Voters headed to the polls this primary season will have to make a choice: Whether to pull a Republican or Democratic ballot. But no matter which ballot we choose, our choices have already been winnowed down by ballot access rules that make it far tougher for folks to run outside the two-party system.
If you wonder why so few independent candidates appear on Cook County ballots, look at the signature math: In a Cook County Illinois House district, a Democrat or Republican needs 500 to 1,500 signatures to run in a party primary, while an independent candidate in the same district could need around 10,000.
The system is designed that way as a filter. Major parties narrow their fields through primaries, while independent candidates qualify directly for the general election ballot. To do so, they must gather signatures equal to at least 5% (and up to 8%) of the voters who participated in the last regular election in the district — a formula that can quickly translate into many thousands of signatures in Cook County.
For a recent example, consider that Ald. Byron Sigcho-Lopez needed to gather nearly 11,000 signatures to run as an independent in the 4th Congressional District seat previously held by Jesús “Chuy” García. Sigcho-Lopez is unique in that he has built-in support from the Chicago Democratic Socialists of America and the Chicago Teachers Union, helpful grassroots organizations built for the sort of ground game that signature gathering requires. Others are not so fortunate. Just one independent candidate made it onto the ballot in 2024 legislative and congressional races.
It’s fair to argue that requirements that are too lax could lead to overcrowded ballots and an infusion of unserious candidates in the general election (although we met some unserious candidates running in both the Democratic and Republican primaries). The problem for independents, and thus the voters, is that requirements that are too strict are making it unnecessarily difficult to launch an independent bid at all. Illinois’ system doesn’t explicitly ban independents, but it raises the cost of entry so high that most potential candidates never try. And, instead of the primaries being the true filter, the parties themselves serve that role.
Compounding the problem: the way Illinois handles petition challenges. Candidates rarely collect just the legal minimum. Because objections are common, campaigns often collect far more John Hancocks, sometimes double or more, to withstand challenges.That turns ballot access into a logistical and legal exercise that favors campaigns with money, lawyers and established political networks.
Illinois’ rules also differ from many other states. Independent candidates here must gather signatures equal to 5% of the vote in the last election for that office. In many states the requirement is a lower percentage, or is capped at a fixed number of signatures. The difference may sound technical, but it has practical consequences. A higher threshold means more time, more volunteers and often more legal help just to qualify for the ballot.
The result is that many races effectively become two-candidate contests long before voters ever see a ballot. In districts dominated by one party — and Cook County has many of them — the decisive election is often the primary. If no independent candidate can realistically qualify for the general election ballot, the range of choices presented to voters has already been narrowed by the rules themselves.
At a time when neither Republicans nor Democrats are particularly popular with the American electorate, it’s past time to explore ways to broaden the scope of what’s on offer during election season. Variety — and competition — is a good thing. The most direct fix would be to reduce the 5% requirement for independents to either a flat cap or a lower percentage, in line with other states. For example, in states such as Colorado, independent candidates can qualify for legislative ballots with a capped number of signatures — often around 1,000 — rather than a percentage requirement that can climb into the many thousands. That approach still ensures candidates demonstrate genuine support without making ballot access prohibitively difficult.
Competitive elections strengthen democracy, and state leaders should reexamine a system that protects party insiders and sidelines would-be challengers long before voters get their say. We’d like to see more independent candidates on the ballot — especially since 45% of Americans use that word to describe themselves.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
