We
never needed the Buy My Ballot Spot (2014 SB 54) for someone to get on
the ballot if they didn't want to go though the parties. Just get 300
signatures from their friends or 1000 signatures for a state wide race
and go directly to the General Election as an Unaffiliated Candidate.
The Buy My Ballot Spot with paid signature gatherers favors the rich and famous. Why do they need State Mandated help?
My
Poll Results from respondents. Survey was sent to all active voters in House
District 30 in West Valley City in January 2016 (not just one party)
A
federal judge has ruled that a portion of the law that passed in 2014,
SB 54 Elections Amendments, is not constitutional for two political
parties, the Utah Republican and the Utah Constitution parties. This
part of the law requires the political parties allow voters who were not
members of their party to select their party’s nominee. Because of that
ruling, candidates of the Utah Constitution Party cannot use the
optional signature route to get on the party primary ballot. (They don’t
have enough members). They are OK with the ruling because they didn’t
want the State telling their Party how to select its nominees.
Voters
can only sign one candidate petition per race but might be able to sign
a form to remove their signature, if they act fast enough, and sign
someone else’s petition.
In some areas of the State, there are
not enough registered Republican Party voters to make the signature
party nominee route fair. Candidates using the signature route likely
will have to register to do so prior to the legislative session and then
all candidates will register after the legislative session. If someone
decides to run for Party Nominee after the legislative session, there is
almost no time to gather signatures.
The
Utah Republican Party, who wasn’t part of the “compromise” is still
contesting the law in court. A special legislative session to fix the
law based on the court ruling was not called by the Governor.
30% The legislature should provide minor fixes of the current election law and see what happens in 2016.
53% The
legislature should repeal this petition law because the court’s ruling
has caused the law to become unfair to some candidates in some political
parties.
17% It is too late for the legislature to do
anything this election year, but I will not be signing any signature
party nominee petitions this year.
(Disclaimer,
I have personally fought the signature party nominee route because I
believe it favors the incumbents, the rich and the famous. While I [was]
an incumbent and plan on running for [election] after the legislative
session though the neighborhood caucus and convention system, I am NOT
also using the signature route because I do not believe that route is
fair).
Showing posts with label Fair Elections Utah. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fair Elections Utah. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 6, 2017
Saturday, April 23, 2016
Governor Gary Herbert nice guy that has been in office too long
I had promised both campaigns that I wouldn't endorse either Gary Herbert or Jonathan Johnson before the convention. The County Convention was last week... :)
I had someone I respect today question why the delegates would possibly not vote for our current Governor Gary Herbert.
I will give you more than one reason. But #1: He has been in office too long. Perhaps not in years, but too long. (If he doesn't win another term he will be over 7 years as Governor, and almost 5 years as Lt. Gov).
Some will say that they will not pay attention to some State House Rep. that missed getting out of convention by 2 votes last week. I say, don't shoot the messenger.
Let me go back to 2009. I got my photo taken with then Sen. Hatch. I had decided that Sen. Bennett had been in DC too long, but in 2009, I was just fine with Sen. Hatch. By 2012, I had changed my mind. We had 2 candidates that year (we had lots more running) that I felt could do the job. One, I thought could do the job better, and I wrote this:
http://fredcox4utah.blogspot.com/2012/06/dan-liljenquist-or-senator-orrin-hatch.html
(OK, Dan has made some decisions since 2012 that I question, so no guarantees for 2018, other than Sen. Hatch has been in DC now very much too long. We will see who comes along).
I do believe the Governor is starting to do some amazingly dumb things to make himself look good. That is never a good sign.
First, lets start with this:
This group seemed to do a great job of getting both of our previous State AG's into trouble. Lets hire them to help my campaign? NOT!!!
http://www.sltrib.com/news/3246126-155/rolly-hes-baaaack-swallow-operative
OK, not as dumb as it could be, but I am just getting started.
Why would Gary Herbert and Spencer Cox "miss" marking their 2016 candidate forms correctly and then going back the next week and changing them, when they had signed and specifically initialed on March 15 that they knew they could not change the form after March 17.
The election law broken: 20A-9-201(8)
http://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title20A/Chapter9/20A-9-S201.html?v=C20A-9-S201_2014040320150101
The typical Penalty: 20A-1-609
"Except as provided ... a person convicted of any offense under this title may not:
(a) file a declaration of candidacy for any office or appear on the ballot as a candidate for any office during the election cycle in which the violation occurred;
(b) take or hold the office to which he was elected; and
(c) receive the emoluments of the office to which he was elected."
http://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title20A/Chapter1/20A-1-S609.html?v=C20A-1-S609_1800010118000101
The way out: 20A-9-202 (5) find someone to complain about the form within 5 days of March 17th
http://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title20A/Chapter9/20A-9-S202.html
They both made the same "mistake" at the same time.
Yes, a few others did as well, but very few overall and this was a very public item on the form
https://elections.utah.gov/Media/Default/2016%20Declarations%20of%20Candidacy/Governor/Governor%20Herbert%20and%20Lt.%20Governor%20Cox%20Declaration%202.pdf
Notice that they added a check box saying which method of nomination they were seeking on 3/21/16. Notice on the 2nd page they initial that they knew they couldn't change the form after March 17th at 5pm.
It isn't too bad, as they found an exception, a way to legally fix the forms without getting charged with the Class B Misdemeanor, and being banned from taking office as Governor and Lt. Governor, which is the normal default for violating the election law in this area of the law.
More recently:
Why would Governor Herbert even risk violating the State Constitution and negotiate a deal for a special session vs a veto override session to save face during an election year?
http://www.utah.gov/governor/news_media/article.html?article=20160419-1
Compare this to Utah Constitution, Art. VII, Sec. 8, (4)
http://le.utah.gov/xcode/ArticleVII/Article_VII,_Section_8.html
Notice the words: Shall, and also 60 days.There is no provision in the State Constitution for the Governor to have the legislature delay polling their body to create this deal, a Special Session.
And finally:
Today at the State GOP Convention, the Governor had his very expensive convention booth with signs that it is being sponsored by Coal and at least one other industry. He had sponsored very expensive events for delegates at both the professional basketball arena and the pro soccer stadium.
And today he complained about attacks when the delegates just got in the mail in the last few days several letters from the Governor supporters trashing Jonathan Johnson. This included lobbyist, state school board member, and ballot nomination signature businessman Spencer Stokes. You can't write the stupidity.
One attack was my good friend Lt. Gov. Cox hitting Jonathan about 2 adult magazines Overstock was carrying (they announced today that that is ending) when Jonathan was complimenting the state legislature for passing a resolution condemning Porn.
http://www.ksl.com/?sid=39432748&nid=757&title=lt-gov-spencer-cox-calls-gop-opponent-hypocritical-in-porn-twitter-exchange
Governor Herbert has been in office long enough. Some think I have been too. I am saving my yard signs. Will the Governor?
More Recent updates:
Speed dating fundraising:
http://www.sltrib.com/news/3833261-155/donor-speed-dating-with-guv-doesnt-sit?fullpage=1
Audio:
http://www.sltrib.com/news/3890228-155/in-audio-utah-guv-says-hes
Fundraiser with ties to even with taxpayer money:
http://www.sltrib.com/news/3850380-155/herbert-campaign-piggybacks-fundraiser-on-governors
Adding items to the special session call:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865653961/Utah-House-speaker-says-Herberts-Common-Core-efforts-are-political.html?nm=1
The corporation (working hand in hand with the Governor's department) credited with getting all the jobs the Governor has been taking credit for, no filing taxes for 5 years:
http://www.sltrib.com/news/3887372-155/states-economic-development-partner-failed-to
It is one thing to hire the same political group that got our past 2 Attorney Generals in trouble, to appear to intentionally violate election laws on their candidate forms, to skirt the state constitution to save face, and then to toss out everything the attorneys are telling elected officials recently based on current federal election laws and how they are being enforced and make proposals that had lobbyists uncomfortable?
I have seen the Governor for almost 12 years, more times than I can count. He started out as the person that would go anywhere to represent the then Governor. The recent actions show he is willing to do anything to stay in office. Even skirt the State Constitution? The recent comment from the Speaker "The legislative branch has not been grafted into the governor's re-election campaign" is what I am feeling.
Friday, February 7, 2014
2014 SB 54 Elections Amendments
2014
SB 54 Elections Amendments, A proposal for the Utah Legislature to
adopt Count My Vote, prior to knowing if they get enough signatures, and
prior to a vote in November if they do. It provides exceptions, one of
which would ruin the Same Day Ballot that the GOP is adding to increase
participation for Neighborhood Caucus Election night.
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. SB 54, lines 796 to 800 ruins that and should be amended.
Again, we need to amend it to allow greater participation by those that are new to the process. Delete lines 796 to 800. This will allow someone new to run the night of the meeting. We have and should have incentives to file and run for delegate or precinct chair prior to the meeting, but as drafted, the bill reduces participation.
My letter to the Utah Republican State Central Committee:
Dear SCC members,
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. SB 54, lines 796 to 800 ruins that and should be amended.
Again, we need to amend it to allow greater participation by those that are new to the process. Delete lines 796 to 800. This will allow someone new to run the night of the meeting. We have and should have incentives to file and run for delegate or precinct chair prior to the meeting, but as drafted, the bill reduces participation.
My letter to the Utah Republican State Central Committee:
Dear SCC members,
It is my opinion that if the proposed bill should be amended, particularly lines 796 to 800.
If not, the bill should not pass.
794 (b) permits members of the registered political party to vote for neighborhood
795 delegates remotely or by absentee ballot;
796 (c) accepts a vote cast remotely or by absentee ballot, under Subsection (12)(b), for a
797 period of not less than two days after the day on which:
798 (i) all delegate nominees of the registered political party have been identified; and
799 (ii) the name of each delegate nominee described in Subsection (12)(c)(i) is made
800 available to members of the registered political party;
The 2 day system in the bill for the caucus will ruin it.
You either can't find out that night who won any race, or
you have to file before you know who won.
Someone running for State Delete that night and losing and running for Prec. Chair or County Delegate if they lose goes away.
I have talked to Sen. Bramble last night [Tues. Feb. 4] about these concerns to no avail.
We, the SCC, have spent months coming up with a Same Day Ballot to solve the concerns and not ruin the meeting.
If not amended or deleted, lines 796 to 800 ruins the meeting.
See:
as well as:
We have made huge improvements for the 2014 Neighborhood Elections.
For some of these, see:
For
purposed of reviewing Sen. Brambles 2014 SB 54 bill, and to allow the
Count My Vote language to be put directly in statute with an exception
to parties that qualify for the 4 items covered in the bill, I am
willing to temporarily look past many of the flaws from the initiative,
since they may not apply. See:
http://www.neighborhoodelection.org/flaws_in_count_my_vote_proposed_legislation
I
am opposed to changing the system we have to allow unaffiliated voters
to affiliate the day of election. It has proven to decrease cross voting
during a primary and still allow individuals to vote. I believe that
requirement, "allow unaffiliated voters to affiliate the day of
election" could be part of SB 54 on lines 792 to 793.
As you know, I am not in favor of changing the threshold percentage to avoid a primary.
See:
I have no problem with electing alternate delegates, and we currently allow counties to do so.
If Lines 796 to 800, were modified to allow our Same Day Ballot to meet the requirements of lines 794 and 795,
we might have a bill to work with.
To replace the the threshold percentage item, the following items could be discussed:
legal notice requirements for caucus and convention and
require election day affiliation for UAF so that law Isn't removed later.
We could add voter info protection and
remove straight party voting in the general.
We could also fix the check a buck program so it comes out of the taxes of the person that checked the box instead of everyone else.
require election day affiliation for UAF so that law Isn't removed later.
We could add voter info protection and
remove straight party voting in the general.
We could also fix the check a buck program so it comes out of the taxes of the person that checked the box instead of everyone else.
The final point is the bills timing. It is a big risk. See the critical dates from March 1st to May 15th.
Notice the bill would have to pass the legislature, both houses by March 13.
The Governor has until April 2 to sign or veto it.
The legislature has until May 12, to override a veto.
Count My Vote has until April 15 to get the signatures they need.
The
county clerks have until May 1st to the 15th to verify the signatures
and turn them in to the Lt. Gov. those that have requested to be
removed.
The Lt. Gov. has until June 1st to decide if the number of signatures meets the law.
We
do not know if between March 13th and April 15th if the number of
signatures coming in will increase or decrease if the bill passes. It
could either add fire to their initiative or crush it. It is a risky
move.
In
a nutshell, 2014 SB 54 lines 796 to 800 must be amended or deleted
before we even have something to discuss. (The 2 day requirement) it
isn't the 48 hours it is the other requirements.
Fred C. Cox
Salt Lake County representative to the State Central Committee
Thursday, November 21, 2013
5 reasons not to sign their petition
1. The "bill" Count My Vote, or proposed law is flawed, terribly so. Even some of
the strongest supporters admit the legislature will have to fix it if
this mess passes.
We tell public officials to kill these kind of errors in committee, not skip the public hearing, not read the bill and vote to send it to the floor of the legislature to decide if it should pass or not.
That is exactly what Count My Vote is telling people to do. Sign it, unread, and hope everyone realizes next fall it doesn't deliver. They could have amended it but chose not to and by law, can no longer amend the "bill".
2. This proposed law will cost taxpayers millions, $1 Million the first year and almost that every 2 years, with about 1/2 of the unfunded mandate being picked up by the less populous counties, the ones that the same proposed law will cause to be flyover places where the candidates and elected officials won't come anymore.
3. When Utah tried a direct primary in 1937 to 1947, it came with a run off primary, so the majority would elect the nominee. When the voting turn out and the cost drove the public and the media to reject that system - a compromise, caucus/convention and run off primary was created. We have that today. Count My Vote not only removes the nominating for general elections using delegates, it removes the run off primary system we have and nominees will no longer be selected out of a 2 person race.
4. The political royalty sponsors of Count My Vote loved the current system when the turnout to the neighborhood caucus elections meetings (GOP) was about 25,000, but when it exceeded 50,000 and 100,000, they no longer want that system because they no longer have the power. They don't tell you that the same delegates, proposed to be elected by closer to 10,000 attendees will still pick nominees such as the replacement for Spencer Cox.
5. They claim more people will be able to vote. A large percentage of voters will not affiliate to vote in the GOP primary election and those same people will not be able to vote in a "GOP" direct primary under Count My Vote. They will get to pay more as Count My Vote makes sure the parties will not be picking up the tab they currently do, it will be the taxpayers, unaffiliated or not.
Don't sign, just to vote on it later. Do read it. Do find out more. I trust if you actually understand what you will get, you will not sign the Count My Vote / Buy My vote initiative.
We tell public officials to kill these kind of errors in committee, not skip the public hearing, not read the bill and vote to send it to the floor of the legislature to decide if it should pass or not.
That is exactly what Count My Vote is telling people to do. Sign it, unread, and hope everyone realizes next fall it doesn't deliver. They could have amended it but chose not to and by law, can no longer amend the "bill".
2. This proposed law will cost taxpayers millions, $1 Million the first year and almost that every 2 years, with about 1/2 of the unfunded mandate being picked up by the less populous counties, the ones that the same proposed law will cause to be flyover places where the candidates and elected officials won't come anymore.
3. When Utah tried a direct primary in 1937 to 1947, it came with a run off primary, so the majority would elect the nominee. When the voting turn out and the cost drove the public and the media to reject that system - a compromise, caucus/convention and run off primary was created. We have that today. Count My Vote not only removes the nominating for general elections using delegates, it removes the run off primary system we have and nominees will no longer be selected out of a 2 person race.
4. The political royalty sponsors of Count My Vote loved the current system when the turnout to the neighborhood caucus elections meetings (GOP) was about 25,000, but when it exceeded 50,000 and 100,000, they no longer want that system because they no longer have the power. They don't tell you that the same delegates, proposed to be elected by closer to 10,000 attendees will still pick nominees such as the replacement for Spencer Cox.
5. They claim more people will be able to vote. A large percentage of voters will not affiliate to vote in the GOP primary election and those same people will not be able to vote in a "GOP" direct primary under Count My Vote. They will get to pay more as Count My Vote makes sure the parties will not be picking up the tab they currently do, it will be the taxpayers, unaffiliated or not.
Don't sign, just to vote on it later. Do read it. Do find out more. I trust if you actually understand what you will get, you will not sign the Count My Vote / Buy My vote initiative.
Thursday, October 24, 2013
Why the Sudden Urgency to improve Neighborhood Elections
Why the urgency?
Count My Vote makes mistake after mistake. If they think we are voting on the changes to save their behind, they are wrong.
Since the beginning of the year members of the republican state central committee have been working on trying to tweak the neighborhood caucus election system. A system that has worked well for years where 25,000 came, but the last two meetings it has doubled and then doubled again.
Count My Vote demanded changing the balance and getting rid of multiple round ballots, or changing the balance and taking the meeting out of the meeting. Creating a system that would favor the wealthy, the famous, incumbents and encourage people to stay home and watch Dancing with the Stars.
Of Course the demands were rejected. They still are. That doesn't mean reasonable changes can't be made and will.
The last central committee only one proposal was put on the agenda, one that didn't have a prayer to pass which was known in advance by most of the committee. The other consensus items were not even allowed on the agenda.
The reason for the "emergency" meeting is that those same people that have fought the Count My Vote people since they met in the Alta Club in May of 2010, that have wanted improvements to the system, have demanded the meeting, so we make the changes. If Count My Vote gets some of the issues solved at the same time, fine.
As you know from 2008 to 2010 neighborhood election meeting attendance doubled. From 2010 to 2012, meeting attendance doubled again. There is hope that in 2014, it will double again and 250,000 will attend. I know that The State GOP has a committee that is working to make sure we don't have the same growth problems for 2014 and that the system can handle the volume of those interested and still allow time to meet candidates and ask questions.
New proposals for 2014 include a better system for check in, including optional preregistration. The ability to optionally pre-file to run to represent your neighbors as well. The meeting will be designed to last for 2 hrs. or less, from 7pm to 9pm. There will be a pre-meeting from 6pm to 7pm to allow you to personally meet candidates to represent your neighborhood that have decided to run and for you to ask one on one questions. Even with large groups, changes to make sure members can agree on questions to ask neighborhood representative candidates with more time to hear from them.
I hope you will come again in 2014 and make the meeting better.
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? in 1946, after almost 10 years of a direct primary with run off, the media and public demanded the return of the Caucus and Convention System to replace the need for a run off election.
Even the Deseret News in 1946 was specific that they didn't want to just eliminate the run off, as that would turn the power over to money. They wanted that every day people would vote at local meetings. That is what we have.
I am not afraid of Count My Vote.
They have made mistake after mistake. Ignoring those prior to the announcement, of their initiative, where they had 25 people stand behind a podium at the capitol and they couldn't figure out for an hour how to attach their sign.
They said they needed $1.5 Million. Then had to loan themselves $50,000 just to hit 1/3 of that. They filed an initiative, that even some of their strongest backers find poorly drafted, with rookie wording mistakes. I have read through over 1000 bills and voted on them. This isn't ready to become law, even if you agreed with it.
They schedule public meetings at noon during a special session of the legislature? In Provo and other locations they used slides that incorrectly calculated less than 60 delegates from all parties control the will of 3 Million.
There were over 110,000 caucus attendees in just the republican meetings alone in 2012 and there were tens of thousands of delegates elected. Yes the slides have now been updated to be more correct, sorta like closing the barn door after the horse has bolted. Both sets of slides are online. Look at the ones at the CMV website and the ones shown in Provo on the Lt. Gov. Website. The attendees at the meetings were given worse than spin. If you are going to try to sell your product, at least be honest.
It is going to cost taxpayers about $1,000,000 initially and $900,000 dollars every two years to replace what we have with the Count My Vote / Buy My Vote initiative. We get no run off Election. There is no limit to the number of candidates that could be on the ballot.
Count My Vote even missed their last filing deadline with the Lt. Governor as required by 20A-11-802 (1) (v)
I am just getting started in the mistakes Count My Vote has made. To be continued.
Monday, October 14, 2013
Count My Vote vs Flyover Counties and Towns
Utah's Neighborhood Elections force candidates to pay attention to rural areas
of Utah. Direct primaries encourage candidates to ignore rural areas and
communicate only by paid advertising. A direct primary would create
fly-over areas of Utah that will rarely get to meet their candidates
face to face.
Utah's Neighborhood Elections work to create a balance between population and Counties, similar to what the US Presidential Electoral System is designed to do.
See also:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865588184/My-View-No-caucus-means-fly-over-counties.html
Why keep the US Presidential Electoral System:
The US Constitution provided for a balance between small population states and large ones. This is one of the reasons for the Senate having 2 per state and the House being divided based on population.
The current US Presidential Electoral System keeps part of that concept so that voters in California, New York, and a few others do not decide who is elected, ignoring the rest of the country.
The original system was designed so that the electors nominated two candidates, one not from their state, and unless there was a candidate nominated by the majority of electors, the voting for president out of the top 5 nominees was done by the US House of Representatives, one vote per state. If two candidates received a majority of electors, the House would decide between just the two. Basically, the loser of the top two became the Vice President, who would take over if something happened to the President. The elector college system protected every state from being ignored.
By 1796 and 1800, partly due to political party influence, and because the public didn't want the US House to decide the election a movement to change happened and under the 12th amendment this was changed. One reason was to make sure the President and the Vice President could run together. The change made it so the electors would almost always reach a majority and therefore cast the final vote, and because of that, most states have now required that the elector vote based on which party they represent. Utah requires that an elector be replaced if they do not vote per party. See http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE20A/htm/20A13_030400.htm
Under the current system, Utah having 6 votes instead of 4 gives us a slight edge over population. Utah has decided to have a winner take all system. If Utah were to split our vote, it would carry less weight in the national election, but it would put Utah more in play.
While the current system doesn't work as originally intended, there is still some balance favoring smaller states, just barely enough to encourage candidates to campaign throughout most of the country. Without the US Presidential Electoral System , I believe that would be eliminated and I also believe the cities with the most population would be the locations where campaigning would occur, making the situation of ignoring parts of the country even worse.
Some information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelfth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Utah's Neighborhood Elections work to create a balance between population and Counties, similar to what the US Presidential Electoral System is designed to do.
See also:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865588184/My-View-No-caucus-means-fly-over-counties.html
Why keep the US Presidential Electoral System:
The US Constitution provided for a balance between small population states and large ones. This is one of the reasons for the Senate having 2 per state and the House being divided based on population.
The current US Presidential Electoral System keeps part of that concept so that voters in California, New York, and a few others do not decide who is elected, ignoring the rest of the country.
The original system was designed so that the electors nominated two candidates, one not from their state, and unless there was a candidate nominated by the majority of electors, the voting for president out of the top 5 nominees was done by the US House of Representatives, one vote per state. If two candidates received a majority of electors, the House would decide between just the two. Basically, the loser of the top two became the Vice President, who would take over if something happened to the President. The elector college system protected every state from being ignored.
By 1796 and 1800, partly due to political party influence, and because the public didn't want the US House to decide the election a movement to change happened and under the 12th amendment this was changed. One reason was to make sure the President and the Vice President could run together. The change made it so the electors would almost always reach a majority and therefore cast the final vote, and because of that, most states have now required that the elector vote based on which party they represent. Utah requires that an elector be replaced if they do not vote per party. See http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE20A/htm/20A13_030400.htm
Under the current system, Utah having 6 votes instead of 4 gives us a slight edge over population. Utah has decided to have a winner take all system. If Utah were to split our vote, it would carry less weight in the national election, but it would put Utah more in play.
While the current system doesn't work as originally intended, there is still some balance favoring smaller states, just barely enough to encourage candidates to campaign throughout most of the country. Without the US Presidential Electoral System , I believe that would be eliminated and I also believe the cities with the most population would be the locations where campaigning would occur, making the situation of ignoring parts of the country even worse.
Some information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelfth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Thursday, September 26, 2013
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
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.
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.
Thursday, August 29, 2013
Count My Vote vs Fair Elections in Utah who is funding the Buy My Vote group
Major Count My Vote funding so far released.
Alliance for Good Government
http://disclosures.utah.gov/Search/PublicSearch/FolderDetails/1411317
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.
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.
If you change the way our Utah primary's work, you could have two republicans in the general election ballot (or two democrats).
We have a system that that does NOT favor the incumbent, wealthy or famous. This is a good thing. Keep Fair Elections in Utah. Keep the neighborhood caucus election system.
Update:
I am glad Gail Miller is keeping involved. Helping children with reading.
It is sad she bought into the Count My Vote / Buy My Vote arguments however. Didn't Chris Cannon have endorsements from Pres. Bush, Mitt Romney and both of the then current US Senators at the time? Jason Chaffetz still won.
re: Sen. Bennett in 2010. He was not in the top 2 coming out of convention. In fact the more moderate Tim Bridgewater was selected by 57% of the delegates in the last round. Mike Lee managed to get 43% and make it to a primary. Sen. Bennett endorsed Tim Bridgewater during the primary, but with voters ticked at TARP and ObamaCare, they went with Mike Lee.
You like or don't like Sen. Mike Lee? Well 57% of the delegates didn't pick him to be the nominee. It was during the primary he was selected to be the GOP nominee.
Limiting? There were over 120,000 voters that participated in the 2012 Neighborhood Caucus election and meeting. The democratic caucus also had record turnout. People want a say on who shows up on the ballot.
The open primary is working so well in 2013 where 15% was considered good? You can't blame that on the caucus system. The one time Utah got rid of the caucus system our turnout went to 10% for a primary that included the US Senate. It was even that low in Salt Lake County. See August of 1946.
For more information see:
http://fairelectionsutah.com/
Alliance for Good Government
http://disclosures.utah.gov/Search/PublicSearch/FolderDetails/1411317
8/20/2013
Gail Miller $100,000.00
12/17/2013
James Swartz $25,000.00
12/6/2013
Leslie and Alan Layton $25,000.00
11/22/2013
Ian M. Cumming $25,000.00
11/4/2013
Thomas and Kristin Stockham $25,000.00
10/18/2013
Prime Holdings Insurance Services, Inc. $25,000.00
9/3/2013
Mike Leavitt $25,000.00
9/3/2013
Rich McKeown $25,000.00
8/26/2013
Garff Enterprises, Inc. $25,000.00
8/26/2013
H. Roger Boyer $25,000.00
8/26/2013
Maccall Management, LLC $25,000.00
8/26/2013
Merit Medical $25,000.00
8/23/2013
Dell Loy Hansen $25,000.00
8/23/2013
Donald and Susan P. Lewon $25,000.00
8/23/2013
John Price $25,000.00
8/22/2013
Kem C. and Carolyn Barnes Gardner $25,000.00
8/20/2013
H. Brent Beesley $25,000.00
8/7/2013
Mark Miller $25,000.00
7/18/2013
Dinesh Patel $25,000.00
7/18/2013
Gary Crocker $25,000.00
9/13/2013
Sandy Chamber of Commerce $24,000.00
12/28/2013
L E Simmons $20,000.00
10/9/2013
Khosrow B. Semnani $15,000.00
8/13/2013
Burton L. and Elaine L. Gordon $12,500.00
12/31/2013
John Miller $10,000.00
12/30/2013
David E. Simmons $10,000.00
12/26/2013
Dan England $10,000.00
12/11/2013
Anne Osborn $10,000.00
8/27/2013
JLS Holdings, LLC $10,000.00
8/12/2013
ThomasArts Holding, Inc. $10,000.00
7/11/2013
Bruce Bastian $10,000.00
7/10/2013
Omar Kader $10,000.00
5/7/2012
Khosrow B. Semnani $10,000.00
4/24/2012
William Nelson Shiebler $10,000.00
4/20/2012
Dell Loy Hansen $10,000.00
4/16/2012
Lunt Capital Management, Inc. $10,000.00
12/13/2013
Gail Miller $9,000.00
11/13/2013
Gail Miller $9,000.00
12/31/2013
Scott Keller $5,000.00
12/20/2013
R. Anthony Sweet $5,000.00
12/4/2013
Thomas Guinney $5,000.00
11/22/2013
Kristen M Fletcher $5,000.00
11/6/2013
Victor and Linda Lund $5,000.00
11/4/2013
E R Dumke, Jr. $5,000.00
10/16/2013
Ezekiel Dumke $5,000.00
9/30/2013
Edward McCartney $5,000.00
11/4/2013
Lonnie M. Bullard $3,000.00
12/31/2013
Clark and Jennifer Whitworth $2,500.00
12/31/2013
Don Stirling $2,500.00
12/30/2013
James Olson $2,500.00
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.
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.
If you change the way our Utah primary's work, you could have two republicans in the general election ballot (or two democrats).
We have a system that that does NOT favor the incumbent, wealthy or famous. This is a good thing. Keep Fair Elections in Utah. Keep the neighborhood caucus election system.
Update:
I am glad Gail Miller is keeping involved. Helping children with reading.
It is sad she bought into the Count My Vote / Buy My Vote arguments however. Didn't Chris Cannon have endorsements from Pres. Bush, Mitt Romney and both of the then current US Senators at the time? Jason Chaffetz still won.
re: Sen. Bennett in 2010. He was not in the top 2 coming out of convention. In fact the more moderate Tim Bridgewater was selected by 57% of the delegates in the last round. Mike Lee managed to get 43% and make it to a primary. Sen. Bennett endorsed Tim Bridgewater during the primary, but with voters ticked at TARP and ObamaCare, they went with Mike Lee.
You like or don't like Sen. Mike Lee? Well 57% of the delegates didn't pick him to be the nominee. It was during the primary he was selected to be the GOP nominee.
Limiting? There were over 120,000 voters that participated in the 2012 Neighborhood Caucus election and meeting. The democratic caucus also had record turnout. People want a say on who shows up on the ballot.
The open primary is working so well in 2013 where 15% was considered good? You can't blame that on the caucus system. The one time Utah got rid of the caucus system our turnout went to 10% for a primary that included the US Senate. It was even that low in Salt Lake County. See August of 1946.
For more information see:
http://fairelectionsutah.com/
Monday, July 29, 2013
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/
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/
Saturday, June 22, 2013
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:
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:
and
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.
Keep fair elections in Utah.
Thursday, June 6, 2013
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.
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.
Wednesday, June 5, 2013
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.
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.
Friday, May 24, 2013
Utah Caucus and Convention System History
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
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
Thursday, May 16, 2013
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.
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.
Saturday, May 11, 2013
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)