Salt Lake Tribune opinion article

The Salt Lake Tribune has published an op-ed about this issue . 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. W believe the Count My Vote group would ruin that.

Understanding the Caucus Process

Understanding the Caucus Process (2012)

 This great video from the Utah Republican Party explains what the neighborhood meeting is all about:



http://youtu.be/N9lVB21hDrc

Preserve our local neighborhood caucus in Utah

Watch this video from Iron County Republican Party


http://youtu.be/S-WKrrARWcA

The threshold to avoid a primary is a two way sword

The threshold to avoid a primary is a two way sword. An 85/15 would make it easier for a weak challenger to get to a primary, but impossible to eliminate the incumbent without large amounts of money or fame. That was the Count My Vote / Buy My Vote request originally. Added to that the eliminating of any kind of multiple round and you could have 6 candidates in the primary, one of which would always be the incumbent.

They couldn't get 85/15, so they next tried 75/25. Almost impossible for an incumbent not to get 25% and make it to a primary. Yes, the incumbent is going to have a harder time getting 75%, but if the goal is more primaries that cost more money, it is one step closer to Buy My Vote or Buy My Ads. Add the elimination of the multiple round and you could get 3 or 4 candidates going to the primary. 70/30 allows up to 3 and again makes it harder to eliminate an incumbent.

Yes, the goal of 60/40 may have been to help the incumbents, but after Jason Chaffetz almost won in convention and Bennett and Gov. Walker lost, those that wanted to protect the incumbents realized they made a mistake with the 60/40 and many for years have wanted to switch it back. Two legislators were eliminated at convention this year. And yes, we still have some primaries, but not as many as we get with 2/3 or 70%.

In 2012 Utah, we have primaries: Hatch/Liljenquist, Dougall/Johnson, Swallow/Reyes, McCartney/Valdez, Okerlund/Painter, Vickers/Anderson, Perry/Galvez, Redd/Butterfield, Anderegg/Moore, Handy/Crowder, Macdonald/Bagley, Sagers/McCoy, Kennedy/Nitta, Muniz/Hendrickson, Stratton/Murray, Christofferson/Kane, Greene/Stevens, Layton/Daw, Nelson/Wright, Westwood/Carling, and Crockett/Winder, to name a few. Not every race had a primary nor should it. Most of those were GOP primaries.

Since 2000, 1/2 of all state wide and congressional contested GOP races  have gone to primary. 44 races, 30 were contested and 15 went to primary.

Yes a 2/3 threshold would have made a few more primaries, but the risk of an incumbent losing, or someone rich or famous losing would also go down.

Some that spoke for the 2/3 or 70% may believe what they have said, but I totally disagree and many in the SCC and also many of the delegates disagree as well. 

I have always said, The 60% threshold to avoid a primary works, allowing a shot of a challenger to eliminate an incumbent and yet requires a challenger to be a strong candidate. 

The current system does not protect the incumbent, wealthy or famous. I think that is a good thing.   Finely tuned balance. It won today.

(originally posted 18 May 2013)

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. Dropping off our votes but not discussing. 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 65% 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. I think that is a good thing.

 Keep Fair Elections in Utah.  

(originally posted on May 18, 2013 

Fair Elections in Utah Salt Lake Tribune

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.