This item is a couple of months old, but I just read it yesterday. Apparently, San Francisco Mayor (and Democratic gubernatorial candidate) Gavin Newsom’s girlfriend recently tried to change her registration from Republican to “No Party” or Unaffiliated. But she wound up registered as a member of the American Independent Party instead.
From the San Franciso Chronicle…
It turns out, however, that the onetime Republican registered as a member of the American Independent Party – the anti-immigrant, anti-abortion, anti-NAFTA and anti-tax party.
San Francisco’s election rolls show Siebel cast her ballot using the Green Street address both in November, when Newsom was re-elected, and during February’s presidential primary. But because she was affiliated with the American Independent Party, she was ineligible to vote for any of the Democratic or Republican presidential contenders, including Newsom’s pick, Hillary Rodham Clinton.
The mayor’s office tells us Siebel is actually an independent voter – “decline to state,” in registration lingo – and checked the American Independent box thinking that was what independent voters were supposed to do.
She has since changed her affiliation to “decline to state,” mayoral spokesman Nathan Ballard said.
It appears Siebel is far from the only voter to mistake the American Independents for independents.
According to Contra Costa County Registrar Stephen Weir, president of the state association of county election officials, 2 percent of California voters identify themselves as member of the American Independent Party. That’s a lot more than other minor parties, including the Greens (0.77 percent); Libertarians (0.5 percent) and Peace and Freedom (0.35 percent.)
Nearly 20 percent of California’s voters, in contrast, are registered as decline to state.
Weir says the secretary of state is working on redesigning registration forms to make it clear that the American Independents are an actual party, and not unaligned.
So take heart, Jennifer.
15 responses so far ↓
1 Arthur Torrey // Jul 5, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Don’t feel bad… In Mass. we have a “political designation” (the official term for “minor party” – takes 20 petition sigs to form one) known as the “Independent Voters Party” – in the states registration codes, they were assigned the letter “I” before anyone realized this would be a problem.
As a result, voters that don’t want to be counted as members of a political party must REGISTER as “UNENROLLED” – can you say “cognitive dissonance”? It can be a real challenge to explain how this system works…
ART
LPMA – Speaking for myself
2 Trent Hill // Jul 5, 2008 at 2:44 pm
How does a Mayor’s girlfriend, who is constantly absolved in politics, NOT know this clear distinction?
3 Fred Church Ortiz // Jul 5, 2008 at 2:50 pm
I still say the only way to make that mistake on the CA form is to not read it.
4 paulie cannoli // Jul 5, 2008 at 2:51 pm
Lots of people make that mistake.
In my experience of registering thousands of voters in California (quite possibly tens of thousands), the vast majority of people who register AIP fall in this category.
5 Trent Hill // Jul 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Paulie,
I think “the vast majority” is unfair. I’d say 20-25% of registered AIP voters KNOW what party they are in and vote along those lines when possible.
6 paulie cannoli // Jul 5, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Of the many I registered, the AIP would be lucky if 2.% knew they were registering with a political party. 0.2% may have been more like it. And I had a pretty good sized sample.
7 Gene Trosper // Jul 5, 2008 at 6:45 pm
This is how the AIP has become the “third largest” party in California, based upon registration numbers. Most who wish to be registered “independent” check the AIP box out of mistake or plain ignorance. My guess is that if most AIP registrants knew what the party stood for, registration numbers would plummet.
8 paulie cannoli // Jul 5, 2008 at 6:48 pm
Most who wish to be registered “independent†check the AIP box out of mistake or plain ignorance.
That’s an exaggeration. Most who want to be registered independent correctly check the “decline to state” box.
I’ve advocated for some time now a new libertarian party in CA called the “Decline of the State Party”.
9 Brandon H. // Jul 5, 2008 at 7:14 pm
Maybe someone should create a party called “None of the Above”.
10 paulie cannoli // Jul 5, 2008 at 7:37 pm
Nun of the Above?
11 Trent Hill // Jul 5, 2008 at 8:36 pm
“Of the many I registered, the AIP would be lucky if 2.% knew they were registering with a political party.”
That’s a gross exaggeration.
As of May 2008, there are 331,619 voters registered with the AIP.
Michael Peroutka, recieved a paltry 26,600 votes for president in California in 2004. This is about a third of what our Senatorial and Gubanatorial candidates did in 2006. But using these 2004 numbers, 8% of AIPers voted for Peroutka.
Using the senate race from 2006, the number is 22.72%. The gubanatorial race, 20%.
The further back you go, the more the number increases–which contradicts your theory. More people are registered and vote independent these days,and yet the AIP’s vote totals were HIGHER before this ascent of the “Decline to State” voter.
Senate race year — Vote total
2006 — 75,350
2004 — 81,224
2000 — 134,598
1998 — 54,699 (weak candidate, dislike by many conservative)
1994 — 142,771
1992 — 373,051
12 Trent Hill // Jul 6, 2008 at 6:10 pm
anyone disagree?
13 paulie cannoli // Jul 6, 2008 at 7:16 pm
anyone disagree?
Yes.
I think you are making a leap in saying that those who voted for AIP candidates are a subset of those registered AIP.
For all we know, most of those who voted AIP are not registered AIP.
I don’t know this for a fact; what I do know for a fact is that I have registered thousands – I believe tens of thousands – of voters in California, including many who checked the AIP box. When they would do this I often asked them if they meant to register with a political party, and the vast, overwhelming majority indicated they did not – they meant to register decline to state a political party.
Lastly, there were a very small number who did know what the AIP was and did mean to register that way. It was a vanishingly small minority. Maybe 0.2%, maybe even 2%, but certainly not anything like 20%.
This is only from personal experience, but I had a large representative sample, and other petitioners I know have all told me the same thing.
14 Trent Hill // Jul 6, 2008 at 9:42 pm
paulie,
We must also remember that this is a party first formed in 1968. When it was formed, it became a force under George Wallace. Everyone who registed into the party, within 8 years of its founding HAD to know what it stood for–as George Wallace and the AIP were constantly in the news until 1976. After that, William Shearer (the founder of the party) helped craft an election law that said parties would be listed alphabetically. As the party’s original founding has moved further nad further away, you’ve had more and more independents mistakenly registering into the party, while the number of ACTUAL AIPers declined due to death or dissafection to the Republicans.
15 Trent Hill // Jul 6, 2008 at 9:43 pm
My theory, expounded above, would explain why the AIP still gets 70k+ votes for Senate and Governor, but also fits with you and Andy’s personal stories about registering thousands of voters and VERY few of them having MEANT to register into the AIP.
Leave a Comment