Lessons learned from Electoral Board actions... could ballot access rules be relaxed?

Twenty-five years ago, when I was first circulating petitions to run for judge, it was tough getting people to open their front doors.

I had my poll sheets and my clipboard and my brochures---it was pretty obvious what I was up to---but, on porch after porch, after ringing the doorbell, I'd see the curtains or blinds move, just a little, and then... quite often... nothing happened. I'd wait awhile, awkwardly, hopefully. Then I'd move on.

It can't possibly be any easier today.

It seems like very time I see the news there's another story about someone impersonating a plumber, electric company employee, gas company employee -- whatever -- knocking on a door, bamboozling the homeowner into taking him to the basement or the yard while a confederate surreptitiously enters the house, scooping up electronics or jewelry.

Yeah, I know that has nothing to do with getting judicial candidates on the ballot. But you know what does? Every one of these stories ends with a police official warning viewers: Don't open your door. To anyone. Ever.

Now let me shift gears (I promise I can tie this up).

In this election cycle we have seen 21st Ward Ald. Howard Brookins knocked off the ballot because he couldn't scrounge up enough good signatures for a late-opening judicial vacancy. At the other end of the City, 50th Ward Committeeman Ira Silverstein nearly lost his bid for reelection to the State Senate before it began -- he reportedly had the same problem as Brookins (not enough signatures after a records examination), although I've read accounts indicating that Silverstein was able to rehabilitate just enough signatures to stay on the ballot.

These are the professionals, mind you. The Election Code was designed by the political professionals to get them on the ballot... and keep interlopers off.

I can't imagine ward committeemen or the sons of ward committeemen having trouble getting on the ballot in the days of Richard J. Daley. Unless, of course, they were troublemakers or malcontents from the 5th or 43rd Wards.

The pros knew how to get themselves---and those happy few who, for whatever reason, were chosen to fill out a ticket---on the ballot with a minimum of fuss. Professor Milton L. Rakove documented this in Don't Make No Waves, Don't Back No Losers (Indiana University Press, 1975). Da Late Mare supported Rakove's academic study of the Cook County Democratic Party to the point of giving him a place on the county ticket in 1970 (in a 'suicide squad' race for a suburban seat on the Cook County Board). Once anointed, though, Rakove realized that he had no idea how to get the signatures necessary to qualify for the ballot. He promptly repaired to party headquarters to ask Chairman Daley's office manager, Mary Mullen, what he should do. "She responded, pointing to a stack of petitions on a table, 'See that pile over there on that table? Those are your signatures, 8,000 names. This is an organization we are running here.'" (Don't Make No Waves..., p. 99, n. 1.)

In the Bad Old Days, Democratic Party committeemen had precinct captains ready and able to fan out across the county or any necessary part thereof to gather signatures for any vacancy, even if it just happened (*cough*cough*) to open up at the very last minute. The system worked... as designed... for those for whom it was designed to work.

In this election cycle, though, the system almost failed for one committeeman and didn't work for the son of another committeeman.

In Brookins' case, at least, part of the problem may have involved the use of paid circulators.

Paid circulators are most likely going to be folks drifting through the subway cars, approaching people in parking lots, walking through the tavern -- not the men or women carrying poll sheets and standing forlornly on your front porch. Which the police have warned you never to open. (See? I tied it up!)

There is nothing inherently wrong with paid circulators. I've signed petitions at the request of paid circulators on subway platforms and in parking lots and so, probably, have you. But, as the pros will tell you, the failure rate on signatures gathered in this manner is usually much greater than that for signatures gathered door to door. Paid circulators are like the bowl of Super Sugar Crunchies in an old TV ad: The announcer would caution that the cereal was part of a balanced breakfast -- and it was always shown with nutritious milk, and orange juice, and a grapefruit, and toast -- and the announcer never said how much a part. Whatever, even the cereal maker never claimed the cereal was itself a healthy meal.

If you're using paid circulators to supplement your own signature-gathering efforts, and the efforts of your family and friends, using the sheets provided by the paid circulators to add heft to your petitions and maybe scare off potential challengers, you're in good shape. If you're relying on paid circulators exclusively, you may have a problem. Better plan on buying a lot of signatures.

How many? Ald. Brookins turned in over 3,500 signatures -- and came up somewhere between 250 and 400 signatures short of the 1,000 he needed to get on the ballot.

But here's the thing: If two prominent Chicago politicians could not easily qualify for the ballot, maybe the political professionals will decide to look at whether the rules need to be changed. Tweaked, at least. This cycle may be dismissed as fluky... maybe the pros will cite candidate-specific problems... but, if enough committeemen are also finding that people aren't opening their doors for them or their people, there may be some impetus for reform. Well, revision anyway.

The goal would still be to leave a chasm between those who benefit from the arcane provisions of the Election Code and the rest of us Great Unwashed. But any easing of requirements could conceivably benefit the attentive. Such as, perhaps, the many smart lawyers who read FWIW and hope one day to attain the bench.

Is there hope for change in the near future?

This year a number of disappointed county office-seekers, one of them Todd Stroger, filed suit in Federal court to have the requirements for Cook County candidates (more than 8,000 signatures required for Cook County Sheriff or a seat on the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District) struck down or at least conformed to the requirements for statewide office (only 5,000 signatures required for Governor). See, Acevedo, et al. v. Cook County Officers Electoral Board, et al., 18 C 293. So far, the action has not fared well -- Judge Bucklo denied the Plaintiffs' motion for a TRO on January 24 -- but the point is that these are not Communists or some other fringe group complaining about onerous signature requirements (the leading case in the area is Illinois State Board of Elections v. Socialist Workers Party, 440 U.S. 173 (1979)) but, rather, not-quite-inside-enough-insiders, including the son and heir of one of Da Late Mare's most prominent, and reliable, committeemen.

(Any student of Chicago history can easily explain why it is harder to run for Cook County Sheriff than Governor: Keeping the Sheriff's office under control was considered much more important to the health and prosperity of the Cook County Democratic Party than holding the Governor's office. Good heavens. Aldermen were important. People gave up seats in Congress for a chance to be Alderman. If an independent alderman became too great a nuisance, he could always be exiled somewhere where he could do the organization no harm -- perhaps to the U.S. Senate, as in the case of Paul Douglas.)

So, with the Brookins and Silverstein problems, with the Acevedo case, and with police officials repeatedly telling homeowners---registered voters---not to open their doors to anyone, some of the tea leaves are pointing tentatively, cautiously, arguably in the direction of loosening signature requirements. And it might even happen, too.

I'm not smart enough or connected enough to predict that something will or won't happen, but I will predict that, if it happens soon, it will happen right at the very end of May....