Hayworth knocked off Independence line

16

The battle for the 18th Congressional District seat is off and running for sure.

A State Supreme Court judge has pulled Congresswoman Nan Hayworth’s name from the Independence Party line in the November ballot saying she lacked the sufficient number of valid signatures on her nominating petitions.

Hayworth, R-Bedford, is running for a second term against Democrat Sean Patrick Maloney, who won the line in a race against four others in the June 26 primary.

Judge Sam Walker of Westchester County State Supreme Court has ruled that 66 of 814 signatures were invalid. “She was left with 748 signatures, 22 short of the required 770 signatures,” reads the 12-page decision by Walker. A total of 770 valid signatures were required.

The signatures were approved by the state Board of Elections, but questioned in a lawsuit because it was said they could not be read clearly or there was not a proper witness signature on the paperwork.

Hayworth’s staff on Tuesday confirmed that the campaign was disappointed with the decision and that they would fight it in court.

“We have started – and are well along – in the appeal process,” Campaign Manager Bruce Harvie said. “We are disappointed by the efforts of the Maloney campaign to disenfranchise these voters.”

Maloney’s campaign staff suggested the issue was more about dwindling support for Hayworth.

“Not one voter was disenfranchised by the court’s ruling – it’s a ridiculous claim meant to distract from the fact that Congresswoman Hayworth’s efforts to end Medicare as we know it have made her so unacceptable to the Independents of this district that she couldn’t find 770 voters who actually wanted her on the ballot,” said Ben Hodapp, Maloney’s campaign manager.

Hayworth did have the Independence Party support when she ran in 2010. In addition to the Republican support, she  has the Conservative party line in this election as she did in the last one.

The district includes parts of Westchester and Dutchess counties and all of Orange and Putnam counties.

This posting has been updated to include comments from Maloney’s staff.

Share.

About Author

16 Comments

  1. We dont like her brand of name calling, strident sarcasm, finger pointing and Do Nothing for middle class taxpayers who are in danger of losing their homes because her R party ran Wall St into the ground.

    Now her friends in Wall St are back to the same shenanigans and she thinks we need her some more ?? No Way !!!

  2. Chris Pawelski on

    Count Chocula says:

    “Nan will win and you can take that to the Bank”

    I sincerely hope it’s not the bank this know-nothing/do-nothing is overseeing in her oversight duties on the House Financial Services Committee. We all know how clueless she is in that position and merely acts as a puppet, doing whatever she is told by her masters. Those that fund her. Of course when she first ran she ran as “Doctor, Mom, Businesswoman” and when she opens her mouth she obviously has no clue about matters of high finance. But, the criminals on Wall Street who do the credit default swaps, who tanked the economy and nearly caused another Great Depression, are the only constituency that Hayworth truly serves. She has no tangible accomplishments in behalf of the district. Zero, zippo, none.

    Thank you Count Chocula for your bold prediction. Still predicting she will one day beat Gillibrand and take her Senate seat? Ha ha ha ha … that one cracks me up to no end. You didn’t sound so confident during the middle of the Jay Townsend incident tho.

    Don’t quit your day job Count Chocula, whatever that is.

  3. just the facts on

    most of you are losing sight of the point here…the fact of the matter is that new york is
    one of only 6 states that allow minor parties to cross endorse major ones….and that opens
    the door to poltical and ideological extortion depending on the goal of the minor party
    eg take my position on a single issue or lose our line ..or after you are elected if we provided
    the margin of victory you owe us big time including jobs….this is unacceptable and it
    perverts the two party system in new york…because particularly on the republican side it
    prevents candidates from doing what they honestly believe for fear of offending whatever
    minor party endorsements they think they need to win….republicans have had to coble together
    a coalition of conservative and independence party support for years to win and that means
    that republicans are not free to select their own candidates for their own reasons…we need
    a member of the state legislature with the gumption to introduce legislation banning cross endorsements

  4. a little extortion wont hurt anyone on

    i hope “just the facts” is “just kidding about the facts” when he talks about the danger of using minor party lines for extortion purposes, when his buddies do exactly that.

  5. bye bye nan! on

    Let’s see if you can hold on with just the rep and con lines in a presidential year. I think not.

  6. Intelligent, informed voters vote AGAINST any pol who accepts the totally bogus “Independent” line or the phony “Working Families” endorsements.

  7. Working families that don't work on

    how does one obtain the bogus working families line? Explain to the world.

  8. just the facts on

    cross endorsements should be banned…I have been saying that for about 10 years…when will
    it catch on and to a little extortion wont hurt…i have no buddies in the minor parties but you
    should know that if you know anything about the political landscape

  9. Gooses and Ganders on

    But your buddy Nick Spano sure happily and cynically perverted and manipulated the Westchester Conservative Party in order to screw Astorino and back Andy Spano, didn’t he?

  10. just the facts on

    the issue is not who I know who my buddies are and who has been involved in politics..i don’t
    fault anyone for using the system as it now exists…however that system is flawed in that
    it allows the minor parties too much say in who the major parties pick to run….what jobs
    they give out if they win,and how many votes get cast on the minor line that would never exist
    if the line were not attached to a major party..in other words it compromises the two party system..so you either agree with that premise or not…its not about any one person and its
    exactly why only 6 states permit the practice…and as i have consistant stated over the years
    CROSS ENDORSEMENTS SHOULD BE BANNED IN NEW YORK…

  11. Gooses and Ganders on

    What’s wrong with them getting some jobs instead of all jobs going to the bedbugs, relatives, friends, and financial supporters of the crooked politicians? When the Dems and Reps agree to hire ONLY qualified, industrious and independent people they (and you) can then, and only then, criticize without the risk of being called hypocritical. When you demand ethics, be astute enough to live by them.

  12. just the facts on

    what’s wrong with them getting jobs…????what if they demand jobs in return for the cross
    endorsement..see anything wrong with that? or are you simply turning a blind eye …how about
    when they demand a candidate take a position on an issue in return for the cross endorsement
    like abortion…for example…you seem to want to excuse what these minor parties do because
    of a bias against certain elected officials..i am talking about the process in general…and soon
    you will see that cross endorsements will be out the window

  13. Gooses and Ganders on

    Love to see a Republican who hires a boatload of Democrats after being elected. Or vice-versa. Or even hire qualified people who declare no Party. The incumbent would be vilified and disavowed by his Party forthwith after being tarred, feathered and castrated. Like it or loathe it, it’s the name of the game. Your effective goal is to keep the status quo while not letting anyone else play. And consider the very real fact that we would never have had a Bill Clinton if it were not for that admitted goofball, Ross Perot. Same goes for Bush, Jr. Were it not for Nader, we would have had eight years of President Gore. Had either Bush Sr. or Gore been allowed by Party leaders to compromise by giving third party candidates a small voice in their platforms and with some jobs, they would have prevailed, and they know it well.

  14. just the facts on

    I will agree that Bush 41 should have been re elected and that al gore won the 2000
    election…but you are confusing one issue..I have no problem with third parties running
    their own candidates…or even with major parties taking into consideration whatever positions
    third parties want…that is totally different than what goes on in this state where a third
    party is able to cross endorse and as a result emasculates the major party candidate….
    one is compromise the other is political extortion