-- Return to Press Page The Oklahoman, February 25, 2005 Ballot law overly restrictive by Chris Powell In the 2004 election, 99 percent of America could vote for four or more candidates for president. In Oklahoma, only votes for President Bush or Sen. John Kerry were allowed. Political parties other than Republicans and Democrats must gather more than 73,000 signatures to participate in the 2006 elections. It seems obvious our state's requirements for ballot access need to be adjusted, but objections remain. Critics of reform claim the law should be used to safeguard the two-party system or that easing ballot access will cause overcrowded ballots or that more candidates will result in voter confusion. None of these is a valid reason to oppose reasonable ballot access. From statehood until 1974, new political parties in Oklahoma could gain ballot status by obtaining the signatures of 5,000 voters. Under that requirement, no more than four parties ever had a presidential candidate on the ballot at one time; even notable candidates like Theodore Roosevelt and Strom Thurmond failed to get enough signatures. Overcrowded ballots haven't been a problem for the 49 states with easier ballot access, nor did Afghanistan or Iraq experience problems in their elections despite having numerous parties participate. Additionally, Oklahoma requires only 5,000 signatures or a fee for candidates to participate in presidential primaries, but overcrowded ballots haven't been a concern. As with overcrowded ballots, voter confusion is much discussed but rarely observed. People who can choose between the myriad of options for things like soda pop can easily decide between more than two candidates for office. Critics of voter choice may point to Florida during the 2000 election, but that merely demonstrated that poorly designed ballots, not the number of candidates, cause voter confusion. Those who say that Oklahoma voters would be confused by having more choices must believe that we are less competent than voters everywhere else. Often, the real objection to reasonable ballot access is that it will undermine the two-party system. Critics fear their own party, Democrat or Republican, will be weakened. This desire to prevent competition is nothing short of political repression, only slightly better than despots like Saddam Hussein and Josef Stalin, who allowed only one choice -- themselves. Others fear a European-style multiparty system may develop, like the unstable government of Italy. However, alternative parties and candidates are a permanent fixture in nearly every state, but no other state has abandoned the two-party system. The experience of every other state demonstrates that Oklahoma has nothing to fear from easing ballot access. More choices would involve more citizens in the process, increase turnout and provide more information about what people want from government. Alternative parties would advocate new ideas that may prove popular and then be adopted by the two major parties. Oklahoma House Bill 1429 would return the law to what is was before 1974. If 5,000 signatures were good enough for 67 years and are good enough for Democrats and Republicans in presidential primaries, then it's good enough for all parties today. It's long past time to bring democratic elections back to Oklahoma. Powell is past chairman of the Oklahoma Libertarian Party.