logo

Maine GOP: It's Our Right to Nominate Candidates Without Majority Support

image
Created: 04 May, 2018
Updated: 17 October, 2022
2 min read

The Maine Republican Party filed a complaint against Secretary of State Matt Dunlap Friday, asking the court to find ranked choice voting unconstitutional on the grounds that it is their right to decide how many of their primary voters actually matter.

It is yet another development in the ongoing efforts by the political establishment to defy the election reform before the June 12 primary.

In short, the Republican Party in Maine implemented a rule that says party nominees will be selected by a simple plurality system, which is in direct conflict with the state's new ranked choice voting rules.

They then filed a lawsuit using the same argument the Democratic Party has relied on in previous court cases for years -- their associational rights as a private organization.

But, in this case, the Maine GOP's argument so that it can invoke its associational rights is quite telling:

“While the plurality system under the Maine Constitution mandates that “a candidate who receives a plurality of the votes would be declared the winner of that election,” the RCV “Act, in contrast, would not declare the plurality candidate the winner of the election, but would require continued tabulation until a majority is achieved .” - Maine Republican Party v. Dunlap, pg. 4

They, seriously, are arguing that ranked choice voting requires a majority to be reached before a candidate is nominated. But, it's their First Amendment right to nominate candidates with just a plurality (i.e. a minority).

"This is the extremist element of one party once again trying to defy the law and the will of the people of Maine," says Cara McCormick, treasurer for the Committee for Ranked Choice Voting.

"They changed their rule this morning so they could file a lawsuit this afternoon to try and take away the people's right to choose the way we elect our leaders. This is precisely why we need ranked choice voting in the first place - to fix a broken system."

IVP Existence Banner

I might need to do some more research, but this could be the first time in history an organization, political or not, is going to the court to argue for their right to be controlled by a minority of their members.

Bizarre.

Check out the complaint for yourself:

Latest articles

votes
Wyoming Purges Nearly 30% of Its Voters from Registration Rolls
It is not uncommon for a state to clean out its voter rolls every couple of years -- especially to r...
27 March, 2024
-
1 min read
ballot box
The Next Big Win in Better Election Reform Could Come Where Voters Least Expect
Idaho isn't a state that gets much attention when people talk about politics in the US. However, this could change in 2024 if Idahoans for Open Primaries and their allies are successful with their proposed initiative....
21 March, 2024
-
3 min read
Courts
Why Do We Accept Partisanship in Judicial Elections?
The AP headline reads, "Ohio primary: Open seat on state supreme court could flip partisan control." This immediately should raise a red flag for voters, and not because of who may benefit but over a question too often ignored....
19 March, 2024
-
9 min read
Nick Troiano
Virtual Discussion: The Primary Solution with Unite America's Nick Troiano
In the latest virtual discussion from Open Primaries, the group's president, John Opdycke, sat down ...
19 March, 2024
-
1 min read
Sinema
Sinema's Exit Could Be Bad News for Democrats -- Here's Why
To many, the 2024 presidential primary has been like the movie Titanic - overly long and ending in a disaster we all saw coming from the start. After months of campaigning and five televised primary debates, Americans are now faced with a rematch between two candidates polling shows a majority of them didn’t want....
19 March, 2024
-
7 min read