campaigning like he wants to get votes. Most just file to make a statement. This guy is after party building. It used to be that you could fit the Kent County Libertarian meeting in a mini van comfortably. Now it has packed rooms rivaling the major parties. If you want to know what he plans to gain go to DP.
EL, you of all people know that he will get zero Libertarian votes in the primary because no one can switch parties after the March deadline.
David, there is no Libertarian primary. McVay is the only filed candidate.
If Miller is unaffiliated and allowed to run as a Republican in the Republican primary, then there’s nothing preventing McVey from doing so as well. The code sections quoted by The Straight Scoop thus mean nothing.
“This is an oddity, but it will ultimately mean absolutely nothing. Neither the Dem nor the Rep will waste any money on these primaries and will still win them easily. One of those two will then win the general election.”
I have a two word responce “Alvin Greene”
I have two words for you, “Spell Check.”
If it’s now in the hands of the Dept of Elections, doesn’t that mean it’s in the hands of a major party person? I always got the impression that Elaine Manlove was a loyal Democrat.
The thread and others keep on going for Mr McVay. All this advertising and how much has to be reported in the 30- and 8- day reports for it? $0.
Virtual handshake to McVay.
To add on, Delaware Liberal has become quite the boon for Delaware Libertarians this past weekend.
I always got the impression that Elaine Manlove was a loyal Democrat.
Two responses, Geezer:
– Given it’s an appointed spot and looking over history of that spot, it tends to be someone that is loyal to the insert-party-holding-sway all of the time.
– I have found Elaine Manlove to be fair in her roles, past and present, working for the dept of Elections. Keep in mind, I wouldn’t normally attempt to defend against a statement like yours, unless my experiences are what I made in this point. We’ll see how she responds to this scenario, but I have to say that I am at least satisfied with her work in this role moreso than I was with her predecessor.