Lawyer Fights to Boot Starrett from Ballot

A nonsense technicality is endangering the ballot status of Oregon’s Mary Starrett, the Constitution Party’s nominee for governor. It seems that the party failed to post a notice of their convention in a newspaper of general circulation.

Fearing that Starrett may play a “spoiler” role in November, a conservative activist Kelly Clark has filed suit to toss her off the ballot. Clark earlier led the legal challenge against Multnomah County’s move to legalize gay marriage and has previously served in the Oregon State House.

From the Ashland Daily Tidings...

A prominent Republican lawyer filed a state elections complaint late Friday seeking to knock third-party gubernatorial contender Mary Starrett off the Nov. 7 ballot on grounds that her nomination process was legally flawed.

Starrett, a former TV talk show host and anti-abortion activist, is slated to appear on the fall ballot as the Constitution Party’s nominee. Some Republicans fear that Starrett will play a spoiler’s role this fall, taking votes away from GOP nominee Ron Saxton and tipping the race to incumbent Democratic Gov. Ted Kulongoski.

The complaint seeking to invalidate Starrett’s candidacy was filed by Kelly Clark, a West Linn lawyer and former Republican state legislator who led the legal challenge against Multnomah County’s move to legalize gay marriage.

Clark contends the Constitution Party violated state election law by failing to file a notice in a general circulation newspaper publicizing the party’s June 3 nominating convention in Lake Oswego where Starrett was chosen to be the party’s gubernatorial nominee.

“We searched every major newspaper, and we could not find any indication that they publicized a notice of their convention,” Clark said in an interview Friday night.

“If we are right, and the party didn’t follow proper process, then Mary Starrett doesn’t belong on the ballot” he said.

The compliant asks the secretary of state’s office to remove Starrett’s name from the ballot by Wednesday, Clark said.

If that request is denied, then a lawsuit will be filed in Marion County Circuit Court seeking to invalidate Starrett’s nomination, he said.

Clark said the lawsuit was not filed in coordination with the Saxton campaign or Oregon Republican Party solely as a way to keep a potential spoiler candidate such as Starrett off the November ballot.

Instead, he said he filed the lawsuit on behalf of several individual voters, some of who are supporters of Saxton, who were concerned about an apparent election law violation.

“This isn’t about Mary Starrett,” Clark said. “This is about the flawed process by which the Constitution Party is conducting its affairs.

“If they want to play in the big leagues, then they have to follow the big league rules,” he said.

8 Responses to “Lawyer Fights to Boot Starrett from Ballot”

  1. RCAIP Says:

    Oregon may not be with us and is dominated by a lot of kooks, but Mr. Clark is wrong in doing this.

    Its also pointless because Kulongski still is ahead in the polls with or without Starrett.

  2. Donald Raymond Lake Says:

    Exactly the Big Picture: Like the Dems with Nader/ Camejo in an electorial ‘winner- take- all’ shoo-in for Kerry -Edwards in California in 2004, the GOP shows it’s true lack of consideration for the public and its part in the two party Establishment domination of American public policy. We owe them a debt of graditude for coming out the murky, evil shaddows! A pox on both houses!

  3. NewFederalist Says:

    Gosh, how wonderful. A group of concerned citizens just wanting to make certain the election code is followed exactly. I wonder if the nominee in question just happened to be a Demorepublicrat… oh wait… maybe they can change rules to accommodate THEM. Such BS!

  4. Fred C. Says:

    IIRC, This is the exact same technicality that kept Peroutka off the Vermont ballot in 04. Learn from past mistakes!

  5. Sean Scallon Says:

    Gee what a suprise, GOP wants CP candidate off the ballot.

    People talk about the partisian division within the country but the GOP and Dems and the Dems actually agree on one thing: They and only they should be the only two parties to choose from during an election.

  6. undercover_anarchist Says:

    I don’t think the “technicality” is a “nonsense” one at all. it is very reasonable. Just because the sheep-raping CP morons don’t know how to read and can’t follow rules doesn’t mean that special considerations should be made for them. They probably tried to publish the notice in the Christian Polygamist Weekly Bulletin, but I guess that doesn’t count.

  7. Chris Campbell Says:

    Well, the ever asinine undercover is back….

    Well now, guess we see whre teh “conservative GOPers” are coming from, no??

  8. NewFederalist Says:

    I think I just read someplace where this attempt failed and she WILL be on the ballot.

Leave a Reply