Remarks of Ken Krawchuk, 2002 Libertarian PA gubernatorial candidate, at the kickoff rally for the Voter's Choice Act

Harrisburg State Capitol
September 24, 2005

Did you ever witness a terrible accident? Maybe it was a car crash. Or an industrial accident. Perhaps some outlandish tragedy at the end of a series of impossible causes.

Do you remember how you felt? That initial lack of understanding as you watched it unfold, that puzzled feeling of, "Why is he doing that?" Then the shocking realization that it's not deliberate, but an accident, and you're not in a position to prevent it? The helpless, sinking feeling as you watch, knowing full well what's about to happen? Capped off by the unreality of the actual tragedy happening, right before your eyes.

Frightening, isn't it? Don't you sometimes wish you could have known sooner how the tragic events might unfold? Maybe you would have a chance to be able to divert it, even avert it entirely? But that's not the way accidents work, is it?

Folks, I have some good news, and some bad news. The bad news is that there's a terrible accident about to happen. The good news is that it's not too late to divert it, perhaps even stop it.

We already know what the accident will be. We already know who the victim is. We even know it's cause. And we hold the solution in our hands.

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm here today to warn you that there's a political train wreck coming in 2006. Over one million voting age Pennsylvanians will risk being denied their right to vote for the candidate of their choice. Perhaps you'll be one of them. I already know I am. Let me explain.

Under Pennsylvania law, members of the two old parties need to collect 2,000 signatures to get their names on the statewide ballot. But if you're an independent candidate or a member of any of the many third parties, that same law requires you to collect, and I quote, "a minimum number of valid signatures equal to 2% of the number of votes received by any candidate for any office in the preceding November election within that electoral district." Got that?

Let's take that arcane formula and visually present what it means. Assume that this twelve inch ruler represents the 2,000 signatures required of candidates from the two old parties. How many do we third parties need? I have here a tape measure. Let's pull out 12 inches, but that's not nearly enough to represent what we need. Let's pull out two feet, three feet, five feet, ten feet, twelve feet! Because in a typical year, it works out to somewhere between 21,000 and 26,000 signatures, roughly twelve times the 2,00o that are asked of candidates from the two old parties.

As unreasonable as that number seems, it gets worse. Some signatures are sure to have some flaw which prevents them from being counted, so it's always necessary to collect additional signatures as a cushion to prevent challenges similar to what they did to Ralph Nader last year. So we must collect thousands more, stretching that tape measure past twelve feet out past fifteen feet, past seventeen, all the way out to twenty feet! That represents the 40,000 signatures that we collected to get our statewide candidates on the ballot last year, twenty times as many as the 2,000 that the two old parties needed.

Still with me? Because it gets worse -- much worse. Because of a fluke in the election cycles, there will be no statewide races this year. So rather than computing that 2% number based upon this years judges' races, races which are usually poorly attended, the number will be based instead on Bob Casey Jr.'s 2004 vote total. So how many will we need? Not twenty times as many, not twenty-five, not thirty times, but over thirty-three times as many! In 2006, third party and independent candidates will be required to submit no less than 67,070 signatures, as compared to a mere 2,000 for candidates from the two old parties. Thirty-three times as many.

And it doesn't stop there. Remember that additional signatures are always needed as a cushion, making that 67,000 number grows to 70,000, to 80,000, past 90,000, all the way to 100,000 signatures! Fifty times as many signatures as the two old parties! In a land that's known for freedom, how can such a thing be fair? Well, it's not – which is why we're here today.

So what do we do? How do we avoid this accident we can so plainly see coming? I'm glad you asked.

Earlier this year, all of the third parties in the Commonwealth joined together to form the Pennsylvania Ballot Access Coalition. Our Coalition is composed of Libertarians, Greens, Constitutionals, Socialists, Prohibitionists, and independents such as the Ralph Nader campaign. We put aside all our differences and focused on that one area where we all agree: fair ballot access.

Over the course of several months, we drafted a new law called the Voters Choice Act. The law aims to do only one thing: eliminate the complicated formula! When the Act passes, the formula will vanish from three places in the law: First, regarding how a new political party gets recognized; second, with how many signatures it takes a third party to get their candidates on the ballot; and third, with how many signatures an independent candidate needs to get on the ballot. Let's look at them one at a time:

Currently, a new "minor political party" gets recognized when they receive enough votes according to that complicated 2% formula. Under the Voters Choice Act, a new minor party would be recognized by the state when five one hundredths (0.05%) of the citizens register with that party. This is the same threshold that neighboring Delaware uses, and to their advantage -- their voter turnout is greater than ours.

Next, under current law, for a minor political party to get their candidate on the ballot, it requires anywhere from twelve times as many signatures as the two old parties, up to fifty times as many, depending on circumstances. But under the Voters Choice Act, the signature requirement would be eliminated for any recognized minor political party. Instead, they would nominate candidates directly according to their party rules, and at their own expense. Again, this is something that Delaware law provides for, and again to their advantage, since it fosters greater voter participation and the spread of new ideas.

Thirdly, the Voters Choice Act would change how an independent candidate gets on the ballot. Currently, they are required to collect the same number of signatures as the third parties, up to fifty times as many. Rather than up to 100,000 signatures, independent candidates would use the same number of signatures that the old parties need.

To summarize, the Voters Choice Act would reform ballot access laws by making it easier to form new political parties, and making it easier for their candidates and independent candidates to get on the ballot. And it's not some Grand Experiment, as Pennsylvania itself once was. Rather, it's merely following the lead of our neighboring state to the south, Delaware.

Why am I bothering to tell you all this? Why have we all come out here on this beautiful Saturday? Because there is something you can do to stop the accident we all see coming. Remember the words of the grassroots activist, ten words, two letters each: If it is to be, it is up to me. So what can you do?

Go to PaBallotAccess.org. Print out the white paper there. Read it. Familiarize yourself with it. Call your state rep and state senator. Make an appointment. Give them a copy Ask them to sponsor it. Get involved! You don't have to be a citizen. You don't have to be a voter. You don't have to be anybody. You just have to believe as we do, that in a land that's known for freedom, how can such a thing be fair?