Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections Candidate Filing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sponsor seeks higher candidate filing fees and signature option after contested filings
Summary
Representative Stephanie Mickelson introduced a request to raise candidate filing fees and signature thresholds, citing ‘gamesmanship’ in past elections; committee returned a related RS to sponsor for revision.
Representative Stephanie Mickelson (Legislative District 32) presented RS 32292, a proposal to increase filing fees for candidates for a range of offices and to raise signature thresholds as an alternate route to ballot access.
“First off, if you couldn't raise $250 to favor a filing fee, you probably don't have a lot of support,” Mickelson said, describing recent contests where campaigns placed nominal or ineligible candidates on ballots and saying the last time filing fees changed was 1996. Mickelson listed proposed fees in the draft: $1,000 for U.S. Senate, $1,000 for congressional representatives, $500 for statewide officers, $1,000 for legislative seats, and $100 for most county offices.
Mickelson said the draft also preserves a path for candidates to qualify by petition signatures in lieu of paying the fee. “We do have a lot of gamesmanship that is going on within our candidate filings,” she said, and asked the committee to introduce the RS so the discussion could continue.
Committee members asked whether raising fees is the best remedy and whether signature thresholds should be adjusted. Representative Crane suggested alternate approaches and indicated concern about raising costs for viable, low-resource candidates. Mickelson said she was open to friendly amendments and to continuing the conversation.
Representative Polhonka moved to introduce RS 32292. Representative Crane later offered a substitute motion to return RS 32292 to the sponsor; the substitute motion to return the RS to the sponsor was approved by voice vote and the RS was returned for revision.
Committee members indicated bipartisan interest in addressing perceived filing abuses, but the record shows they preferred the sponsor to refine language and thresholds before formal introduction.
