Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance

committees of the NM Legislature. The LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports

if they are used for other purposes.

Current FIRs (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) are a vailable on the NM Legislative Website (legis.state.nm.us).

Adobe PDF versions include all attachments, whereas HTML versions may not. Previously issued FIRs and

attachments may be obtained from the LFC in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.

F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T

SPONSOR Park

ORIGINAL DATE

LAST UPDATED

1/18/08

HB 190

SHORT TITLE Primary Ballot Access For Certain Candidates

SB

ANALYST Ortiz

APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands)

Appropriation

Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY08

FY09

NFI

(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)

Duplicates SB1

Relates to HB203

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

LFC Files

Responses Received From

Attorney General’s Office (AGO)

No Responses Received From

Association of County Clerks

Secretary of State

SUMMARY

Synopsis of Bill

House Bill 190 provides for a statutory alternative to placing a candidate’s name on the primary

election ballot if a candidate does not receive the “preprimary convention designation."

Currently, a candidate will appear on the primary election ballot only if he or she receives a

preprimary convention designation by receiving at least 20 percent of the votes of the elected

delegates at the preprimary convention. Senate Bill 1 will allow a candidate to collect additional

signatures to total at least four percent of the total vote of the candidate’s party in the state or

congressional district. Senate Bill 1 restores pre-2007 language found in Section 1-8-33(D) of

the Election Code.

SIGNIFICANT ISSUES

According to the AGO, there is a pending lawsuit Don Wiviott v. State of New Mexico and

House Bill 190 – Page

2

Mary Herrera, Secretary of State

, D-0101-CV-2008-00022 (1

st

Judicial District) that alleges that

the Legislature’s 2007 decision to delete Section 1-8-33(D) unconstitutionally abridges a

candidate’s access to a primary election ballot. If the Legislature adopts Senate Bill 1, then the

lawsuit may be moot.

The Federal Court for the District of Connecticut has ruled that a similar statute that required a

candidate to receive a preprimary convention designation (15%) was a “severe burden" on ballot

access and turned away viable candidates. See

Campbell v. Bysiewicz I

, 213 F.Supp.2d 152 (D.

Conn. 2002)/ Campbell v. Bysiewicz II,

242 F. Supp. 2d 164 (D. Conn. 2003). The Court struck

down the law and the Connecticut Legislature amended the law to allow a candidate, who did not

receive the 15 percent designation, to file petitions signatures (equal to 2 percent of the total

state-wide party registration) to be placed on the ballot. See

C.G.S.A. § 9-400 (amended through

2007). In contrast, the Massachusetts State Supreme Court upheld a two-part system where a

candidate had to: (a) first obtain a certain number of signatures (from registered voters from any

party) and (b) receive 15 percent of the state convention delegate vote. See

Langone v. Secretary

of the Commonwealth

, 446 N.E. 2d. 43 (Mass. 1983). The Court found that the law was not a

“severe burden" on ballot access because it allowed a political party to re-gain some control over

whom it was nominating as its candidate (i.e. since any registered voter could sign the

petitions—conceivably Democrats could sign petitions for a candidate who was trying to run as a

Republican). (Note, New Mexico requires a person signing a candidate petition to be of the

same political party as the candidate. See

NMSA 1978, Section 1-8-31)

CONFLICT, DUPLICATION, COMPANIONSHIP, RELATIONSHIP

Duplicates SB1

Relates to HB203

ALTERNATIVES

It may be possible that no candidates receive the 20 percent support and thus the party may not

have an eligible candidate.

EO/mt