Massachusetts voters sick of holding their noses on Election Day could get another option: none of the above.

"Occasionally, when you get an application for a position, none of them are qualified," said William H. White , a retired systems analyst from East Dennis spearheading the scheme, who testified yesterday before state lawmakers.

The measure, pending before the Legislature, would add the line "None of the Above; For a New Election" to every state and local race on the ballot. If that option won the most votes, another election would be held in 60 to 80 days, and other candidates would be allowed to run.

In a state where 70 percent of candidates ran unopposed last year, the bill would let voters try to force competition by calling for a new election.

The bill was sponsored at White's behest by Senator Robert A. O'Leary , a Barnstable Democrat, and Representative Cleon H. Turner , who represents Dennis. Turner said yesterday that the novel idea has gained little traction so far on Beacon Hill.

The bill's approval would make Massachusetts the first state to offer voters such a choice that is binding. Nevada has given its voters a nonbinding none-of-the-above option in statewide races since 1975.

Under White's proposal, the presidential race would be the only one in which voters could not demand a new election. But they could register their discontent by voting for none-of-the-above, as well as a candidate.

"That would signal that this candidate would not have a mandate, even if they won," said White.

ANDREW RYAN

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Boston Globe

BOSTON --Voters frequently complain elections boil down to a choicefforts occurred in the states, none of which resulted in electoral changes. But just this week, an Associated Press/Ipsos poll found that a plurality of Republican voters are still unwilling to pick a favorite among presidential candidates, suggesting that a "None of the above" choice would actually be the top vote getter if the election were held today.

But even while the two lawmakers sponsoring the bill for White celebrated his civic activism, they also found substantive problems with his bill and said it's very unlikely to get much support at the state house.

By DAVID SCHOETZ
July 19, 2007

------------------------------------------------

The retired systems analyst from Dennis testified Wednesday on behalf of a bill that would allow voters to reject a field of candidates and force a new election. Under the measure, if "none of the above" garnered more voters than any particular candidate, a follow-up election would be ordered within 80 days.

"The fundamental idea is that all legitimate consent requires the ability to withhold consent," White said after his brief appearance at a Statehouse hearing considering an array of proposed election matters. "Putting `none of the above' on a ballot would allow voters to withhold their consent."

White, who currently is registered as an "unenrolled" voter, said the measure wasn't aimed at any particular party or candidate, but the frustration he often has felt as he entered a voting booth. He also said it would be a way of empowering the average voter instead of the major political parties that field candidates.

Currently, only Nevada offers a "none of the above" option, but it is nonbinding and does not overrule the top vote-getter.

White's bill is co-sponsored by his local legislators, Sen. Robert O'Leary, D-Barnstable, and Rep. Cleon Turner, D-Dennis, but it received a muted response from the Joint Committee on Election Laws during its hearing Wednesday.

After a handful of questions, committee members moved onto the other 23 items on their agenda. It was unclear if they would vote on White's bill.

Heads, Tails or None of the Above

Massachusetts Bill Would Give New Option to Voters Unhappy With Political Choices

No more flipping coins. Kiss eeny meeny miny moe goodbye. Here's a new ballot choice: none of the above.

At least, that's the option that retired Cape Cod systems analyst William White wants to give Massachusetts voters.

White testified before state lawmakers Wednesday on behalf of legislation he drafted that would add "None of the above: for a new election" below the names of every candidate on Massachusetts ballots except those running in the constitutionally protected presidential race.

"My interest is really in enhancing the democratic nature of the political process," White, the director of voters for None of the Above, told ABC News. "I feel one of the most fundamental things we can do is give voters the choice to reject all candidates."

Under White's proposal, if none of the candidates for a particular office received a plurality and the "None of the above" option did, a new election would be held two months later that excluded the original field's losing candidates.

So many races go uncontested in Massachusetts, according to White, that a "None of the above" option would force parties to put up more viable candidates. White, a registered independent, said the bill is rooted squarely in reviving the democratic process and has nothing to do with partisan politics.

He admits that there's little appetite for such a significant change in voting among lawmakers -- but he's considering the effort more marathon than sprint.

"This is a major change to the electoral process, so it's going to take time," he said. "And I think it should take time."

About 10 years ago, a flurry of "None of the above" efforts occurred in the states, none of which resulted in electoral changes. But just this week, an Associated Press/Ipsos poll found that a plurality of Republican voters are still unwilling to pick a favorite among presidential candidates, suggesting that a "None of the above" choice would actually be the top vote getter if the election were held today.

But even while the two lawmakers sponsoring the bill for White celebrated his civic activism, they also found substantive problems with his bill and said it's very unlikely to get much support at the state house.