Count My Vote or Blank Check Vote

Updated based on current version.

Whether or not you agree that the caucus and convention system which did NOT favor the incumbent, wealthy or famous, as being a good thing, the New Count My Vote 2.1 is worse.
 
Currently you can at least watch what your legislator does during the session and if you don't like it, you can either run or help someone run against them by filing after the session ends.

CMV 2.1 changes the deadline to be selected by the party OR to submit signatures by the first business day after March 1st., lines 469, 476). (worse than CMV2.0)

They are saying we have to have the caucus and county and state party conventions during February, when the Utah Legislature is meeting!

This takes away part of the accountability of these elected officials.

Most of the bills will pass after the new proposed filing deadline and it will take time prior to qualify and so it would be two years until you have a chance to hold your State Representative accountable or perhaps four years for your State Senator or Governor depending on their end of term.

So much for accountability to the people. Is this initiative is written to protect incumbents?

Do we call this Count My Vote or Blank Check Vote?

https://elections.utah.gov/Media/Default/2018%20Election/Initiatives/Count%20My%20Vote%20Addendum.pdf

What is the major problem technically? 

The new CMV2 violates the Utah Constitution Art VI sec 1, (2) (a) (i) (B ) for lines 97 to 107.

IF they CAN constitutionally combine an initiative and a referendum of advance legislation, which the constitution has as separate powers and the state law has different requirements for, the state constitution is very clear a referendum can not repeal bills passed by a 2/3 vote of both legislative houses. This is written to include repeal of those, even before they exist, violating the part of the State Constitution they are using to create CMV2. 

Other major problems?

While it will cost less to get on the primary ballot under CMV2, it will cost a lot more to actually run and win elections making lobbyists and corporations, or the wealthy and famous even more powerful in elections.

There are no geographical requirements for signatures within a district or state so the potential of fly over counties and cities and area becomes much worse.

What should Count My Vote 2.1 actually change?

IF they really want to change elections, they should get rid of straight party voting as people can now get on the general election ballot as an unaffiliated candidate with signatures bypassing the political parties, and have been able to for many years. They just have a harder time wining with straight party voting. CMV2 does nothing to help unaffiliated voters. That would.

The next thing they should look at is Ranked Choice Voting and not the expensive run off primaries that are part of CMV2, that have poor voter turnout and cost millions each election.

Ranked Choice voting Video

Don't sign their initiative. It makes elections worse and not better.  

The Same Day Ballot for the Neighborhood Caucus Election Republican Meeting

The Same Day Ballot for the 2014 Neighborhood Caucus Election Republican Meeting

It started about a year ago with some at the Utah Republican State Central Committee (SCC) trying to figure how to grant an exception or maybe even a proxy vote for some that couldn't come to the  the Neighborhood Caucus Election Meeting.

The idea of a Proxy Vote was defeated, and it has taken many months to come up with a Same Day Ballot (SDB) system. It has many protections so it isn't a proxy vote. The person prints out their own ballot, which has a number to avoid copying it. They fill out their own ballot that day and put it in an envelope, seal it, and sign across the seal, so we know it wasn't someone else. They provide the ballot and copies of their state ID to whoever is bringing the ballot that allows those receiving it to check the signature and make sure the person is a registered voter in the precinct. The ID is given back to the person that brought in the ballot so we don't have issues with ID theft or party liability for the ID copies.

It was structured in such a way to allow the mom who was planning on coming to the neighborhood caucus election meeting, but her kids got sick to still vote, or the firefighter, for example, that had to work that night. We want people to come to the meeting, but things can come up that can't be controlled. The Same Day Ballot (SDB) is designed to not provide an incentive for people to avoid the meeting. The person that just had knee surgery that uses a SDB, is not likely to be able to come, and the SDB will actually increase the number participating and not decrease it.

Because the ID with the ballot was given outside the envelope, the party never gets control of it, and the person selected to deliver the ballot is going to be a spouse, family member or trusted friend. People will not give a copy of their ID to someone they don't know. That would make sure someone representing a campaign didn't try to abuse the system.

We added a pre-meeting before the Neighborhood Caucus Election Meeting from 6pm to 7pm and advance registration, to encourage, but not require, those wanting to run for delegate or precinct chair, etc. to let people know in advance so those that couldn't come would know who to vote for, and have time to call them up and ask questions. The SDB allows a write in vote, so if they know or want someone to be nominated that night, they can vote for them as well.

The next concern, which was discussed in Filmore, during the October 26th SCC meeting, was a limit as to how many of the Same Day Ballots could be brought in by one person.

Since we live in Utah, and we also have small rural towns, there are people that are trusted in each community that could pick up quite a number of the SDB. The proposal in Fillmore was to limit the number of SDB's a person could bring in to one (1). That was discussed and rejected. five (5) was a number discussed, but it wasn't approved either. We wanted to have a large enough number to make sure the mom or the firefighter could find someone to bring their SDB in, or if a family got sick, the voters in the household would turn in their votes, but small enough so as to not encourage abuse. On Saturday, Dec. 14th, the SCC decided three (3) was the best number for the limit of SDB's a person could bring in.

Some have raised concerns that the number 3 would be limiting. In the September 21st SCC meeting, a resolution titled "Resolution to Increase Voter Participation and Defend the Utah Neighborhood Election" passed the committee with no one voting against it, so the majority, and perhaps all the members of the SCC believe we want increased voter participation. We had over 110,000 voters come to the Republican Neighborhood Caucus Election Meeting, and we made improvements so that number can continue to increase. It has doubled and then doubled again. We don't know that we will have 250,000 voters show up in 2014, but we want to be as prepared for that as we can, and we want to hear more from those running at the same time.

It was made clear that the limit of 3 would not limit the number of firefighters that could participate, as they would each have family and friends that could deliver the ballot for them. It was also make clear that this limit would not apply to the Same Day Military & Mission Ballots that are sent to the precinct chair and vice chair. That had other protections to make sure we know who is voting.

I would be happy to provide more information.

Fred C. Cox, representing Salt Lake County on the Utah Republican State Central Committee.

Note, the approx. 180 committee members were elected by either state or county delegates which total 4000 (state) or approx. 10,000 (county), that were elected by over 110,000 registered Republican voters in 2012. Each county has at least 2 or more members.

Fair Elections Utah Help us fight the Count My Vote or Buy My Vote initiative

Fair Elections Utah

We call upon Citizens of Utah , the Utah Legislature, and Political Parties in Utah  to protect the Utah Neighborhood Election, Caucus and Convention Candidate Nomination Process.

We have a system that that does NOT favor the incumbent, the wealthy or the famous. This is a good thing, and should be preserved.

The Neighborhood Election and Convention system in Utah is the best way to make sure a grassroots process can win over large amounts of money. It is the only way someone with $100,000 can go against someone with $2 million in election funds.

We want neighbors discussing the best candidates and finding ways to improve this state and the nation. If the system is changed, we would be dropping off votes, but not meeting and discussing candidates and issues. That is what is wrong with Washington, D.C. They don’t listen to each other in a meeting. They watch from their offices. We need to change that, not perpetuate it.

We already have a "bypass" system, filing as an unaffiliated candidate. A candidate can go straight to the general election ballot. Someone who doesn't think they can win if vetted by average citizens asking one on one questions can still run and spend their money. Why should they be a political party nominee if they are going to bypass their political party?

At only one time for 10 years in Utah’s history did the state depart from the Neighborhood Election, Caucus and Convention System. In 1937, a powerful democratic state senator convinced enough of the legislature to switch to an open primary. He had had two losses, a US Senate race and also for governor, because the majority of the convention delegates disagreed with his legislative voting record. But he was well known and had money.

Many at the time felt like an open primary was his ticket to the governorship, and he did win. But the change in the system only lasted for a decade. After public and media disillusionment, and even worse voter turnout, Utah restored the Caucus and Convention System. Why go back?

Our current problem with voter turnout is it has not kept up with the population increases. The voter turnout keeps going up but not as fast as the population. Some of that is the younger voters, where Utah has a larger percentage of them and they aren't, as a group, as involved. We need to educate those moving in and not understanding our system.

Many citizens who attend their neighborhood elections and caucus meeting become interested in politics and get involved in their communities, the state and the nation. They meet and help candidates become elected. Some then later become candidates. This should be encouraged through education.

The system and the experience attending the meetings can always be improved, but the “Count My Vote” initiative isn't the way to do it. Any changes to the system the political parties use to determine their nominees should be determined by the political parties.

Fair Elections Utah. Help us fight the "Count My Vote", or "Buy My Vote" initiative.

Fair Elections in Utah vs Count My Vote

The caucus & convention system in Utah is the best way to make sure a grassroots process can win over large amounts of money. It is the only way someone with $100,000 can go against someone with $2 million in election funds.

We have a system that that does NOT favor the incumbent, wealthy or famous. This is a good thing.

Our problem with voter turnout is it has not kept up with the population increase. The voter turnout keeps going up but not as fast as the population. Some of that is the younger voters, where Utah has a larger percentage of them and they aren't, as a group, as involved. Also those moving in and not understanding our system.

We already have a "bypass" system, filing as an unaffiliated candidate. You go straight to the general. Someone doesn't think they can win if vetted by average citizens asking one on one questions, can run and spend the money. Why should they be a party nominee if they are going to bypass the party?

If you change the way our Utah primary's work, you could have two republicans in the general election ballot (or two democrats).


Bypassing the caucus/convention system will not create more participation. There are 4,000 state delegates and many more county delegates that spend countless hours vetting candidates to be on the ballot. They are selected by those that attend the neighborhood election caucus meeting. The current one-on-one candidate vetting by delegates cannot be done well any other way.

When people realize this Count My Vote initiative will give them less of a chance to participate but give media and power brokers more power, they will not sign any initiative. This is a power grab and it isn't by the neighbors you elect as delegates.

If you are going to run as a Democratic candidate, you have to comply with their rules. If you are going to run as a Republican, you have to comply with their rules. If you don't like those rules, you can run as unaffiliated, independent or as a third-party candidate. Count My Vote is attempting to change all party rules by changing state laws by initiative, thus bypassing the political parties and the Legislature.


Who gets to pick the people that show up on the ballot? It is the voters through the caucus system. The candidates get to decide if they are going to run and each of us vote to have them vetted. We put the best ones we have that volunteered to run on the ballot. One of the reasons we get involved in the caucus system is to have a say as to who is on the ballot.

If we didn't have the system we have, it would be the power brokers that would get to decide. They are the ones trying to get rid of the caucus.

Keep Fair Elections in Utah, keep the caucus and convention system

For more information, see:
http://www.fairelectionsutah.com/

Why Keep the Utah Neighborhood Caucus and Convention System

Why Keep the Utah Neighborhood Caucus and Convention System?

The caucus system in Utah is the best way to make sure a grassroots process can win over large amounts of money. It is the only way someone with $100,000 can go against someone with $2 million in election funds.

We have a system that that does NOT favor the incumbent, wealthy or famous. This is a good thing.

Our only problem with voter turnout is it has not kept up with the population increase. The voter turnout keeps going up but not as fast as the population. Some of that is the younger voters, where Utah has a larger percentage of them and they aren't, as a group, as involved. Some of that are those moving in and not understanding our system.

 If you are going to run as a Democratic candidate, you have to comply with their rules. If you are going to run as a Republican, you have to comply with their rules. If you want to run and not have those rules, you can run as an unaffiliated or independent, or run as a 3rd party candidate. “Count My Vote” is attempting to change all party rules by changing state laws by initiative, thus bypassing the political parties and the Legislature.

We already have a "bypass" system. It is called filing as an unaffiliated candidate. You go straight to the general election. So if Mr. Jowers, or Mr. Leavitt don't think they can win if vetted by average citizens asking one on one questions, they can run that way and spend the money. Why should they be a party nominee if they are going to bypass the party?

When people realize this "Count My Vote initiative will give them less of a chance to participate but give media and power brokers more power, they will not sign any initiative. This is a power grab by Lobbyists, and those that want to run for office but don't believe they can win if vetted by average citizens asking one on one questions.


I ask you to read these two of my Op-Ed articles:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/56205410-82/state-caucus-system-party.html.csp

and

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765631377/We-need-to-keep-fair-elections-in-Utah.html

We need to coordinate with college and university campuses in Utah so students know where their caucus meeting is, and where Utah residents can register to attend and participate.

We could make sure that neighborhood caucus meetings could be done in two hours, and the election results distributed not just to the county and state parties, but to those who missed the caucus, so they can learn who represents them and who to contact to make their views known. Any person who got a babysitter for two hours to attend a caucus meeting should be able to vote within that time frame.

The present system does not protect the incumbent, the wealthy or the famous.

Keep fair elections in Utah.

Messed up Utah primaries Which bad idea do you want

It appears the Count My Vote / Buy My Vote Group has decided their idea of bypassing the caucus / convention system was a bad idea. 

I agree.

Now they want to ruin our primary system. If you change the way our Utah primary's work as they are proposing, you could have two republicans in the general election ballot (or two democrats).

Much of the state there will just be republicans and part of Salt Lake County, just democratic candidates on the General Election ballot.  And this is a good idea?

They are going to poll everyone to see which bad idea we like. What do you bet they just poll 400 of us and call it good. How about running changes past the parties or at least the legislature? The states that are ruled by polls typically are ruled by Debt.

If the voters figure this out, none will sign on to this idea.

We have a system that that does NOT favor the incumbent, wealthy or famous. This is a good thing.

Keep Fair Elections in Utah. Our Caucus and Conventions system. 

PS, if they want to really help voter participation, we have some ideas, if they have the guts to try.

My view We need to keep fair elections in Utah Deseret News

My op-ed for the Deseret News:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765631377/We-need-to-keep-fair-elections-in-Utah.html

That system of discussion is being proposed to be removed from the neighborhood caucus meeting. We would be dropping off votes, but not meeting and discussing candidates and issues. We want neighbors discussing the best candidates and finding ways to improve this state and the nation. That is what is wrong with Washington, D.C. Many don't listen to each other in a meeting. They watch from their offices. We need to change that, not perpetuate it.
Perhaps the "Count My Vote" group should go watch "WALL-E" from Pixar again (the people on the spaceship).
We are talking neighborhood town halls. We aren't just meeting to elect delegates. I believe the Count My Vote group would ruin that.

The present system does not protect the incumbent, the wealthy or the famous. Keep fair elections in Utah.

Utah Caucus and Convention System History

When people realize this "Count My Vote initiative will give them less of a chance to participate but give media and power brokers more power, they will not sign any initiative. This is a power grab by Lobbyists, and those that want to run for office but don't believe they can win if vetted by average citizens asking one on one questions.

Perhaps you should realize that Utah was one of the early states to get rid of the Caucus System. We didn't like the results when we did and voter turnout went down. It appears we changed it to get a governor that wouldn't have won otherwise. It took less than 10 years for everyone to want the Caucus and Convention System or Mass Meetings back. 

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it"

Who are we going to change our system for this time? The people, or some powerful candidate?

Utah has used neighborhood caucus and convention system since statehood in 1896, as did every other state at the time.  

Utah Governor Herbert B. Maw

At only one time in Utah’s history did the state depart for 10 years.  In 1937, a powerful State Senate President, Democrat Herbert Maw, convinced enough of his colleagues to switch to an open primary.  Some wonder if he had self-serving motives. He had had two losses, a US Senate race and also for governor, because the majority of the convention delegates disagreed with his legislative voting record. But he was well known and had money. 

Many felt like an open Primary was the ticket to the governorship, and he did win.  But the Change in the system only lasted for a decade.  After disillusionment, Utah restored the Caucus and Convention System. See the Deseret News from 1946:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=VXczAAAAIBAJ&sjid=sXwDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6680%2C5376710

Today only seven states still have a caucus and convention system, but Utah is the only state that actually nominates the candidates in the convention that are placed on the ballot.  Other state conventions are endorsing conventions, but the party has little or no control over which candidate/s runs against its endorsed candidate and whether the others even represent the Party platform.

The current system does not protect the incumbent, wealthy or famous. I think that is a good thing.  

Historical research credit: Cherilyn Eagar

Is Count My Vote a Republican or Democratic Group

Interesting that a few weeks ago, the Count My Vote / Buy My Vote people were emphasising they were also run by a lot of democratic members when Jim Dabakis encouraged their members:

"Democrats, do not be manipulated into into helping the GOP insiders in their internal war. DO NOT help the initiative–DO get involved in helping Utah Democrats decide own own future by getting involved in our review of our party’s process."

The Count My Vote / Buy My Vote people fought back with this:
"The managing partner of Exoro is Maura Carabello, a well-known Democrat who helped Salt Lake County Mayor Ben McAdams, a Democrat, get elected last fall.

... half of the Exoro staff are Democrats, half are Republicans.

Carabello and Webb are both on the Count My Vote steering committee, as are other well-known Utahns, including former Gov. Mike Leavitt."

Now the Count My Vote / Buy My Vote are all Republicans again? That is what they are saying now. I wonder why?

You really can't have it both ways.

When people realize this "Count My Vote initiative will give them less of a chance to participate but give media and power brokers more power, they will not sign any initiative. This is a power grab by Lobbyists, and those that want to run for office but don't believe they can win if vetted by average citizens asking one on one questions.

Perhaps you should realize that Utah was one of the early states to get rid of the Caucus System. We didn't like the results when we did and voter turnout went down. We changed it to get a governor that wouldn't have won otherwise. It took less than 10 years for everyone to want the Caucus System or Mass Meetings back. "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it"

Who are we going to change our system for this time? The people, or some powerful candidate?

References:

http://www.fairelectionsutah.com/NewsletterLetterfromtheChairUtahDemocraticParty.pdf

http://utahpolicy.com/view/full_story/22443310/article-Bob-Bernick-s-Notebook--Dabakis--Weird-Stance-on-Nominating-Changes

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865580660/Caucus-initiative-moving-forward.html

For some counter arguments, take a look at this blog:

http://fairelectionsutah.blogspot.com/

 

Why vote down the take over compromise at the convention

For a period spanning 2 years, I had the best floor attendance record for floor votes in the entire Utah legislature. I wanted to hear what Rep. King, Rep. Powell, Rep. Bird, and Rep. Noel were going to say. Even though I had read the bills in advance, discussing them could cause me to change my mind or figure out a better way, solving the concerns of many.

That is being proposed to be removed from the caucus meeting. We would be mailing in or dropping off votes, but not meeting and discussing candidates and issues. That is what is wrong with Washington DC. They don't listen to each other in a meeting. They watch from their offices. We need to change that not follow it.

I am not in favor of changing the 60% threshold  and changing to 2/3 will not get the Count My Vote / Buy My Vote people to back off, they also want:

 "AND if the caucus event is opened up so everyone can participate even if they cannot attend at a specific place at a specific time" . 

I say go watch WALL-E from Pixar again, the people on the spaceship.

 I like the idea of improving the caucus meeting so everyone that was not at the meeting can find out who represents them and who to contact. We can make the meetings so someone can come for two hours and vote.

We are talking neighborhood town halls. We aren't just meeting to elect delegates. I believe the Count My Vote / Buy My Vote group would ruin that.

The current system does not protect the incumbent, wealthy or famous. Ie think that is a good thing.

 Keep Fair Elections in Utah.  

 

Keep Fair Elections in Utah

The Salt Lake Tribune has published an op-ed that I wrote. You can read it at:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/56205410-82/state-caucus-system-party.html.csp



The idea is so everyone that was not at the meeting can find out who represents them and who to contact.

We are talking neighborhood town halls. They aren't just meeting to elect delegates. I believe the Count My Vote group would ruin that.

No, I didn't pick the photo that they used. 

In support of Aaron Gabrielson for Utah State Republican Party Chair

The movement of the Count My Vote / Buy My Vote group in many cases is to make sure the establishment has more power than grassroots. It is my opinion watching them personally this last month that Aaron Gabrielson wants to help both groups (establishment and grassroots) and James doesn't. Do we really want to hack off a very vocal part of our party? For all the move to be inclusive, the establishment wants more to participate as long as they maintain the power. This is a bad direction to go.

Four years ago, I supported Dave Hansen for state party chair and very actively helped his campaign because I believed we would have a divided state party if the other candidates won and Dave would keep the party whole. I also supported Morgan Philpot at that time because I believed he would help to make sure we didn't have a divided party. In 2010 after watching Dave attend rallies and be supportive of those in the party wanting to push back against the Federal Government, I knew I made the correct choice. I have been on different sides than Dave on other races and other causes, but Utah was better because of his service. Dave was also fair to all the US Senate candidates in 2010. I watched other states such as Nevada react poorly to 2010 and it showed in 2012.

One of the reasons I ran to be a member of the state central committee was I felt like a large percentage of the committee was trying to shift the balance of power away from the state delegates and more to the state central committee and was amazed to watch the votes of the state central committee. I attended for a year before running to be a member. I do agree there needs to be a balance of power between the delegates and the state central committee. I have voted against changes I believed shifted the power to far either way. 

I voted for Thomas Wright for State Party Chair 2 years ago, despite concerns because I felt the other choices would not help unify the party. This year I am supporting Aaron Gabrielson for similar reasons. I believe Aaron will keep the party whole and growing.

How much did Aaron raise to help fight Matheson in 2008 and 2010? How much has he raised to even run for this election. I am not worried about Aaron's ability to raise money. More importantly to me was Aaron's ability to find 80 volunteers to help him fight to get good Republican's elected when he didn't have a title and he didn't have to do anything.

I am worried about the establishment movement to crush grassroots. I believe Aaron will help unify. Remember that a large chunk of the funds Aaron raised for state raises in 2012 was to go to Rep. Kraig Powell, hardly a "TEA Party" favorite, but a good man representing his constituents and the Republican Party candidate.

For the last week or two I have been also asking myself why LaVarr Webb who leads the powerful lobbyist and insider  Exoro Group  and also the Count My Vote / Buy My My Vote group working to bypass the neighborhood election, caucus and convention system  doesn't want Aaron to win ? 


I believe we should improve, but not gut, our neighborhood election, caucus and convention system. The Caucus System in Utah is the best way to make sure a grass roots process can work over large amounts of money. It is the only way someone with $100,000 can go against someone with $2,000,000 in election funds. 

We have a system that that does NOT favor the incumbent, wealthy or famous. This is a good thing. 

While all 3 candidates claim they are in favor of fighting to support and keep the caucus system, I do not believe we should do this by caving into their demands . Out of the 3 candidates, the one that has the Count My Vote / Buy My Vote group the most concerned is Aaron Gabrielson. He is also the one that has impressed me based on his actions and not just his words.

Aaron Gabrielson is also someone involved with social media, and didn't just sign up on Facebook this last month. He is relatively young and energetic. One of the major focus groups that the Republican Party needs to help understand the party are the young voters.  

Join me in supporting  Aaron Gabrielson for Utah State Republican Party Chair. Let's keep the party whole, add the younger voters and and let's fight to keep our neighborhood election, caucus and convention system.

To the members of the State Central Committee

To the members of the State Central Committee, 2011-2013,

I wish to go on record that I object to the attempt by some to create an emergency or "surprise" State Central Committee meeting prior to the State Convention next week with most of the "outgoing" committee members. I would think we were more grownup that this.

Dozens of you were contacted recently by email or phone to see if you are willing to sign on to requesting a new meeting, apparently because someone didn't like the results of the votes we took in the March and April meetings. I didn't like all the results either, but that is why we vote, to see what we as a committee can agree on and what we don't. That email wasn't sent to everyone. This email is being sent to all the ones listed on the State Party website. I am sorry if it no longer applies to you or I get the email address wrong.

If this "grassroots" called State Central Committee meeting were to be held just prior to the convention, I believe it would disrupt those members that have volunteered to help candidates and the constitutional and bylaw issues being discussed. The delegates are coming as early as 7am and for the SCC members to be in a meeting after than time, that eliminates those that are helping with credentialing, booths, passing out flyers, or just meeting old friends and making new ones.

Many, but not all SCC members are state delegates and should be asking their final questions to candidates during this time period, or help their favorite candidate get elected. 

If there truly was an emergency, that would be one thing, but what would be the limit to the agenda items?

To be further discussed that day at the Convention, they have to be items that we have already voted on, or the C&B committee voted on already, and already be in the call for the convention.

I hope that this email already finds you in agreement and that this "last ditch effort" has already failed.

My likely assumption is that someone wants the SCC to change their vote on the threshold to avoid a primary. While this is a critical vote, we had it in March and again in April. We could not get 2/3 of those voting to agree on changing the 60/40 system we have now. There was no confusion on the vote.

Again, I ask that you reject this apparent "sour grapes" move. If someone is worried about the County My Vote / Buy My Vote group's threats, I say "bring it". We can kick their butt.

Fred C. Cox, Salt Lake County

PS

For my opinion on the 60% issue, see:

http://fairelectionsutah.blogspot.com/2013/04/keep-it-at-60-percent.html

Disclaimer, I was originally "maybe OK" with a change in percentage until I realized 2 things:

1. Moving from 60% to 2/3 would, based on the last 12 years and the party released stat sheets, increase the number of contested in-party state wide or congressional races going to a primary up by 17%.

2. The Count My Vote / Buy My Vote group in their last letter to us threatened us to raise the threshold high enough so that later they could push to eliminate multiple round or preferential voting, (only have one vote) and have more than 2 candidates go to the primary. At least they were open and honest about their motives. I would hope we would be smart enough to see them.

3. See other reasons at the above link.

[update. At least 50 members of the committee voted to re-vote the 2/3 threshold vote and hold the special meeting apparently because they didn't like the results last time.  They are not proposing an amended proposal, it is the same one]

[update 2: The meeting was held and not only did they not get the 2/3 vote, they lost and didn't get a majority voting for this change. When it went to convention, 55% voted against this change.]

Fair Elections Utah

My other blog on Fair Elections Utah vs the Count My Vote / Buy My Vote is at:
http://fairelectionsutah.blogspot.com/

Fair Elections in Utah vs Count My Vote

“Count my Vote” or Buy my Vote?                   
Fred C. Cox, Salt Lake County

One of the principles of those wanting to gut the neighborhood election caucus meeting and convention system we have in Utah, is this:

" A system that provides inherent advantages to those who are incumbent, wealthy or famous is not acceptable." http://utahpolicy.com/view/full_story/21947725/article-Principles-for-an-Acceptable-Nomination-Process

I find this statement amazing, because I agree with it. The proposal to bypass the caucus system and also change the percentage to avoid a primary to 85%/15% will actually create "inherent advantages to those who are incumbent, wealthy or famous". It is designed to do exactly what the supporters of this proposal state are against their principles.

If you are going to run as a democratic candidate, you have to comply with their rules. If you are going to run as a republican, you have to comply with their rules. If you want to run and not have those rules, you can run as an unaffiliated or independent, or run as a 3rd party candidate. This is an attempt to change the party rules by state law, bypassing the party and is even an attempt to change the law bypassing the legislature. That is called being a pirate.

There are 104 members in the Utah State Legislature. It contains both Democratic members and Republican members, liberal, moderate and conservative. It is simply amazing that not one of them were willing to run a bill to do what this group plans to do by a voter initiative. Why? It isn't that all incumbents win under the current system. In fact there were 2 members of the Utah House that lost at convention this last election, a half dozen that lost in a primary election and 2 more than lost in a general election. There were others that decided not to run.

The current system does not protect the incumbent, wealthy or famous. Perhaps that is the problem this group is trying to solve.

The Caucus System in Utah is the best way to make sure grass roots movements can work over large amounts of money. It is the only way someone with $100,000 can go against someone with $2,000,000 in election funds.

There were about 120,000 republicans in Utah that went to the neighborhood caucus elections in 2012 to elect the 4000 State Delegates. Add to those numbers the democrats and the primary elections.  Certainly the municipal elections didn't do any better in voter representation.

Most people who want the caucus system changed, there are exceptions, are frustrated that they don't have as much power as people who show up to the neighborhood election caucus meetings. It doesn't take money; you just have to show up.

Bypassing the Caucus / Convention System will NOT create more participation. Approx. one out of every 4 or 5 republicans attended their neighborhood election caucus meeting this last year. One in every three told a KSL poll they were involved or attending. There are 4000 state delegates that spend countless hours vetting candidates to be on the ballot. They are selected by those that attend the neighborhood election caucus meeting. You just have to attend.

When people realize this will give them less of a chance to participate but give media and power brokers more power, they will not sign any initiative. This is a power grab.

It doesn't mean things can't be better, but this isn't the way to do it.


This proposal isn't "Count my Vote" it is “Buy my Vote”, funded like a hostile corporate takeover by DC lobbyists acting like pirates.  

 Don't let them Buy your Vote, Keep the Caucus System.   

Read the State Democratic response:
http:www.fairelectionsutah.com/NewsletterLetterfromtheChairUtahDemocraticParty.pdf


(Print to .pdf of the letter to replace the one updated on April 12, 2013)