The Lincoln Plawg - the blog with footnotes

Politics and law from a British perspective (hence Politics LAW BloG): ''People who like this sort of thing...'' as the Great Man said

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?
Tuesday, November 30, 2004

Did the Dems try to keep Bush off the ballot?

A commenter on Kos has an interesting piece of testimony on reasons Dems had not to turn out for Kerry: some, when asked, said
because they heard how Bush failed to meet a deadline to get his name several state ballots and the Democrats refused to push this in court.

As it happened, I mentioned back on June 4 the problem Bush had in Illinois: the late GOP convention meant that he would not accept the nomination in time to qualify under state law.

At that stage, a bill (SB 955) was in the legislature with corrective amendments, but was being held up by Dems with riders. An alternative being canvassed was a Federal court order.

Evidently, the problem was fixed - how, I can't tell right now.

But the question remains: did the Democrats, with a majority in both houses of the legislature, do all they could to keep Bush off the Illinois ballot? If not, why not?

(According to the Illinois General Assembly site, SB 955 was never passed.)


One mystery solved: the bill that did the trick for Bush in Illinois was SB2123, which became law on July 8.

There is a quote [1] from a Dem senator Rickey Hendon the day after passage of the bill:
This shows that [Democrat Senate President] Emil Jones has bipartisan cooperation in his heart.

Apparently, the vote in the House was 108-1.

But surely - as the Swifties demonstrated (as if it needed demonstrating) - a presidential campaign is hardly a time for bipartisan cooperation (or heart, come to think of it).

Now, stymieing Bush in IL would rank as pretty scorched earth - a whole mess of incoming would not doubt have ensued. (Though - would we have noticed?)

But - rules are rules. Did the Kerry campaign address the issue? Coordinate the response of Dem legislators in the state(s) affected?

  1. The date does not match the bill status page details.

free website counter Weblog Commenting and Trackback by