Backers of third parties hope to cash in on a growing frustration with the political establishment. The Tea Party demonstrations that started last year, the growth of unaffiliated voters, and the expansion of social networking to spur political activism has fueled optimism from minority parties.

A recent Rasmussen Reports poll suggests an opening may exist beyond the traditional two-party structure. One question asked: “If you were to vote today and you got to choose between a candidate from the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, or the Tea Party, which would you choose?”

A third of the respondents sided with the Democrats. A quarter opted for the “Tea Party.” Only 18 percent chose Republicans.

“The hypothetical ‘Tea Party’ did better than the Republican Party,” laughed Sean Haugh, former state director of the Libertarian Party.

But third parties face a series of obstacles before they can reach voters. North Carolina erects some of the nation’s highest ballot-access barriers on minority parties. Ballot Access News reports that only Oklahoma makes it tougher than North Carolina to place a presidential candidate on the ballot. Meantime, only Alabama places greater burdens on third-party candidates seeking to run in statewide election races.

The state began printing official ballots in 1901, controlling which candidates and parties appeared. Over the next century, the state regularly revised its laws governing who can and cannot get on the ballot. Third-party activists say that every time minority parties reach the ballot, the state changes the rules and raises the barriers higher.

When a 5,000-signature requirement allowed two new parties to reach the ballot in 1982, the legislature set the signature requirement at an all-time high — 2 percent of the number of voters in the previous gubernatorial election. Today, that translates to 85,000 signatures.

Over the next quarter century, only three parties were able to jump the hurdle — the Reform Party, the Natural Law Party, and the Libertarian Party. None of them, however, has seen a candidate collect 10 percent of the vote, a threshold that (since 1949) has given a party permanent ballot status. The frustration of having to start the petitioning process from scratch each election cycle caused the Reform and Natural Law parties to give up after two tries.

Last third party standing

Only the Libertarian Party remains standing. Since its inception in 1976, the Libertarian Party has collected enough signatures to get on North Carolina’s ballot eight times. And yet it has never reached the 10-percent threshold.

In 2007, the state changed the polling percentage required to retain ballot access from 10 percent to 2 percent.

After spending more than $200,000 and 3½ years collecting the 70,000 signatures then needed to reach the ballot, the party turned in 11 boxes of petitions a month before the June 2008 deadline.

“It’s like showing up to the beginning of a marathon already out of breath,” Haugh said, paraphrasing former Libertarian gubernatorial candidate Mike Munger.

Breaking through the barrier

Munger, a professor of economics and political science at Duke University, collected 3 percent of the vote in 2008 — 120,000 votes — enough to get Libertarians on the 2010 ballot without petitioning.

In previous election cycles Libertarians were so wiped out from petitioning, they didn’t have time, energy, or money for advertising, media engagements or door-to-door outreach. Party leaders hope 2010 will be different.

“It’s hard for us to tell how much our message might resonate with voters, because we’ve never had an opportunity to present it,” Munger said during his brief period on the campaign trail in 2008.

Gaining ballot status without undergoing of petitioning has revived the party, Haugh said. “We’ve brought back people who’d given up and attracted new people who’d never been interested before.”

Bar still high

Although Libertarians have proved it can be done, getting on the ballot is still too difficult, advocates for third parties complain.

“I don’t think it’s possible for any other party to meet this standard without out-of-state money” to pay petitioners to collect signatures, said Barbara Howe, chairwoman of the Libertarian Party of North Carolina. “It’s an ever-rising bar.”

Howe thinks the signature requirement should be low enough for a core group of party volunteers to meet it without having to pay outside petitioners. She and Haugh agree that 5,000 signatures is a “perfectly reasonable standard.”

“Historically, that seems to be a happy medium,” Haugh said.

“It keeps Mickey Mouse off the ballot,” Howe added, “but it doesn’t prevent a legitimate grass-roots organization from getting off the ground.”

“Choices confuse people”

In its court proceedings, the state has defended its signature requirement as a means of keeping voting simple. Allowing multiple parties and candidates on the ballot would confuse voters, the argument goes.

Ballot clutter is a myth, third parties say.

In Tennessee, where only 25 signatures are required, a mere nine parties appear on the ballot.

South Carolina has never had more than four parties on the ballot and its 10,000-signature requirement is significantly lower than North Carolina’s 85,000-signature requirement.

Even a several-page ballot would not present a problem, Haugh argues. He pointed to the 2003 recall election in California that elected Arnold Schwarzenegger governor. There were 135 candidates. One was an exotic dancer. The ballot was six pages long.

“Yes, it was a bit of a circus,” Haugh said, “but it resulted in a clear winner.”

Without representation

Al Pisano, chairman of the Constitution Party of North Carolina, believes three parties is not a crowd.

To cater to a diverse population, the menu should be broader, he said.

The Constitution Party offers right-wing voters something they can’t find in either the Republican or the Libertarian party, he said — positions that are more fiscally conservative than the modern GOP and more socially conservative than the Libertarians.

Similarly, the Green Party offers left-wing voters a voice that isn’t broadcast from the platforms of Democrats or Libertarians.

In 2005, the Libertarian and Green parties sued the state for violating their members’ constitutional rights. They claimed that restricting voting options infringed on freedom of speech, freedom of association, and equal protection under the law. They wanted the signature requirement lessened, if not dropped altogether.

In October 2009, the Court of Appeals issued a split decision favoring the state. The North Carolina Supreme Court is set to hear the case late this spring or early this summer.

The road ahead

While easing ballot access restrictions would provide voters with more choices, there’s no guarantee that the offerings of third parties would deliver victory at the polls, says Andrew Taylor, a political science professor at N.C. State University.

Minority parties also face restrictive campaign finance laws, a cumbersome candidate nomination process, and above all, a winner-takes-all electoral system, written in the U.S. Constitution, which was not designed to accommodate third parties.

Short of a constitutional amendment, Taylor doesn’t see third parties gaining any considerable political power any time soon.

“But third parties aren’t asking for that,” he said. What third parties want more than the presidency or high poll numbers, he said, is to be invited to debates, to be given an outlet to present their ideas.

“At the moment they don’t even have that,” he said, “because the organizers don’t invite them. They’re effectively muzzled.”

“They are just asking to make a case, and if the public’s not interested in what they have to offer, then so be it,” he said.

Although easing ballot access is not a sufficient condition for the rise of third parties, Taylor said without it, “they are fighting with one hand tied behind their backs.”

Sara Burrows is an associate editor of Carolina Journal.