http://www.ballot-access.org/2009/08/13/south-carolina-green-party-will-appeal-fusion-decision/

According to the law, the Dem candidate would be forced to follow the same rules.

I was at the GP convention that nominated Mr. Platt, and was one of the people who voted for him to represent us. I was only concerned with getting the nominee that would represent me…not the Working Family or democratic parties. This law, and this decision made it impossible for someone I felt would do a good job from even having his name on the ballot.

After doing research on the subject, I admit that I was doubtful that “third” parties would see a positive outcome….At the same time I still believe that South Carolina has one of the better access laws in our country.

I guess my only concern is that we need to define our fusion voting (it is not a statute but rather a freedom which comes from interpretations that are not prohibited), and revisit the “sore loser” law…if a candidate is nominated, and on the ballot for one Party, he/she should not be allowed to be kicked off the ballot because of a later convention or primary loss.

I do wonder….If the Dem candidate had lost the vote in a challenged race at the Green convention…would they have been removed from the ballot????

As an example, in the New York fusion election for the seat in NY-23 last cycle, the presumptive Democratic nominee, Jon Powers, was co-nominated by the Working Families Party. However, Powers was then so bloodied by a second candidate that he lost the Democratic nomination to a third candidate, Alice Kryzan.

Obviously, Powers wanted to drop out and have Kryzan nominated on the WFP line. However, New York law wouldn’t let the WFP dump Powers even though both parties wanted that to happen. In order to get off the WFP ballot line, Powers actually had to move out of state and become ineligible to serve.

That’s a problem, and it’s what this South Carolina law attempts to solve. However, the SC law creates an unfair burden for candidates who originate in a third party and want to pursue an additional major-party ballot line. If an LP candidate wants to also run as a Republican, he risks getting tossed from the ballot entirely if he fails to get the GOP nomination.

So essentially, the SC law helps major-party candidates secure minor-party ballot lines, but discriminates against minor-party candidates who want major-party ballot lines. It needs to be changed.