Independent Party of Florida 100 Starkey Rd. Bldg. 300 — Suite 365 Largo, FL 33771-2334 (727) 585-1111 Gaindyparty@aol.com ‘www.independentpartyflorida.org Via Electronic Mall ‘September 8, 2016 Maria Matthews, Esq. Director, Division of Elections Room 316, R.A. Gray Building 500 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 Maria.matthews@DOS.myflorida.com Dear Ms. Matthews, We received your letter dated September 7, 2016. In it, you inform us that the Division of Elections will not list our nominees for President and Vice President of the United States on Florida's ballot for this fall's election because the Florida Independent Party (Party) is not a “national party” for purposes of section 103.021(4)(a) of the Florida Statutes. We ask you to reconsider this decision for three reasons. First and foremost, our Party is the State's third largest party. Our 258,000 members should not be disenfranchised from voting for their party's nominees during this very important election cycle. Yet precluding the Party's nominees from appearing on the ballot would do just that - and unfairly so. See, e.g., Anderson v. Celebrezzee, 460 U.S. 780, 786 (1983) (‘Our primary concem is with the tendency of ballot access restrictions ‘to limit the field of candidates from which voters might choose.’ Therefore, ‘in approaching candidate restrictions, it is essential to examine in a realistic light the extent and nature of their impact ‘on voters.”) Second, section 103,021(4)(a)'s requirements are less than clear. That section defines a “national party” as “a political party that is registered with and recognized as a qualified national committee of a political party by the Federal Election Commission.” The Federal Election Commission, however, only relies on an advisory opinion process to resolve such issues. By definition, this advisory process offers guidance through its fluid criteria and the discretion that comes with it — it does not definitively decide the issue one way or the other. Therefore, the Division's misplaced reliance on this advisory process cannot provide the kind of certainty section 103.021(4)(a) seemingly requires. See How does a committee qualify as a state or national party committee? httpyAnww.fec.gov/ans/answers_party.shtmittqualifyThird, the Florida Supreme Court's decision in Reform Party v. Black, 885 So. 2d 303 (Fla. 2004) requires a contrary result. There, the Florida Supreme Court recognized the fundamental rights associated with having a party's nominees on the ballot, and the need to uphold only “generally applicable and evenhanded restrictions” that “require candidates to make a preliminary showing of substantial support." Id, at 309. The Florida Supreme Court also recognized the Secretary of State's position that “her function is purely ministerial and that therefore she has no basis to look behind the certificate to determine that the party meets the statutory criteria." id, at 311. The Florida ‘Supreme Court even commented on how the Federal Election Commission “seems to have created a working definition of a ‘national party’ in light of the elements it considers in granting [and revoking] national committee status to a minor political party” through an advisory opinion process. Jd. at 313. Here, as you may or may not know, the Party's candidates have already been successfully nominated as the candidates for the Independence Party of Minnesota and the Independence Party of South Carolina, and have petitioned as independent candidates onto the ballots of seven other states in only four weeks. Ongoing petition efforts continue in other states. Some states are currently reviewing petitions already submitted. And in the four short weeks that the Party's candidates have been running for office, they have already registered in national polls, Together these facts show nationwide "substantial support.” Floridians should not be denied an opportunity to vote for the Party's candidates. More specifically, we ask that you not interpret Florida law in a manner that has a significant, adverse impact on our Party and its members -- especially when one set of rules apply to one subset of parties and another set of more onerous rules apply to others. We respectfully urge the Division of Elections to reconsider its decision. We ask that you add the Party's candidates on this fall's ballot. Let the ballot box — not ballot access — be the deciding factor for the candidates of Florida's third largest political party. Sincerely, Ernest Win. Bach Emest Wm. Bach State Chairman CC: Adam Tanenbaum; General Counsel ‘Adam.Tanenbaum @DOS.MyFlorida.com