www.Jim4US.com    Press Release




-  Independent candidate for the PA 7th District, U.S. Congress, Objects to the Challenge to Petition Signatures filed against him  - 

Thursday, August 12, 2010    11:30 AM (EST)
Contact : Press office | 610-688-9471 | info@Jim4US.com

PENNSYLVANIA VOTERS DESERVE LESS CLUTTER AND MORE CANDIDATES 

CANDIDATE JIM SCHNELLER NOTES: PETITION TO SET ASIDE HIS NOMINATION PAPERS IS HOLLOW AND CONTAINS NUMEROUS FALSE OR IRRELEVANT ALLEGATIONS

PETITION TO SET ASIDE NOMINATION PAPERS SEEKS TO DISTRACT VOTERS FROM ONGOING INVESTIGATION OF MEEHAN PETITIONS


    Jim Schneller, candidate for U.S. Representative for the 7th district of  Pennsylvania, responded Thursday to the petition to set aside nomination papers filed by two Delaware County residents, apparently at the behest of the Meehan ticket, but not containing any statement to that effect.

" For all we know the Bryan Lentz campaign has also has been a partner in this petition and/or in the onging concerted efforts to re-spin my campaign. The bare fact that the striking of my nomination signatures could end my candidacy, does not mean that Pat Meehan would be the benefactor of the matter. Both Lentz and Meehan stand to lose votes to me, and their back and forth on the signature-gathering matter has revealed that. Their mission is to nip my campaign in the bud, and the past week's carousel is what the region's best two-party mind's came up with. 

  Who has contributed to this petition is important, because it is a petition that could never stand up in any Court, not even to survive the opening bell, and so it is a frivolous petition, filed solely to create legal costs and extra press. Is it not difficult enough for independents to get on the ballot, without false accusations and harrassing lawsuits ?  Mr. Meehan, harassing lawsuits are illegal in Pennsylvania !  Republicans and Democrats, woe to those who would use obstruction to a candidate with integrity, to tell the public that the political party is the only way to office, and that the present two parties are above the law.

  Pennsylvanians have put up long enough, with the anomaly that citizens may file suit in place of candidates, in challenges to nominations.  Does Mr. Meehan have reason not to name himself as objector ?  What are the qualifications of the plaintiffs to sue ?  I ask, Mrs. Wechsler, Mr. Angelos, have I done anything to deserve this suit filed by you ?  How is it that you have sued to end my candidacy for office when we've never met, we live 7 to 15 miles apart, and I am a law abiding citizen and have presumably therefore not infringed on your rights ? Mrs. Wechsler, you claim to be registered with no party affiliation. Have my nonpartisan planks rubbed your nonpartisan planks the wrong way ?  Mr. Angelos, am I to be a stepping stone in your legal career ?  What sort of law allows uninvolved associates to sue in place of public figures ?  I say enough ! Pennsylvania's rules of procedure regarding parties in interest, and standing to sue, ought to apply to signature challenges as well.  Let the parties who sue be the candidates themselves or their campaign committees.  And when will the Pennsylvania Attorney General be presenting us with the results of his investigation into the Meehan petitions which began in April 2010 ?

  Blatantly arbitrary and unenforceable "violations" are reason alone for the public to ignore this challenge and await some more meaningful discourse in this race. The petition outrageously seeks to set aside 92 papers, or 3481 signatures, because they were "not notarized properly," based on a sentence in a newspaper article stating that "Schneller's . . . . campaign had the petitions notarized ," and yet in the next sentence the petition admits the name of the notary and the fact that she was present at the time that the petitions were notarized !  Perjury by notaries is extremely rare ! The Meehan camp is therefore claiming that campaigns cannot have notaries available at headquarters on the last day or days of the signature period to notarize collector's papers. This is incomprehensible. Notary sessions are the usual practice, and relieve campaigns from having to gather hundreds of papers notarized at dozens of different notaries.

  Likewise, the petition seeks to set aside 197 signatures for the erroneous reason that a signor of a primary petition cannot sign a nominating petition. This is the reverse of the truth. Equally obtuse is the claim that 1144 signatures are invalid because the collector of signatures had also collected in the primary season last Spring. As in the former, this is an empty claim.

  The petition also seeks to strike a few thousand erroneous signatures by way of claims of duplication, illegible signatures, wrong municipality, and such. It is clear to this campaign that any insufficient signature entries will total in typical amounts, which will fall far below the number needed to set aside nomination. Amazingly, though only 40 not-notarized signatures are stated in the petition, the detailed listing then designates over 2000 of the signatures as not-notarized. Worse, our spot check reveals that a number of claims of 'not registered' and 'wrong municipality' are plainly wrong.

  So based on typical percentages of discardable signatures, Meehan, Wechsler, and Angelos have filed on a wing and a prayer, knowing that the number of stricken signatures could never add to 3700, which is the number needed to cause me to be removed from the race. They have filed their petition on the tiniest of hopes and reasons of press, publicity, causing of legal costs, and negative publicity that are convenient to their campaign.  I hope they realize that their tactics are unAmerican and unfair. This is an issue which residents of the 7th District continuously voice to me during this campaign. Now, at a point where the big parties are attempting to domineer the setting more and more with each election, I stand against this practice, and I stand ready to defend the right that we citizens enjoy under the Constitution: the right to vote for choices of candidates generated by a fair and balanced process !

   Equally hard on Pennsylvanians, and on our hopes and future, are the G.O.P.'s  and the Democrats challenges to numerous other Pennsylvania candidates filed this week.  An all out assault, on all third party candidates for statewide office, and on many other candidates including myself, is in progress, and this is outrageous.  After small advances for Pennsylvania independents, and setbacks, our two-party 'leaders' true agenda is again plainly set out before us, and it says that ballot access is theirs to control, not the public's !  At a point such as this,  when the parties act like pit bulls, it's time to accost them, leash them, and vote for those who aren't them ! 

____________________________________

Candidate Jim Schneller on certain Tea Party requests - August 8, 2010


Candidate Jim Schneller on claims of improper Democrat petition strategy - August 5, 2010


Candidate Jim Schneller adds to pledges for good governing - July 5, 2010