Plan to provide alternate path to ballot faces hurdles

What do you do if you want to create the appearance that you support providing an alternate path to the ballot for major-party candidates but don’t actually want to provide such an alternate path to the ballot?

You sponsor a bill that places requirements that are nearly impossible to reach and, in practicality, don’t provide an alternate path to the ballot. That’s especially effective in a 30-day session, when creating dissent can bog down a bill until there’s no time left to pass it.

That’s exactly what Rep. Jose Campos, D-Santa Rosa, is accused of doing.

At issue is whether Democrats and Republicans who don’t secure 20 percent at their party’s preprimary nominating convention should be allowed another way to get on the ballot. Under the previous law, they could do that by submitting petitions containing enough signatures to qualify, but a 2007 change, approved unanimously by lawmakers and signed by the governor, got rid of the second provision.

A bipartisan group of lawmakers from the House and Senate have sponsored legislation (read the House bill here and the Senate bill here) that would return the law to the way things were before the 2007 change. But Campos is making a different proposal that, at this stage, is the biggest threat to returning ballot access to major-party candidates who can’t secure the votes of 20 percent of party insiders.

Campos’ proposal, instead of merely requiring a certain number of signatures to get on the ballot, would give potential candidates less than three weeks to gather the signatures and would also require that those signatures come from every county in the state or congressional district. Campos says his goal is providing a voice to rural communities, not restricting ballot access.

Many say Campos’ proposal is unreasonable

After speaking with several current and former political candidates, politicians and campaign workers, I get the sense that the majority who have done this find Campos’ proposal unreasonable and disingenuous. Being given less than three weeks to reach every county makes this a restrictive proposal that’s not much better than the current law that provides no alternate path to the ballot, many said.

Of course, conspiracy theories abound. They center on a suspicion that Campos – a close ally of House Speaker Ben Lujan – doesn’t want the law changed because he wants to make it more difficult for other Democrats to run against the speaker’s son for the open Third Congressional District seat.

I was unable to reach Campos for comment. Lujan, for his part, says he supports providing an alternate path to the ballot. I asked today which bill he supports – the more restrictive one sponsored by Campos or the bill that would undo the 2007 changes, which is sponsored by Reps. Al Park, D-Albuquerque, and Justine Fox-Young, R-Albuquerque.

Lujan said he doesn’t know which bill he supports, but said both bills will soon be considered by the Consumer and Public Affairs Committee.

“I don’t know which bill will move out of there,” Lujan said. “I haven’t even read them at this point.”

Whichever bill makes it out of that committee also has to get by the Voters and Elections Committee, which is chaired by Campos and includes Lujan as a member.

An additional hurdle

There’s another hurdle. To take effect immediately – before the March 15 preprimary nominating conventions – either bill would need the approval of two-thirds of House members.

You might recall that Campos was the visible leader last year of the effort to kill a bill that proposed reform of the housing-authority system. A coalition of Republicans and Democrats threatened to blast the bill out of the committee that refused to pass it and bring it directly to the House floor for consideration, and they had enough votes to make good on the threat. That forced a compromise and got the bill by Campos and the speaker.

But getting a simple majority – which Park and Fox-Young could probably do for their bill – is much easier than getting two-thirds. Senate Majority Leader Michael Sanchez of Belen, one of the sponsors of the Senate version of the Park/Fox-Young bill, has already floated the idea that resolving this situation might have to wait until the 60-day session in 2009.

That would leave the current law that provides no alternate path to the ballot in effect for the 2008 election cycle. Five Democrats threaten to split the preprimary vote in the Third Congressional District race, and seven Republicans threaten to split the vote in the Second District, to the point that few – if any, in the case of the GOP in CD2 – will secure the 20 percent needed to get on the ballot.

And that’s why Third Congressional District candidate Don Wiviott is suing to challenge the law. If the Legislature doesn’t act, there’s a chance the law will be found unconstitutional and the 2007 changes will be tossed out before the March preprimaries.

Stay tuned.

Update, 1:35 p.m.

In an interview, Campos said criticism of his bill is unfair, and he sharply criticized Park, Fox-Young and others who disagree.

“Don’t cheapen the voice of rural New Mexico, and I think that’s what these Albuquerque metro people are trying to do,” Campos said.

He said under the old law, and the Park/Fox-Young proposal, political hopefuls have 10 days to gather the number of signatures required to run. In making them go to every county they seek to represent to gather those signatures, Campos’ proposal also doubles the time period to 20 days.

“If you’re not serious about representing all New Mexicans, you should not run,” Campos said. “Maybe it is easier for them to not have to go to the rural areas, but as long as I’m chair of voters and elections I’m going to try to get a greater voice for rural New Mexico.”