Share:
House Co-Sponsorship Memoranda
House of Representatives
Session of 2013 - 2014
Regular Session
MEMORANDUM
| Posted: | January 10, 2014 09:12 AM |
|---|---|
| From: | Representative Duane D. Milne |
| To: | All House members |
| Subject: | Proposed Legislation: Remove Provision in the Pennsylvania Election Code |
| On January 15, I will be introducing legislation to remove the provision in the Pennsylvania Election Code that requires candidates’ county or municipality of residence be noted on the ballot alongside their names in primary elections. The Election Code currently stipulates that candidates standing for an election before the voters of more than one county must have their county of residence noted on the primary ballot. For those candidates to be selected by voters whom reside entirely within one given county, or any congressional, senatorial, or representative district drawn entirely within one given county, the municipality of residence of the candidate is indicated on the primary election ballot. I am urging this clean up of the ballot for a series of reasons. First, as a purely practical matter, no compelling reason exists for this information to be provided on the ballot. Neither House staff nor the Department of State reports any specific reason that this information is included on the ballot. It seems to be a case of a practice that started at some point and continues to be done “simply” because the Code calls for it. Secondly, it is the only socio-demographic piece of data noted with candidates’ names on the primary ballot. Factors such as gender, age, etc. are not noted (i.e., the kind of variables commonly noted and used in a variety of contexts). No particular reason appears evident to single out “geography” as something that should be affixed on the ballot, and no other candidate descriptors (nor should there be in my view, per reason three below). Third, as a best practice, primary ballots should be completely devoid of anything except the names of the candidates. Doing so helps keep voters that much more focused on choosing between candidates per se, and the merits thereof, and not potentially being influenced by a last-second geographic (or other) “cue” seen on this official government document. Fourth, philosophically, one even could argue that the geographic variable on the ballot is a(n unintended) form of campaign advertising to an extent, which of course is not consistent with best practice standards in the conduct of elections in a democracy. To the contrary, the primary ballot should be “neutral” in all respects. I would welcome your support of this legislation. |
Introduced as HB1987