Constitution Party of Utah and GOP Agree Elections Should Serve Parties

Constitution Party of Utah and GOP Agree Elections Should Serve Parties
Published: 03 Aug, 2015
2 min read

Residents of Utah are preparing for a different system for selecting general election candidates, but a third party is teaming up with a major party to maintain the status quo.

"Count My Vote," a plan to introduce a primary for candidates with sufficient signatures alongside the caucus-convention process, passed the Republican-dominated legislature in 2014. In the state's traditional caucus process, a candidate who received 60% of the delegates at the caucus would have his or her name automatically placed on the November ballot. This system ousted long-term incumbent U.S. Senator Bob Bennett in 2010, opening the door for Mike Lee, who won the primary runoff.

The Utah Republican Party has long opposed the "Count My Vote" campaign on the grounds that it violated the party's right of freedom of association. At a meeting of the GOP Central Committee in the spring, the party agreed to stop trying to prevent the law's implementation while also filing a lawsuit against it. At the meeting, they agreed to have the GOP become a "Qualified Political Party," maintaining their caucus system, while also providing that a person may get on the ballot by receiving enough signatures, in accordance with the law.

There has been no ruling yet on the law, but the Constitution Party of Utah filed a motion Friday to let it enter into settlement talks. What the Constitution Party appears to desire is a resolution without going to court or any further dragging out of animosities:

"A settlement conference may be very helpful in bringing about a settlement among the parties. It is the opinion of the Constitution Party of Utah that the barriers to settlement are surmountable. It will merely take energy and resolve to reach settlement. That is why the magistrate judge's involvement could be helpful in encouraging the parties to make progress toward the end goal."

The Constitution Party expressed its interest in the lawsuit earlier this year when the Utah GOP began threatening to sue the state. Collin Simonsen, a candidate for the U.S. House in 2014 -- who also signed Friday's motion -- said in February:

"The First Amendment extends special protection to the process by which a political party chooses to select its standard bearer and in this case the State has impermissibly interfered with that process. This lawsuit is essential to protect the freedom of association enjoyed by private political parties prior to the enactment of Senate Bill 54."

By inserting itself into the conflict, the Constitution Party of Utah is in a unique position. As a third party, the Constitution Party is frequently excluded from the broader electoral process by not having much access to media or candidates' debates. However, their presence in this dispute over the caucus adds to the debate about how candidates should be selected.

Photo Credit: Niyazz / shutterstock.com

You Might Also Like

New IVP 2026 California Governor Poll: What the Toplines Don’t Tell You
New IVP 2026 California Governor Poll: What the Toplines Don’t Tell You
Using verified California voter file data, IVP surveyed high-propensity voters from February 13 through 20. The poll tested first-choice ballot preferences alongside issue intensity on affordability and the cost of living, immigration enforcement, more choice reform, and more....
23 Feb, 2026
-
10 min read
81% of Americans Say Money Controls Politics – Can a Constitutional Amendment Fix It?
81% of Americans Say Money Controls Politics – Can a Constitutional Amendment Fix It?
Polls consistently show that nearly all Americans across the political spectrum agree that there is too much money in politics – whether from foreign sources, corporations, or so-called “dark money” groups. ...
23 Feb, 2026
-
13 min read
10 Reasons Why the Congressional Stock Trading Ban Will Never Pass
10 Reasons Why the Congressional Stock Trading Ban Will Never Pass
The overlap between committee assignments and stock ownership is not automatically illegal. Because the current legal framework permits this proximity as long as disclosure rules are followed, lawmakers are not operating under a system that forces change....
20 Feb, 2026
-
4 min read