Thursday, 4:30 PM
Under bill, dissatisfied voters could reject all candidates
By Andrew Ryan, Globe Staff
Dissatisfied voters tired of choosing between the lesser of two evils on Election Day may get another option: none of the above.
Lawmakers will discuss a proposal today on Beacon Hill that would allow voters to reject all candidates running for an office and demand a new election. Backers say the proposal would be welcome relief for an increasingly disaffected electorate frustrated by nominees anointed by major political parties.
The initiative has been spearheaded by William H. White, a retired systems analyst from East Dennis who has championed the issue for a decade and plans to testify this afternoon at a hearing before the Joint Committee on Election Laws. In a telephone interview today, White described elections as a hiring process in which the political parties acting as an employment agency.
"Occasionally when you get an application for a position," White said, "none of them are qualified."
The measure would add the line "none of the above: for a new election" on ballots to the choices for each elective office. If the none-of-the-above wins the most votes, another election would be held in 60 to 80 days.
The measure was sponsored at White's request by Senator Robert A. O'Leary, a Barnstable Democrat, and Representative Cleon H. Turner, who represents Dennis. It is described on a website which can be found here.
Nevada also allows voters to reject all candidates seeking an elective office, but the none-of-the-above choice is not binding and cannot influence the winner of an election, White said.
If passed, Massachusetts would be the first state in the nation to offer voters a none-of-the-above option that has the potential to change the outcome on Election Day. But there's one exception. In presidential elections, the proposal would still allow voters to choose none of the above, but it would be a non-binding selection because the US Constitution outlines the procedure for electing the nation's leader, White said.
"You could vote for a candidate -- the lesser of two evils or whatever -- and also choose none of the above," White said. "That would signal that this candidate would not have a mandate, even if they won."
Andrew Ryan can be reached at aryan@globe.com
