Opinion ID: 150474
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: The Statewide Qualification Criteria

Text: Plaintiffs also claim that the CEP's statewide qualification criteria, see Conn. Gen.Stat. § 9-702, impose an unfair or unnecessary burden on the political opportunity of minor-party candidates. The District Court agreed with plaintiffs, determining the statewide qualification criteria substantially enhance[d] the relative strength of major party candidates compared to minor party candidates [by] ... encourag[ing] major parties to field candidates for historically uncompetitive seats, without regard to their likelihood of success. Green Party II, 648 F.Supp.2d at 344. The District Court's analysis focused on the effect of the statewide criteria in so-called safe or uncompetitive legislative districts, which are districts in which the candidate of one of the major parties is essentially assured of winning. In the state senate district encompassing New Haven, for example, less than 5% of all registered voters are Republican. See id. at 326 n. 33. Thus the New Haven state senate district is considered a safe district for the Democratic Party, since the Democratic candidate is almost certain to win the race for that seat. The District Court observed that in safe districts, one of the major-party candidates ( e.g., the Republican candidate in New Haven) often fails to achieve 20% of the vote in an election and therefore would not qualify for CEP funding under the single-election qualification criteria. Under the statewide qualification criteria, however, that major-party candidate would, nevertheless, qualify for CEP funding, as the candidate would be on a ticket of a major party whose gubernatorial candidate achieved at least 20% of the vote in the last election. See Conn. Gen.Stat. §§ 9-372(5), 9-702. The District Court concluded, as a result, that the statewide qualification criteria unfairly favor[ed] competition between major party candidates over competition from minor party candidates and thereby burden[ed] the political opportunity of minor party candidates. Green Party II, 648 F.Supp.2d at 344. Once again, we cannot agree with the District Court's application of law to fact.