Republicans Sue State Due to Ballot Complaint

The state GOP disputes the reasoning of Secretary of State Denise Merrill.

Connecticut law demands that the winning party from the previous year gets top billing on the ballot in the next election. While Democrat Dannel P. Malloy won the election in 2010, Connecticut’s Republican Party is suing the state to get the top of the ballot since his vote was split between two parties.  

The GOP argues that even though Malloy won, because the Tom Foley earned more votes in that election compared to votes cast for the Democratic Party. Votes for Malloy were split between the Democrats and Working Families, but together totaled more than Foley’s.

According to CBS Local, Secretary of the State Denise Merrill denied the GOP’s claim, prompting the lawsuit. 

“The Republican Party line for governor garnered more votes than any other party line in 2010. Under Connecticut law, our candidates for state and federal office deserve the top-line designation on this year’s ballot. The Republican Party has earned that,” said State Sen. John McKinney (R-Fairfield) in a statement.

The GOP reportedly hopes to be placed on the top of the ballot in the November elections this year.

Bill Hillman August 10, 2012 at 07:16 PM
Seems clear, the GOP has a case. The PARTY whose candidate got the most votes.. THE PARTY was the Republican Party. It is NOT written, "the party of the winning candidate". @Carl, voting patterns and the top row do matter and can influence the outcome. Sec. 9-249a. Order of parties on the ballot label. (a) The names of the parties shall be arranged on the machines in the following order: (1) The party whose candidate for Governor polled the highest number of votes in the last-preceding election; (2) Other parties who had candidates for Governor in the last-preceding election, in descending order, according to the number of votes polled for each such candidate;
Carl August 10, 2012 at 07:46 PM
Bill, I should have been more clear. The fact that SOS is stonewalling this is nonsense. They made an honest mistake in interpreting the law, but upon learning about it, it's pretty clearly written what should be done. Beyond that, the law should be re-written so that conflicts between the spirit and the letter of the law like this don't happen again.
Bill Hillman August 10, 2012 at 08:06 PM
Agreed, elected officials sworn up uphold the law should do exactly that, and change the laws if warranted, when the wording does not mean what was intended. Then again, this cross-endorsing thing... Both parties use it to their advantage. Maybe this law should be left as is. Seems the intent is exactly for the winning party to get top billing.
Ernie August 10, 2012 at 09:23 PM
what a bunch of whiny blowhards, lighten up folks. http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/-/g/bush_connecticut_welcome.jpg
Bill Hillman August 10, 2012 at 11:04 PM
Have a wonderful weekend, Ernie... are you a voter? Or, do you let the rest of us pick your government for you? Here's some voters: http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/.a/6a00d834515c5469e201630311f0ec970d-500wi


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »