Ballot access laws are supposedly designed to allow orderly access to the ballot. That is, they recognize that running for office is a right, but try to balance that right with concerns about overly crowded ballots. If the voter has to choose from five or six candidates for every office, the reasoning goes, the ballot will be very long and the voter could easily get confused.

Over the years, Alabama has strengthened our ballot access laws until they are the toughest in the nation. To get on the ballot, a statewide independent candidate or political party must collect signatures in the amount of 3% of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial election. To stay on the ballot and be classified as a major political party, they must receive 20% of the vote in a statewide race. For comparison, the national average is 1% of the votes for a signature requirement and 5% of the statewide vote to remain on the ballot.

Because our laws are so restrictive, one would think that Alabama's ballots have been historically crowded over the years, thus requiring these laws. However, looking back in time, we find this is not so.

In 1982, 65% of the House candidates and 69% of the Senate candidates ran unopposed in the general election. Of the 140 Legislative seats on the ballot that year, 93 were unopposed and only 47 had competition. This means that almost two-thirds of the voters (66.43%) actually had no choice of whom to vote for. This is democracy?

In 1986, things improved slightly. That year, 54% of the House and 68% of the Senate ran unopposed in the General election. In all, 81 of 140 candidates (58%) did not have competition.

In 1990, 54% of the House and 43% of the Senate ran unopposed in the General election. Those 72 individuals accounted for 51% of the Legislature.

In 1994, 42% of the House and 46% of the Senate ran unopposed in the General election. Those 61 individuals accounted for 43% of the Legislature. For the first time, a majority of Alabama voters actually had a choice of whom to vote for at the general election.

In 1998, 45% of the House and 23% of the Senate ran unopposed in the General election. Those 56 individuals accounted for 40% of the entire Legislature.

So far, the number of unopposed races has been dropping every year. In 2002, however, this trend reversed itself. Last year, 50.5% of the House and 42% of the Senate ran unopposed in the General election. Those 68 individuals accounted for almost 49% of the Legislature.

As you can see for yourself, Alabama has not been plagued with crowded ballots for the past 21 years. Indeed, Alabama has suffered from the opposite problem, that of deserted ballots. Our laws are so strong and so restrictive, that candidates who would otherwise run and offer a choice for Alabama voters are kept off the ballot. The result is, in 2003, a sitting Legislature almost half of whom had no opposition. This lack of choice is
unhealthy and results in Legislators who do not need to answer to their constituents.

Who really loses, here? The real losers are the 48.57% of voters who in 2002 had no choice to choose from.

The House recently passed bill that raises the bar yet again on ballot access. Apparently, the House members like the way things are, and hope that their seat will be the unopposed one in the next election. Yes, it seems as if they put their own political careers in front of what is best for the voters and citizens of Alabama.

--Matthew Givens