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. 

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

Democratic Leaders to blame for Shutdown

So when the US House recently passed a compromise, backed also by Rep. Matheson as well as Sen. Lee, that wouldn’t have defunded ObamaCare, but delayed implementing part of it, and Sen. Harry Reid refused to even let it be heard, that was the GOP’s fault?

When the House passed a bill to keep the parks open, and Sen. Reid wouldn’t let it be heard, that was the Republican’s fault?

When, instead of calling a meeting with the House and Senate leaders of both parties to solve the impasse, the President scheduled the meeting to see how to get a “clean CR” without dealing with any of the problems of implementing ObamaCare, which even Rep. Matheson’s office said was would not get anywhere as soon as the meeting notice arrived, that was the Republican’s fault?

Who hasn’t had even one budget passed during his entire time as US President, when even his own party wouldn’t buy in to his proposed budgets?

OK, there are people on both sides that aren’t being smart, but the majority of the problem has been with the US Senate Democratic Majority Leader and our current US President.

Our US President isn't implementing all of ObamaCare. He thinks not enforcing the law because it or the Country isn't ready for it is fine, but if Congress delays implementing part of it because we don't have the money, that is not OK?

So when the US House recently passed a compromise, backed also by Rep. Matheson as well as Sen. Lee, that wouldn’t have defunded ObamaCare, but delayed implementing part of it, and Sen. Harry Reid refused to even let it be heard, that was the GOP’s fault?
When the House passed a bill to keep the parks open, and Sen. Reid wouldn’t let it be heard, that was the Republican’s fault?
When, instead of calling a meeting with the House and Senate leaders of both parties to solve the impasse, the President scheduled the meeting to see how to get a “clean CR” without dealing with any of the problems of implementing ObamaCare, which even Rep. Matheson’s office said was would not get anywhere as soon as the meeting notice arrived, that was the Republican’s fault?
Who hasn’t had even one budget passed during his entire time as US President, when even his own party wouldn’t buy in to his proposed budgets?
OK, there are people on both sides that aren’t being smart, but the majority of the problem has been with the US Senate Democratic Majority Leader and our current US President .
- See more at: http://utahdatapoints.com/2013/10/senator-lee-and-the-shutdown/#sthash.kJJAzETy.dpuf