The Badger Herald

NEWS

Nader stays on ballot

Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.

Also by Ryan Masse:

by Ryan Masse

Friday, October 1, 2004

A mere hour before John Kerry and George Bush squared off in Florida, the state of Wisconsin settled a debate of its own Thursday when the state Supreme Court ruled independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader will appear on the Wisconsin ballot.

In overturning a previous ruling by Dane County Circuit Court Judge Michael Nowakowski, the Supreme Court found Nader to have achieved “substantial compliance” with the requirements for ballot access in Wisconsin. Furthermore, the state’s high court found the State Elections Board to have correctly used its discretion in putting Nader on the ballot.

“As there is simply no time to appropriately remand this matter to either the trial court or to the board to properly exercise its discretion, and given the right of qualified voters to cast their votes effectively, I join in the court’s mandate,” concurring Justice Louis Butler wrote.

The court directed the State Elections Board to certify Nader and running mate Peter Camejo as candidates for president and vice president, respectively. Wisconsin became the 33rd state in which Nader has gained ballot access, with litigation pending in 12 others.

The Supreme Court’s decision provided the final chapter in a fierce three-week-long legal battle between Nader and the Democratic Party. The Democrats have alleged Nader failed to meet all filing requirements by not listing an elector from Wisconsin’s 7th Congressional District on his nomination papers. The Elections Board rejected the argument, but Dane County Circuit Court Judge Michael Nowakowki sided with the Democrats in removing Nader from the ballot Tuesday.

Nowakowski’s ruling prompted an immediate petition from the Nader campaign to the Supreme Court. The Democrats argued the court lacked original jurisdiction over the matter, but the court disagreed Thursday.

With all legal recourse exhausted, the Democratic Party now must accept Nader’s presence on the ballot — although that might not be such a bad thing, according to chair of UW College Democrats, Liz Sanger.

“Nothing is going to change — Democrats aren’t worried about Ralph Nader this year,” Sanger said. “It’s a different environment this year and Kerry is stronger on the issues than Nader.”

The Nader campaign, meanwhile, can shift its focus from the courtroom to the campaign trail.

“It definitely has hindered our ability to spend time getting our message out,” said Nader’s Wisconsin coordinator Bill Linville. “At the same time, I think it’s evident to the Wisconsin people that the Democrats weren’t doing this because of rules, like they said, but because they were afraid of Ralph Nader.”

Even the Republican Party got involved in the matter, filing a friend of the court brief in support of Nader’s petition Wednesday. In a statement, Republican Party of Wisconsin executive director Darrin Schmitz accused the Democrats of “resorting to whatever means necessary to disenfranchise a sizable number of Wisconsin voters and deny them a choice on election day.”

Linville wasn’t grateful for either party’s legal wrangling.

“[The Republicans] filed a brief and we couldn’t stop them, but we were not appreciative of their help, and we don’t appreciate either party intervening either way in our campaign,” Linville said.

With the Nader saga in the past, Democratic Party spokesman Seth Boffeli looked to the future, which he said appeared brighter after Kerry’s performance in the debate with Bush Thursday.

“We’re certainly disappointed in the Supreme Court’s ruling,” Boffeli said. “But America saw John Kerry as president tonight. His stances were thought out and well articulated.”

Feedback

Show all comments

Hide anonymous comments

Anonymous (October 1, 2004 @ 10:50am):

Guess who else is on the ballot? James Block...yet NO ONE KNOWS. The newspaper is not doing its Job!!! WWW.voteblock.com

Tony (October 1, 2004 @ 11:49am):

This whole issue of whether or not Nader should be on the ballot shows how hypocritical and evil the democrats are. They bitched and moaned about how the voters of Florida in the 2000 election were disenfranchised due to the who saga with the ballots. However, now they are trying to disenfranchise voters of many states by denying them their right to vote for Nader because they fear he will take away votes from Kerry. Funny how the Republicans didn't sue in 2000 to keep Pat Buchanan off of the ballot when he most certainly took votes away from Bush. If there is one thing that you can always count on from the democrats it is contradictions and hatred.

Anonymous (October 1, 2004 @ 2:45pm):

A vote for Block is a vote for a gutless chicken who is afraid to actually state his positions in the Badger Herald.

Anonymous (October 1, 2004 @ 3:24pm):

Who is this Block guy and why hasn't there been anything about in the papers about his positions? If both papers would just placate him and give him a blurb, maybe we wouldn't have all these people polluting the feedback boards.

Anonymous (October 3, 2004 @ 7:36pm):

It's funny that the Republican party accuses the Democrats of trying to disenfranchise voters when that is a crucial part of their own election strategy in Florida, Michigan, Kentucky, West Virginia, Arkansas, Louisiana, and several other states.

Anonymous (October 3, 2004 @ 10:45pm):

I think the most ironic thing is that while Nader's campaign whines (appropriately) about the idiotic Dem efforts to kick him off ballots, his own campaign has tried to do the same thing to David Cobb, the Green Party candidate in CA, UT, VT, and other states. What a hypocrite!