The Kansas secretary of state has rebuffed an effort by a Republican-affiliated political strategist to take control of the state’s branch of the political party started by No Labels, the bipartisan group that had been exploring running a third-party 2024 presidential bid but decided against it.
Kris Van Meteren, a Republican strategist in the state, says he’s the rightful chair of the party, having convened his own convention — with one attendee — where he elected himself chairman after he incorporated No Labels Kansas Inc. as a nonprofit organization in the state. After he did so, he nominated two candidates for the party’s ballot line in a pair of state Senate districts: his wife and a Democrat who says she was nominated without her consent.
But the secretary of state rejected those nominations, and No Labels is crying foul. They both say Van Meteren has no claim to the party, despite the decision by its national leadership not to run candidates this cycle. And No Labels told NBC News it is actively engaged to make sure no one will hijack the state ballot lines it won't be using in the fall, which would throw a new wrench into the general election.
No Labels announced this spring that it would “stand down” on its attempt to field a third-party presidential ticket, despite having formed state party organizations and gained ballot access in 21 states, including Kansas. In many of those places, the state parties deputized by the national organization technically held the final decision as to whether or not to put forward candidates on its ballot lines. But so far, there has been no indication that they would disregard the wishes of the national No Labels group. And the party hasn’t put any candidates forward in Kansas.
Still, Van Meteren said that days before Kansas’ candidate filing deadline, he took action.
In a post on Facebook early Friday, he said he filed paperwork to incorporate the party and register it with the IRS before he called a convention, named himself party chairman and nominated candidates. One was longtime Democratic state Sen. Marci Francisco, who faces a primary within her own party (and who told NBC News and local outlets she had no knowledge of Van Meteren’s efforts). The other was his wife, Echo Van Meteren, a Republican running for the state Senate.
Van Meteren didn’t respond to emails sent to his firm, The Singularis Group, which has worked with a variety of Republicans in the Midwest and the Great Plains in recent years.
State Secretary of State Scott Schwab rejected Van Meteren’s nominations. His office said in a statement that state laws say “the nomination for state office [must] be called by the state chairperson of the party. The chairperson of the No Labels party is listed as Glenda Reynolds, not Kristian Van Meteren.” The secretary of state’s office also provided NBC News with copies of letters sent to each candidate denying the nominations.
In statements to NBC News and local outlets, No Labels chief strategist Ryan Clancy confirmed that Reynolds remains the chair of No Labels Kansas and that Van Meteren’s filings weren’t sanctioned by the group.
“No Labels Kansas did everything it was supposed to do according to state law: party leadership was designated and adopted; bylaws were submitted to the Secretary of State at the outset along with petition signatures. Unfortunately, this person now appears to be shamefully impersonating a No Labels official,” Clancy said.
“We don’t know him, have no affiliation with him and we hope Kansas state election officials hold him fully accountable for any violations he has committed," Clancy continued. "This is the kind of nonsense that undermines voters’ faith in our democracy and it has to stop.”
Van Meteren has maintained he has followed state laws, and he called on the secretary of state to reverse his decision. He said he's the “legitimate chairman” of the No Labels Kansas Party in his Facebook post Friday, arguing his tactics were lawful.
He wrote on Facebook that he was being accused of "swindling the good people of Kansas into buying some kind of dangerous electoral snake oil. Obviously, potentially giving general election voters more options is such dangerous medicine."
“What is demanded and what I’m asking for is a fair reading of the law by an unbiased legal authority to see if I am, as accused in the press, guilty of some kind of election fraud or crime," Van Meteren continued. "Conversely, I am keenly interested in finding out if I actually followed the law as it is written.”
A copy of the bylaws that No Labels Kansas filed with the state shows how the organization tried to guard against something like this when it started its 2024 presidential push.
The bylaws say the party isn’t authorized to nominate state or local candidates, only to nominate candidates for the presidency and the vice presidency. And a memo from the secretary of state’s office provided to the media argues that political parties aren’t required to file incorporation paperwork, so in its eyes, Van Meteren wasn’t exploiting some kind of valid loophole.
The corporations he created, the memo says, are “completely different and distinct [entities] from the No Labels Kansas, the recognized political party.”
The memo adds that Van Meteren’s filings “may have violated” Kansas law prohibiting “false impersonation as a party officer.”
Could such an effort work elsewhere? It's unlikely.
Ballot access is one of the main obstacles that make campaigns difficult for third-party candidates, so it's easy to see why No Labels' ballot lines would be attractive for someone trying to run for office as something other than a Democrat or a Republican.
But Richard Winger, a ballot-access expert who co-writes the Ballot Access News newsletter, told NBC News that in states like Kansas, where new parties nominate their candidates by conventions, “No Labels can easily block candidates because the state chairs, who are loyal to the national organization, will simply refuse to call any nominating conventions.”
Winger added that No Labels has its own primary on the ballots in a handful of states, including Arizona, where the state is appealing a ruling that said the party can block prospective candidates from running on its ballot line. Florida also has a No Labels primary, but no candidates are registered as running for the No Labels Party. Wisconsin could have been another one of those states, but the party withdrew its pending ballot access application and never ultimately qualified.
Clancy, the No Labels strategist, said in a follow-up interview that “it’s been made very clear to us that we have the ultimate authority over our own ballot, determining how that is used” in the states where the party has access.
“There could be other circumstances where somebody tries to pull this stuff but: No. 1, they aren’t allowed to do it, and No. 2, we have been in communication with lots of our state officers to make them aware of this, and so they can help prevent this from happening,” Clancy said.
“Our reputation and credibility is on the line," he continued. "We are not going to just walk away from this and leave this asset out there for people to screw around with to create mischief.”
And he added that the party will work with authorities to ensure no one “tries to act illegally or unethically with regard to a ballot line.”
The saga is a reminder of the potential unintended consequences of third-party political efforts.
In at least one case in recent years, the introduction of a new political party served as a kind of “Chekhov’s gun” — a seemingly minor development that re-emerged years later with new intrigue and consequences.
When former Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut — a longtime No Labels ally who was leading its presidential candidate advisory committee before he died this year — lost the 2006 Democratic primary for his re-election, he created his own political party so he could still appear on the ballot. Lieberman won his final Senate term that fall as a member of the “Connecticut for Lieberman” party.
After the election, a Lieberman critic changed his voter registration to join the party and said the secretary of state told him he was the only member of the Connecticut for Lieberman party in the state — after which he elected himself party chairman and used the Lieberman party to needle Lieberman himself.
