Here are two cases of Republicans 1. doing the same thing as Torricelli in
MN in 1990, and 2. manipulating the NJ election law in 2001 to change a
primary election date to get a preferred candidate on the ballot. The
Torricelli "precedent" was set many years ago, and I'm sure many more
examples exist of similar behavior by Democrats as well as Republicans.
I agree with the previous arguments - the limiting factor is the candidate
must willingly withdraw from the election. U.S. political parties do not
have control over nomination procedures, and cannot force an unsavory
candidate to withdraw without the candidate's consent. Withdrawing from an
election effectively ends a political career (at least as an elected
official), and is not a lightly made decision. If someone wants to
withdraw, let them, and allow the parties to fill the slot so that voters
still have a democratic (pun intended) choice at the polls.
==================================
Dr. Michael P. McDonald
Assistant Professor
Dept of Public and International Affairs
George Mason University
4400 University Drive - 3F4
Fairfax, VA 22030-4444
Office: 703-993-4191
Fax: 703-993-1399
Efax: 561-431-3190
mmcdon@gmu.edu
http://elections.gmu.edu/
I'm quoting below from my initial source, Howard Kurtz's Media Notes
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37139-2002Oct3.html).
1. By the way, before Republicans get too indignant, they might recall (as
CNN's Jeff Greenfield noted) that in October 1990, Jon Grunseth withdrew as
the GOP nominee for Minnesota governor after reports of an affair and
swimming naked with two teenagers. He was replaced on the ballot by Arne
Carlson, who won the election.
[I have confirmed this happened - there is a book written about it, entitled
"There Is No November" by Leon Oistad and David Hoium, two of Grunseth's
campaign staffers.]
2. And get this: "The Lautenberg-for-Torricelli substitution was eerily
reminiscent of the Republicans' move in last year's governor's race (NJ!).
"With acting Gov. Donald T. DiFrancesco under fire in an ethics controversy,
the GOP leadership persuaded him to withdraw from the primary and replaced
him on the ballot with former U.S. Rep. Robert Franks. The GOP, which
controlled the legislature, passed legislation delaying the primary for
three weeks to give Franks time to run a campaign." Franks lost the primary.
[Here's an article from the May 10, 2001 Bergen County Record]
Republican Bob Franks survived another effort Wednesday to knock
him off the gubernatorial primary ballot.
A three-judge state appeals panel unanimously rejected Republican
rival Bret Schundler's attempt to strike down a new state law that moved
the June 5 primary to June 26. That law effectively allowed Franks late
entry into the race.
Schundler's lawyers argued that the law was unconstitutional on
several grounds, mainly because it was"special legislation" allowing
acting Governor Donald T. DiFrancesco to withdraw from the race and pick
Franks as his replacement. At the heart of Schundler's challenge was a
section of the law
that revived a rarely used provision allowing DiFrancesco to name his
successor. DiFrancesco withdrew from the race April 25 amid reports over
his past business dealings. Franks was picked as DiFrancesco's
replacement the next day.
Schundler said the Republican-controlled Legislature conspired with
DiFrancesco and Republican leaders to pass the bill under false
pretenses. Lawmakers had said they needed to postpone the primary so
that dispute over newly drawn legislative districts could be resolved in
the courts.
But Schundler said the real purpose was to give DiFrancesco time
to name Franks. Before the law was changed, the deadline for the
so-called vacancy committee to pick a replacement had already passed.
The appeals panel rejected every argument that Schundler used to
defeat the law, which was enacted on April 23. The court also refused
to interpret the Legislature's motivations for passing the law.
"The judiciary cannot serve as the thought police,"wrote
Appellate Division Judge David S. Baime."A judge cannot and should not
be required to probe the innermost thoughts"of lawmakers.
The ruling upheld an earlier trial court ruling. A Schundler
spokesman said the campaign will appeal to the state Supreme Court,
which does not have to hear the case.
"We feel we had a very strong case and this issue goes beyond the
impact it has had on Bret's campaign,"said Bill Guhl, the campaign
spokesman."It would set a precedent for future elections, whereby the
process can 1 be manipulated by the act of the Legislature."
Bill Baroni, the Franks campaign lawyer who represented the
campaign in court, called on Schundler to abandon the legal challenge.
"Bret should stop using the New Jersey court system as a way to
hide from the Republican primary voters,"Baroni said.
The appeals court ruling was the second victory for Franks in as
many days. On Tuesday, the Franks campaign withstood a separate legal
challenge lodged by the state Democratic Party, which argued that the
Republican-controlled Senate violated the state constitution and the
Senate's own rules when it introduced the bill on April 24.
But the same panel also unanimously dismissed the suit.
Schundler also argued that the bill unfairly punished his campaign
because money he spent earlier in the race against DiFrancesco would be
deducted from the amount he is permitted to spend in the publicly
financed campaign. Overall, Schundler said he spent about $ 2 million on
the race, including $ 72,000 during the short time DiFrancesco was
officially qualified as a candidate.
He argued that Franks, who also will accept public matching funds
for the race, starts with a clean slate, even though he is an extension
of DiFrancesco's campaign. Both will be permitted to spend $ 5.9 million
on the race.
But the ruling said Franks and DiFrancesco are not a"single
interchangeable" candidate.
"There is no such animal as a composite candidate,"the ruling
said. "Although candidates may share ideological values, each candidate
campaigns as an individual and promotes his personal agenda."
Trenton Bureau Correspondent Charles Stile's e-mail address is
stile(at)northjersey.com