Why should there be a $10k+ filing fee to run for the Senate?

[Truth2Tell]

Since Alvin Greene's filing fee seems to be such a popular topic of discussion I can't help wondering...

What's up with a $10,400 filing fee for ANY public office?

Is everybody cool with that?

:shrug:

[Shrek]

1. It's to keep the ballot from being flooded with unserious candidates

Anyone who doesn't want to spend the money can also get on the ballot by collecting signatures on a petition.

[Truth2Tell]

2. Seems to me it keeps the ballot from being flooded

by people who aren't in possession of $10,400. I imagine that would be an extremely high percentage of the population of the State.

Do you have some info on the signature option? link?

On edit: don't worry about a link... I don't care. Signature alternatives are insulting on their face. A person not in possession of $10k somehow needs to demonstrate their "seriousness" by engaging in a massive personal effort, while those with $10k are clearly already serious?

[Shrek]

5. Link

http://www.slate.com/id/2256774/

Although the filing fees can help offset the cost of running elections, Greene's hand-scrawled check for $10,440 barely made a dent in the $2.5 million it reportedly took the state to keep its polls open on Tuesday. One effect of filing fees may be to keep the ballot from clogging up with names (those long ballots can get expensive!). But the Supreme Court has ruled that filing fees can't be used to prevent poorer citizens from getting on the ballot. So if aspiring nominees can't pony up the requisite fee, they can petition for a spot (free of charge) by collecting a certain number of signatures.

[Truth2Tell]

6. see my edit above nt

[Shrek]

8. SC is more expensive than most other states

Filing fees can range anywhere from zero (Arizona, New York, and Michigan) to thousands of dollars (South Carolina, Florida). The exact method for calculating the fee varies from state to state, but the states generally use one of three methods. The cheapest state filing fees are set at an arbitrary sum that is generally below $500. (Hawaii, for instance, charges $75; Maryland charges $290.) Other states, like North Carolina, will charge a candidate a percentage (usually 1 percent) of the first year of income for the position he or she is seeking. If Greene were just over the border in North Carolina, for instance, he would have had to pay only $1,740 to enter the primary for U.S. Senate.

Not saying I agree with any of this; I was just trying to answer your question.

[Boojatta]

13. There should be a $10,000 filing fee before you begin bombing people with letter bombs.

For example, if there had been a requirement to pay that fee before Unambomber Ted Kaczynski began his bombing campaign, and if he had failed to pay the fee, then we would know that his bombing campaign was just a harmless practical joke rather than something serious.

[woo me with science]

27. They should do that for votng, too, right?

Lotsa non-serious voters out there.

[Selatius]

3. To keep poor people from running and representing their class interests.

For that matter, why should it cost so much to run any campaign. It makes sense to keep the current system in place instead of publicly financed elections if you really want to keep ordinary people out of office and power.

[rucky]

4. straight up

there's no other reason.

[oberliner]

18. Not true

But the Supreme Court has ruled that filing fees can't be used to prevent poorer citizens from getting on the ballot. So if aspiring nominees can't pony up the requisite fee, they can petition for a spot (free of charge) by collecting a certain number of signatures.

(From Slate)

[glen123098]

7. I think there should be no filing fee and instead...

A candidate should be required to get a certain amount of signatures. That will keep the joke candidates off the ballet and make it so less wealthy serious candidates can make the ballet.

[NNN0LHI]

17. Larouchies are really good at gathering signatures

So I don't think that will work.

Don

[glen123098]

20. Well if Larouchies get the signatures than they deserve to be on the ballot.

[NNN0LHI]

21. Yea we need to keep an eye on the banana fungus

Thats for sure.

Don

[Crystal Clarity]

9. I'm not cool with it

The whole thing sounds ludicrous to me.

[John N Morgan]

10. It's the same in FL. $10440 for US Senate or Rep

[old mark]

11. The theory is that anyone who can afford the fee must be an upright, productive solid citizen...

although many of South Carolina's former and current elected officials disprove that theory....It also serves to keep the poor in their place - powerless.


mark

[mwooldri]

12. $10k+ is a bit steep IMO...

A filing fee of sorts, yes.

AFAIK in the UK it's a £500 deposit, which is returned if you get more than X% of the vote. This is for the Westminster Parliamentary elections.

It appears to me that if you're not with one of the big two parties, it's near impossible to get on the ballot. Should be easier for more people to get on the ballot, even with a signature requirement and a filing fee. Then we can see something happen in party politics that's beginning to take shape in the UK: multi-party politics, which is good for the country as a whole because politicians have to work things out between them and one just can't force across through party lines. The GOP seem to do a better job of keeping their elected representatives in toe with the official party line than do the Democrats so the big two parties here are more "big tent" parties (with the Democratic Party's tent being bigger btw) with plenty of dissent... sometimes it's like herding cats... but breaking up the duopoly could be a good thing in the long run and put US politics more in line with that of the rest of the known world.

[KonaKane]

14. It keeps the poor from ever running for office.

Because, as everyone knows, only rich people could possbily make good legislators and representatives.

[Edweird]

15. You gotta keep the 'riif raff' out.....

[quaker bill]

16. There isn't.

It is only one option. The alternative for ballot access in most states is to collect a sufficient number of signatures on petitions. The fee is a substitute for the collection of signatures. The assumption runs that anyone seriously running for the office will either be able to produce the petition or have sufficient contributions to pay the fee.

[Greyhound]

25. Which has been shown false since its inception, n/t

[quaker bill]

26. Not so much

There are relatively rare exceptions. However, if one cannot get the signatures or raise the funds, then the chance of winning the election is pretty low. Only recently have republicans gone with a "crowding the ballot" approach, where they liberalize laws for ballot access to put lots of liberals on the ballot to dilute liberal voting strength. In FL, for the first time in 2000, there were 8 Presidential tickets on the ballot, and most were far left alternatives to voting for Gore. The republican controlled legislature and JEB did this quite on purpose.

[Rage for Order]

19. A poll tax by any other name... n/t

[ellenfl]

22. so only the rich can run? eom

[treestar]

23. Are there any fundraisers around?

If you are seriously running, that much might not be that hard to collect.

And there is always the signature route.

[Greyhound]

24. To keep the riff-raff out of their club.

That seems obvious to me.
:kick: & R

[Obamanaut]

28. It's an 'either/or' thing - perhaps used by people who are too lazy

to get signatures on a petition to run

[IndianaGreen]

29. How did the unemployed Mr. Greene come up with that money?

And why would an unemployed person blow 10 grand on such a thing?

[KharmaTrain]

30. Elections Are Expensive...

Primaries are run by the parties...and they shoulder most of the costs of operating the polling places. While the public bears the costs of a general election, I don't think they should for a primary. Most states you have to vote on a separate ballot. I don't want my tax money to go to paying for the GOOP primary. Thus someone has to pay the costs of running these elections. The alternative is coing back to coventions and "slating"...reduce the costs and then demand reducing or eliminating the filing fee.

[Heywood J]

31. Does anyone really want a ballot like that from the California recall election?

I'm sure we can find some happy medium (not necessarily a fee) that doesn't disenfranchise serious candidates from running, but doesn't force the voter to turn the page when looking for their candidate of choice.

I'm not adverse to an signature-only option, to prove you have a certain level of support in the community.