$40,000 South Carolina filing fee looms for GOP candidates

[Mr. Morden]

The first ballot deadline is approaching, along with the hefty filing fee:

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/sc-filing-fee-poses-early-hurdle-gop-campaigns-n431711

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Will candidates like Gilmore and Pataki even be able to come up with the $ for these ballot filings?  And if not, what’s the point of continuing with their campaigns?

[FLgirl]

Ooh, hopefully this shreds at least a couple more losers.

[ElectionsGuy]

How is Gilmore going to pay for this? That has to be all of his fundraising.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

You don't have to win SC. It's definitely not part of Pataki's path to victory.

[MisSkeptic]

How is Gilmore going to pay for this? That has to be all of his fundraising.

You're a little too high on Gilmore. I mean does he even have enough fundraising money to continue to the next debate?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Yeah, Pataki and Gilmore probably can't afford this. While painful for Jindal and Santorum, they'll probably pay it. And Graham would certainly drop out if he didn't pay it, since it's his home state.

[Mr. Morden]

As a reminder, here's how much cash on hand each campaign (not Super PAC) had as of June 30th:

Gilmore wasn't in the race yet back then, but I can't imagine he would have raised much at this point.  I guess at least he was the governor of a much bigger state than Chafee, so he might be able to come up with more than a few thousand $.

[/]

This is so, so cruel. And they say there isn't 'money in politics'. America's supposed to be a nation where anyone can run for political office, but how can they in the GOP if they basically have to spend what is usually around a year's salary just for one state?

I would criticize this as another hackish GOP policy, but I'm pretty sure the Dems do it too...

[tmthforu94]

This is so, so cruel. And they say there isn't 'money in politics'. America's supposed to be a nation where anyone can run for political office, but how can they in the GOP if they basically have to spend what is usually around a year's salary just for one state?

I would criticize this as another hackish GOP policy, but I'm pretty sure the Dems do it too...

I generally agree, though I don't really mind it this year as it weeds out some candidates who never should have ran to begin with.

[SteveRogers]

You don't have to win SC. It's definitely not part of Pataki's path to victory.

But you have to be on the ballot there to be viewed as a legitimate candidate. Otherwise you'll fade into irrelevancy after New Hampshire as the media pretends you don't exist for the next few weeks.

And Pataki has no path to victory.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

You don't have to win SC. It's definitely not part of Pataki's path to victory.

But you have to be on the ballot there to be viewed as a legitimate candidate. Otherwise you'll fade into irrelevancy after New Hampshire as the media pretends you don't exist for the next few weeks.

And Pataki has no path to victory.

But let's say Pataki surges (yes, I know, I have him at a 0% chance of winning the nomination, but still) and gets 3rd in New Hampshire, and elects to stick it out to Super Tuesday. He still wouldn't be a force in South Carolina. I see little real difference between placing sixth or seventh in the state and not being on the ballot. The media attention in the days leading up to a given primary is typically limited to those candidates who are most likely to win the primary or need a "good enough" performance to continue.

[Kingpoleon]

This is so, so cruel. And they say there isn't 'money in politics'. America's supposed to be a nation where anyone can run for political office, but how can they in the GOP if they basically have to spend what is usually around a year's salary just for one state?

I would criticize this as another hackish GOP policy, but I'm pretty sure the Dems do it too...

Filing fees insure that you can't just pay $100 and have thousands of people on the ballot.

[Simfan34]

This is so, so cruel. And they say there isn't 'money in politics'. America's supposed to be a nation where anyone can run for political office, but how can they in the GOP if they basically have to spend what is usually around a year's salary just for one state?

I would criticize this as another hackish GOP policy, but I'm pretty sure the Dems do it too...

Well it's either that or this:

[Mr. Morden]

The filing fee in South Carolina is so large because the state parties pay for the primary there, and the state GOP wants to recoup at least some of the cost by making the candidates pay through the nose.

In most states, the state government pays for the primary, and so the filing fee is much smaller (a few hundred $ in most cases, I think).  However, they also tend to require you to produce a bunch of signatures, so unless you have a huge amount of organic support, that also requires you to spend some $.

So candidates with little to no money could indeed end up being left off the ballot in many states.  We'll just have to wait and see how it goes.

[Figueira]

This is so, so cruel. And they say there isn't 'money in politics'. America's supposed to be a nation where anyone can run for political office, but how can they in the GOP if they basically have to spend what is usually around a year's salary just for one state?

I would criticize this as another hackish GOP policy, but I'm pretty sure the Dems do it too...

Well it's either that or this:

I'd be cool with that, honestly. And if there has to be a limitation on presidential candidates, it shouldn't be based on money.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

This is so, so cruel. And they say there isn't 'money in politics'. America's supposed to be a nation where anyone can run for political office, but how can they in the GOP if they basically have to spend what is usually around a year's salary just for one state?

I would criticize this as another hackish GOP policy, but I'm pretty sure the Dems do it too...

Well it's either that or this:

And this is a problem because? The instructions are very clear and the media coverage makes it pretty obvious who the joke perennials are. In a GE setting, a few big parties gaining most of the power over time (as happens even in most proportional systems) would help make a lot of the choices irrelevant.

[Mr. Morden]

Apparently Arkansas charges $25,000, but it’s the only other state where the fee is $10,000 or more:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/22/2016-republican-field-may-be-pared-by-campaign-cos/?page=all

[Minnesota Mike]

Apparently Arkansas charges $25,000, but it’s the only other state where the fee is $10,000 or more:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/22/2016-republican-field-may-be-pared-by-campaign-cos/?page=all

The Kansas GOP has a $15,000 filing fee.

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/KS-R

[Mr. Morden]

Apparently Arkansas charges $25,000, but it’s the only other state where the fee is $10,000 or more:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/22/2016-republican-field-may-be-pared-by-campaign-cos/?page=all

The Kansas GOP has a $15,000 filing fee.

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/KS-R

Ah, OK.  But that's a caucus, and I was just thinking of primaries.  But yes, that's another expensive one.

[jimrtex]

The filing fee in South Carolina is so large because the state parties pay for the primary there, and the state GOP wants to recoup at least some of the cost by making the candidates pay through the nose.

In most states, the state government pays for the primary, and so the filing fee is much smaller (a few hundred $ in most cases, I think).  However, they also tend to require you to produce a bunch of signatures, so unless you have a huge amount of organic support, that also requires you to spend some $.

So candidates with little to no money could indeed end up being left off the ballot in many states.  We'll just have to wait and see how it goes.

South Carolina funds the presidential primaries. It lets the parties set the date for their primary, and also to charge a "certification fee". The state may charge a filing fee of up to $20,000 per candidate.

There is at least a possibility that the $40,000 fee is unconstitutional.

Texas primaries are (nominally) conducted by individual parties, but funded by the state. At one time, the parties were required to fund their primaries from filing fees. Filing fees for some offices, particularly statewide office, were set in statute, but filing fees for statewide office split among 254 counties don't go very far. The county parties, who conduct the primary in their county were required to charge filing fees to county offices to make up the difference. Some ended up charging exorbitant fees (if adjusted for inflation, some would be over $50,000).

The SCOTUS ruled this unconstitutional (Bullock v Carter ), reasoning that if violated equal protection of the right to vote (it was reasoned that poor voters might support poor candidates). Since then, the state has funded the primaries, and also sets the filing fees.

The primaries are still (nominally) conducted by the parties, and candidates file with their respective parties. When the parties send their expense report to the state, they deduct the money that they received in filing fees.

Texas does permit parties to set the filing requirements for presidential primary candidates, and they are different between the parties.

The GOP charges $5000, which is the filing fee for US Senator.
The Democrats charge $2000, and require a loyalty pledge (in 2008, Dennis Kucinich refused to sign and was left off the ballot).
Both parties also have a petition alternative, but unless someone was wanting to demonstrate their grass roots support, the filing fee is cheaper. Since filing is in December, a grassroots effort in Texas would be taking away from organizing in Iowa, for example.

The Democratic National Committee has a cap of $2000, so it might be that the SC Democratic fee is much less - or it is conceivable that there is some loophole.

[Senator Cris]

Can someone post a list of candidates that have already filled with SCGOP?

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Can someone post a list of candidates that have already filled with SCGOP?

I can't exactly remember where I saw the list for it, but for sure I remember Just Rubio has paid for it.

[Senator Cris]

Yeah, Pataki and Gilmore probably can't afford this. While painful for Jindal and Santorum, they'll probably pay it. And Graham would certainly drop out if he didn't pay it, since it's his home state.

Both Jindal and Santorum have filled.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

I think petitions to get on the ballot are the perfect balance. It prevents random people like myself from hogging up the ballot yet keeps the system open for those running a serious, grassroots campaign.

[Donald Trump 2016 !]

^
 Doesn't want candidates who have close to 0% chance of winning to be on the ballot = voting for Hitler

At least I hope you were being sarcastic.