Washington state has recently joined Ohio and Alabama in raising concerns about President Joe Biden potentially being left off their general election ballots due to conflicts between the dates of the Democratic National Committee’s nominating convention and state ballot deadlines. However, Washington state has proposed a solution to keep Biden eligible.
The director of elections at the office of Washington’s Secretary of State sent a letter to DNC Chair Jamie Harrison, highlighting that the state’s ballot certification deadline falls on August 20th, the day after the DNC convention in Chicago. Stuart Holmes, the Director of Elections, stated that an exception would be made for the Democratic Party if they submit a provisional certification of nomination by the August 20th deadline.
This issue has also arisen in Ohio and Alabama, where Republican Secretaries of State have indicated that they would enforce similar state election codes. Experts suggest that this move by the red-state officials seems partisan and unprecedented. In the past, states have typically granted provisional ballot access or made legislative amendments to allow major party candidates to appear on their ballots.
Notably, this issue is being leveraged against Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic nominees. It is worth mentioning that this is a unique situation, as there has never been a major party candidate left off the ballot in any state, aside from one instance in 1964 that was unrelated to deadlines.
To ensure Biden’s appearance on the ballot, the Biden campaign and Democratic officials are exploring various strategies. They plan to pursue provisional certification, change election filing deadlines through GOP-controlled legislatures, engage in litigation, and potentially hold a virtual vote for nomination before the convention.
Provisional certification has been granted to nominees in the past if they were unable to align their convention dates with state election code certification deadlines. Legislative actions have also been successful in Ohio and Alabama, where laws were passed to extend nomination deadlines. Litigation could be another avenue, with the Biden campaign potentially arguing that strict application of deadlines restricts access to the ballot and is unjust and unconstitutional.
It is important to note that courts may consider the recent Supreme Court decision on Trump v. Anderson, where it was ruled that states cannot bar candidates from appearing on the ballot for federal offices, specifically the presidency.
The implications of this situation go beyond the immediate challenge to Biden’s ballot eligibility. It raises questions about the integrity of the election process and the potential for partisanship to influence candidate access. These issues could have a significant impact on future elections and the democratic principles of fair representation.
Looking ahead, it is crucial for states to reexamine their election procedures and ensure that they allow for reasonable accommodations to avoid disenfranchising major party candidates. Additionally, there should be a concerted effort to depoliticize these processes and prioritize the fundamental right of voters to participate in the democratic process.
In conclusion, the potential exclusion of President Joe Biden from general election ballots in Ohio and Alabama due to conflicts between the DNC convention and state deadlines highlights the need for a reevaluation of election procedures. This situation raises concerns about partisan influences and calls for a more inclusive and fair election system. As future elections unfold, it is essential to navigate these challenges while upholding democratic principles and ensuring the voices of voters are heard.