If it is good enough for Sam Sloan it is good enough for David Nachbar… - more on Wilson-Pukula
The sum of my legal expertise is centered around Google. David Nachbar’s assertion that Wilson-Pukula could be a possibility back in 2006 prompted me to dig. OK - scratch the surface.
I found this article and how it was used in 2006 and before. Sweeney keeping Gillibrand off the Independent Party Line - Pataki - locking out Forbes. But most likely what he is referring to this..
There was a case in 2004 - Samuel H. Sloan an registered blank (no party affiliation) wanted to run as a Republican in the NY10 - a district centered in Brooklyn. He changed registration to Republican but the party change was not effective until after the November election. There is a cut off
At a meeting of the Executive Committee of the King’s County Republican Party on May 5, 2004, Sloan was nominated and seconded as a candidate for election to the United States Congress for the Tenth Congressional District [Brooklyn].
Plaintiff was informed by Aaron Maslow, the Chairman of the Meeting, that he had been granted a Wilson-Pakula, which gave him the right to petition for signatures and to run for election as a Republican.
From the same brief -
26. For the past three months Plaintiff has been seeking the Republican Party line in his campaign for US Congress from the 10th Congressional District, which is entirely in Brooklyn. He is a registered blank, meaning that he has no party registration. For this reason, he cannot run as a Republican or as a Democrat, for example, unless they grant him a Wilson-Pakula. New York Election Law Section 6-120(3), the “Wilson-Pakula” law, states:
“3. The members of the party committee representing the political subdivision of the office for which a designation or nomination is to be made, unless the rules of the party provide for another committee, in which case the members of such other committee … may, by a majority vote of those present at such meeting provided a quorum is present, authorize the designation or nomination of a person as candidate for any office who is not enrolled as a member of such party as provided in this section. … The certificate of authorization shall be filed not later than four days after the last day to file the designating petition … to which such authorization relates. The certificate of authorization shall be signed and acknowledged by the presiding officer and the secretary of the meeting at which such authorization was given.”
I think this simply means that party leadership could appoint a non-registered party member and allow them to get signatures for a ballot line.
So close to home in New York , I guess this means that County Districts and perhaps even the state district could simply appoint someone.
So again - someone who cheekily says in a City Newspaper interview
This is America, and this is democracy, and candidates need to be heard out. And in this case, ironically, I guess that makes me more a candidate of the people versus being a candidate of the machine.
What exactly am I missing here? Use the machine when it is convenient? Ignore it when it is convenient?
My guess is nothing
You are reading too much into this. A Wilson-Paluka is just an authorization to run on that party’s line for someone who isn’t registered in that party. There are hundreds of WPs given in every county in New York, any Democrat who has the Working Families line, needs a WP, same goes for the IP or the Con line. Since the minor parties are tightly controlled they are highly sought after, but in the major parties (Dem, Rep) if a candidate who isn’t a registered member of the party really wants to run and doesn’t seem like they are out to cause mischief, the party will more than likely authorize them.
Thanks for the additional information but I don’t think I’m reading too much into this at all. I’m sure the law is more comprehensive and reaching than explained here - but this isn’t about 3rd party lines - this is about the Dem line.
Someone who is not a registered Democrat using a legal mechanism to force their way onto the Dem party line. Why is this necessary? Because for whatever reason - they never bothered to register in that party on which you decided to run. In fact they aren’t registered in any party but all of a sudden a particular party registration is important to them. Why bother having registrations at all?
Someone professing from the outside using a legal maneuver to get on a ballot doesn’t seem right. Remember - the question was why didn’t you run in 2006? the answer was about legal maneuvering and only a little about the troubles of B&L.
In the absence of party sweat equity. Doesn’t seem to be a candidate of the people.
Who exactly is pulling the strings here?
A party committee can’t just grant the line to anyone; any registered member of the party could file petitions and force a primary, if it seems the leadership is trying to shove a non-party member down everyone’s throat. And there can be dueling WPs, when candidates approach different county committees within one district (like for Assembly). In that case, the bigger county wins.
But the whole process is very susceptible to corruption when it comes to the minor parties. There, a county”committee” can consist of one zealot and his or her cronies or family members (they only have to have 3 officers; names — chair, treasurer, and secretary — to set themselves up). However, there are lots of legal intricacies that some lawyers use to make themselves rich. And guess what kind of candidates can afford their services?