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).
Fair Elections Utah Working to improve, but not gut, our neighborhood election caucus 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 had a system that did NOT favor the incumbent, wealthy or famous. This was a good thing. SB 54 made things bad. The New Count My Vote is worse.
Showing posts with label Fair Elections Utah. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fair Elections Utah. Show all posts
Friday, May 26, 2017
Thursday, February 20, 2014
2014 SB 54 Elections Amendments
2014 SB 54 Elections Amendments
[update this is for Sub. 1 SB 54. Sub 2 has different requirements]
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
Saturday, January 18, 2014
What is the Truth About Neighborhood Caucus Elections in Utah
All Utahns
deserve the opportunity to understand the drastic changes that are being
proposed to our election system and how these changes will impact YOU.
Count My Vote (CMV) is an initiative to change from our current
Neighborhood Caucus Election system to a Direct Primary. One consequence
of this would be to give big money and lobbyists a much more dominant
role in Utah’s elections.
A diverse group of concerned
volunteers from throughout the state has produced a presentation about
the proposed changes. Please take a minute to view the presentation to better inform yourself about this issue and the consequences of enacting the proposed legislation.
Please
share this information with those you know. It is critical that people
understand the ramifications of signing the Count My Vote petition, and
that they know how to remove their signature if they have already signed it.
Count My Vote and the Emperor's New Clothes
We have all heard the story of " The Emperor's New Clothes"
I have not spoken to anyone that has experience reading bills that have read the proposed "Count My Vote" law that doesn't agree that the Legislature would have to fix it. They even admitted that.
It contradicts itself. I would have thought since they are spending over $3/4 Million on this they would have got a real "bill".
http://fairelectionsutah.blogspot.com/2013/11/below-is-my-non-legal-analysis-of.html
The bunch of people that they had say the "bill" was constitutional, only said that based on one primary argument: Could the state force the parties to change their system based on the proposed "bill"?
They (Count My Vote) don't seem to want people to read it. Just sign it and vote on it later. The purpose of getting that many people to sign it is to make sure, since they are bypassing the legislature, that the "bill" gets vetted. We get ticked at congress if they don't read what they are voting on.
CMV intentionally made it hard for anyone to come to the public hearings, and almost no one would have come if we didn't invite them. They then had a chance to amend their proposed law and they didn't.
Now they hope some legislator can bail them out and change the law, but they can't back off because, I believe, they have told the education community that if CMV passes, they will use it to change the legislature so taxes are raised and education gets more money.
They have told others, I have heard, that CMV will allow certain candidates that "can't" win under the current system, to win, and those are helping to pull in the big bucks for them so their candidates get elected in 2016.
98% of all the money raised, $851,201.50 this year and before comes in contributions of $2,500 or more, much of it $25,000. 92% of all money raised came from 34 donors. 7 of 8 corporations donating to Count My Vote's PIC have not filed with the state as required by state law.
And Count My Vote is worried about 20,000 state and county delegates from the different parties that are elected by 150,000 voters? Perhaps we should worry about the 34 that are doing most of the funding of Count My Vote?
I have not spoken to anyone that has experience reading bills that have read the proposed "Count My Vote" law that doesn't agree that the Legislature would have to fix it. They even admitted that.
It contradicts itself. I would have thought since they are spending over $3/4 Million on this they would have got a real "bill".
http://fairelectionsutah.blogspot.com/2013/11/below-is-my-non-legal-analysis-of.html
The bunch of people that they had say the "bill" was constitutional, only said that based on one primary argument: Could the state force the parties to change their system based on the proposed "bill"?
They (Count My Vote) don't seem to want people to read it. Just sign it and vote on it later. The purpose of getting that many people to sign it is to make sure, since they are bypassing the legislature, that the "bill" gets vetted. We get ticked at congress if they don't read what they are voting on.
CMV intentionally made it hard for anyone to come to the public hearings, and almost no one would have come if we didn't invite them. They then had a chance to amend their proposed law and they didn't.
Now they hope some legislator can bail them out and change the law, but they can't back off because, I believe, they have told the education community that if CMV passes, they will use it to change the legislature so taxes are raised and education gets more money.
They have told others, I have heard, that CMV will allow certain candidates that "can't" win under the current system, to win, and those are helping to pull in the big bucks for them so their candidates get elected in 2016.
98% of all the money raised, $851,201.50 this year and before comes in contributions of $2,500 or more, much of it $25,000. 92% of all money raised came from 34 donors. 7 of 8 corporations donating to Count My Vote's PIC have not filed with the state as required by state law.
And Count My Vote is worried about 20,000 state and county delegates from the different parties that are elected by 150,000 voters? Perhaps we should worry about the 34 that are doing most of the funding of Count My Vote?
Tuesday, January 7, 2014
Are you really believing Count My Vote?
A quick look at the Count My Vote website lists the following concerns about our current system: Outdated, Lower participation (voter turnout), Limited access, restrictive, can't come that night, can't vote, delegates are extreme and that is who the candidates and elected officials are held responsible to.
For some quick answers as to why you shouldn't sign their initiative, see:
http://fairelectionsutah.blogspot.com/2013/11/5-reason-not-to-sign-their-petion.html
For some more, lets look at a few of their claims:
Outdated, as in the constitution? The constitution was based on local participation of voters to make sure the government was accountable. Local townships with frequent votes were the norm. The Federal Government is now trying to run our lives and is working to take over what the State was supposed to do. Local Government is being ignored. We need more people involved and not less. CMV reduces local neighborhood involvement, not increases it.
They go back to the 1800's, but they forget that the system we have is a compromise after trying a better than CMV direct primary. 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.
They also ignore that Utah's 10 year trial with a direct primary was to get a Democratic State Senator President elected either to the US Senate or Governor. That worked. Who are we changing the system back to the 1940's for this time?
Voter turnout can be effected by the age of the voters, strength of one party over another, or the percentage of move-ins to the state. CMV and those that they quote, have assumed the lower turnout has been due to the threshold required to avoid a primary, (fewer primaries) but have ignored the other factors listed as even a possibility. Compare Utah to other states with a dominate political party and our voter turnout looks normal. If it was the number of primaries that was the reason, why did we have such a low turnout in 2013 with the City races? That had nothing to do with the caucus/convention system.
Limited access? If a person thinks a party is too much a barrier to get to a ballot, they can run directly in the general election as an unaffiliated with 300, 5% or 1000 signatures, depending on the size of the race. 300 for local or 1000 for states wide is the maximum. CMV sets that at 2% based on the party voters, and depending on the size of the race and the party, it can vary to as large as 13,000 signatures for all state races for the GOP or 1/90th of that for some other parties. It actually creates a larger barrier than we have now.
Can't come that night? CMV has totally ignored and refuses to even admit that the Utah GOP has Same Day Ballots for 2014, which solves the mom with the sick kids or the firefighter that had to work or the military/mission voters.
See: http://fairelectionsutah.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-same-day-ballot-for-neighborhood.html
Extreme? There are differences between polls between delegates and non delegates. Sometimes it is because the delegates have taken the time to meet the official or candidate personally or have asked a typical question. For example according to a Dan Jones Poll leaked this week, current Utah State Delegates have a higher opinion of Gov. Herbert than the average Republican voters. Is that extreme? For 2012 they picked Gov. Herbert over Morgan Philpot, Mia Love over Carl Wimmer and almost picked Orrin Hatch over Dan Liljenquest as the nominee. States with direct primaries actually have had more problems with extreme candidates.
We have a system that that does NOT favor the incumbent, wealthy or famous. This is a good thing.
For some quick answers as to why you shouldn't sign their initiative, see:
http://fairelectionsutah.blogspot.com/2013/11/5-reason-not-to-sign-their-petion.html
For some more, lets look at a few of their claims:
Outdated, as in the constitution? The constitution was based on local participation of voters to make sure the government was accountable. Local townships with frequent votes were the norm. The Federal Government is now trying to run our lives and is working to take over what the State was supposed to do. Local Government is being ignored. We need more people involved and not less. CMV reduces local neighborhood involvement, not increases it.
They go back to the 1800's, but they forget that the system we have is a compromise after trying a better than CMV direct primary. 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.
They also ignore that Utah's 10 year trial with a direct primary was to get a Democratic State Senator President elected either to the US Senate or Governor. That worked. Who are we changing the system back to the 1940's for this time?
Voter turnout can be effected by the age of the voters, strength of one party over another, or the percentage of move-ins to the state. CMV and those that they quote, have assumed the lower turnout has been due to the threshold required to avoid a primary, (fewer primaries) but have ignored the other factors listed as even a possibility. Compare Utah to other states with a dominate political party and our voter turnout looks normal. If it was the number of primaries that was the reason, why did we have such a low turnout in 2013 with the City races? That had nothing to do with the caucus/convention system.
Limited access? If a person thinks a party is too much a barrier to get to a ballot, they can run directly in the general election as an unaffiliated with 300, 5% or 1000 signatures, depending on the size of the race. 300 for local or 1000 for states wide is the maximum. CMV sets that at 2% based on the party voters, and depending on the size of the race and the party, it can vary to as large as 13,000 signatures for all state races for the GOP or 1/90th of that for some other parties. It actually creates a larger barrier than we have now.
Can't come that night? CMV has totally ignored and refuses to even admit that the Utah GOP has Same Day Ballots for 2014, which solves the mom with the sick kids or the firefighter that had to work or the military/mission voters.
See: http://fairelectionsutah.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-same-day-ballot-for-neighborhood.html
Extreme? There are differences between polls between delegates and non delegates. Sometimes it is because the delegates have taken the time to meet the official or candidate personally or have asked a typical question. For example according to a Dan Jones Poll leaked this week, current Utah State Delegates have a higher opinion of Gov. Herbert than the average Republican voters. Is that extreme? For 2012 they picked Gov. Herbert over Morgan Philpot, Mia Love over Carl Wimmer and almost picked Orrin Hatch over Dan Liljenquest as the nominee. States with direct primaries actually have had more problems with extreme candidates.
We have a system that that does NOT favor the incumbent, wealthy or famous. This is a good thing.
Wednesday, December 18, 2013
The truth about neighborhood election night attendance hospital doctors firefighters military missionaries
For
the GOP alone, neighborhood election night attendance doubled in 2010
and again in 2012 exceeding 110,000 voters. Same Day Ballots approved
for 2014 will help the hospital doctor and firefighter along with the
military and missionary to vote at the meeting. Turnout can continue to
grow, from the 20% registered GOP voters attending in 2012 to even
higher with additional upgrades approved for 2014.
Saturday, November 30, 2013
Why this compromise isn't a compromise.
There are several ways to save fair elections in Utah, and this proposed bill is not the way to do it. To have a real compromise you need to work with the parties on all sides. The Republican State Central Committee has been fighting on several related issues for a year. After months of hammering it out, on October 26, 2013 we were able to agree on meaningful changes. The key players on that compromise are not on board, let alone at the table of this proposed "compromise". The last thing we need is to go backwards and not forward.
According to information we have on a proposed "compromise" law being proposed:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/57190718-82/vote-party-convention-percent.html.csp
The following proposed changes and goals are part of the bill.
1. Allow absentee and remote voting in the neighborhood caucuses and allow more time for people to vote on line or by mail for their delegates.
2. Allow absentee and remote voting by delegates in the convention.
3. Allow unaffiliated voters to vote in party primaries.
4. Change the threshold for a candidate to win the party’s nomination outright at the convention, from 60 percent of the delegate vote to 65 percent.
What has already passed the Republican State Central Committee?
See:
Passed Resolutions from October 26, 2013
1. Resolution to Improve the Language of the Republican Party's System of Nominating Candidates
2. Resolution to Improve the Republican Party Neighborhood Caucus Election Experience by Recommending an optional Neighborhood Meet and Greet with Candidates
3. Resolution to Improve the Republican Neighborhood Caucus Election Check-In Process
4. Resolution to Improve the Republican Neighborhood Caucus Elections by Creating An Online Registration Process
5. Resolution to Allow Same-Day Balloting at Republican Neighborhood Caucus Election Meetings
6. Resolution on Participation by Individuals Engaged in Out of State Military and Religious Service at Neighborhood Caucus Elections
[updated rules as of Dec. 14, 2013
http://www.1888932-2946.ws/ComTool6.0/ckfinder/userfiles/files/Caucus%20Rules%202014.pdf
]
Response to the reported bill, and why the changes are no go at the start.
Goal 1. & 2. The Republican SCC has come up with a same day ballot for the neighborhood elections. While allowing a fire fighter or a mom with sick kids to have their voice heard that night, care was taken to make sure it would not decrease attendance at the meeting. Having an "absentee" ballot will take the "meeting out of the meeting". This is especially true of the convention.
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.
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.
One of the arguments for the proposed changes is that Salt Lake County can't handle over 200,000 attending for the GOP neighborhood elections. Let’s see if we can keep increasing turnout and meet the goals before ruining what we have.
Goal 3. Count My Vote has left alone Utah's "semi-closed" primaries as their legal analysis said it would help protect CMV from being tossed out in court.
In Utah if you are unaffiliated you can affiliate at the polls. This has been the state law has been for over 10 years. This system has been found to allow participation and still almost eliminate cross over voting where someone votes to pick the weaker candidate in a primary so their candidate will win in the general election.
The law had a sunset every 5 years and had existed for 10 years. After extending the law 5 more years failed in committee the summer of 2012, a bill file to eliminate the sunset or expiration date was pulled. It was signed into law, 2013 H.B. 262 Unaffiliated Voter Amendments. It keeps the current law and removes an automatic expiration date.
In 2010, concerns in even the national media that there would be a crossover vote by the Republican voters to get Rep. Matheson eliminated in a primary election never happened. There were two reasons; first, the GOP had a close primary for US Senate where Mike Lee just barely beat Tim Bridgewater, who had been endorsed by Sen. Bob Bennett. The 2nd reason was the current state law re: unaffiliated voters and a 30 day requirement for other voters to affiliate.
The system we have saves almost a $1 Million over the "direct" primary proposed by Count My Vote, which doesn't change the ability for unaffiliated voters to vote and eliminates our current run off primary. .
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?
Goal 4. 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. Raising it to 65% threshold would have make a few more primaries, but the risk of an incumbent losing, or someone rich or famous losing would also go down. Do the rich, famous or incumbents really need the protection?
The current system does not protect the incumbent, wealthy or famous. That is a good thing.
Friday, November 15, 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.
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Don't let the vampire Count My Vote suck you dry
Protect Our Neighborhood Elections, bringing sunlight (and wooden stakes) to Count "My Vote".
Mr. "My Vote" is a lobbyist and a paid political consultant who has turned into a vampire wanting to suck on taxpayers $$. Count "My Vote" will cost taxpayers almost $1 Million and then again almost $1 Million every 2 years.
Count "My Vote" will take away your neighborhood's current ability to help decide who is on the ballot, creating a primary election system with unlimited candidates paying media BIG money to win your vote.
We have a system that that does NOT favor the incumbent, the wealthy or the famous. This is a good thing, and should be protected. Don't let Count "My Vote" suck on your money or your your neighborhood's voice.
To help bring sunlight to Count "My Vote", sign up and donate at:
http://www.neighborhoodelection.org/
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
Neighborhood Elections
Neighborhood
Elections allow candidates who are not famous or wealthy to run for
office. Utah chooses candidates based on ideas & strong community
values, while other states choose their candidates based on who has
spent the most money to reach people with sound-bites, talking points
and buzzwords.
Neighborhood
Elections ensure that the names on the November ballot have been
carefully and fully vetted by elected neighbors that we trust; not by
big money special interests.
Neighborhood
Elections have added many civic minded people to the grassroots spirit
for which Utah is known. Often these people later become candidates
themselves for everything from City Council and School boards to US
Congress and Governor.
Neighborhood Elections ensure that our elected officials are held
accountable by individual citizens and not special interests. Only in
Utah can we find a US Senator in a person’s living room answering
questions from everyday people like your elected neighborhood
representatives.
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. Our Neighborhood
Elections benefit everyone in your area, whether they are registered with a
party or not. Losing the voice of rural Utah with a direct primary would change our state
forever.
Neighborhood Elections ensure that our elected officials are held accountable by individual citizens and not special interests. Only in Utah can we find a US Senator in a person’s living room answering questions from everyday people like your elected neighborhood representatives.
Neighborhood Elections ensure that our elected officials are held accountable by individual citizens and not special interests. Only in Utah can we find a US Senator in a person’s living room answering questions from everyday people like your elected neighborhood representatives.
Saturday, October 12, 2013
Count My Vote or Swipe my Vote
By state law, the
Legislators in each of the counties represented as well as the county
commissioners, etc. are to be invited to attend the public meeting for
the Count My Vote initiative.
The Count My Vote group has scheduled the two meetings representing the Bear River region - Box Elder, Cache or Rich County along with the Mountain region - Summit, Utah or Wasatch County during monthly Legislature Interim Session.
This month the Legislature Interim Session includes a special session called by the Governor of Utah to fund the National Parks staying open, keeping our rural economies alive and also to provide funding for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC).
The Count My Vote has complained that not everyone can attend their neighborhood elections, and so they have scheduled 4 of their 7 public statewide meetings at noon during the week with 2 of those during a Special Session of the Legislature.
They also scheduled 2 of the required regional public meetings during UEA, so they don't seem to want the UEA teachers or their invited parents to attend their Count My Vote public meetings.
http://www.elections.utah.gov/Media/Default/Initiatives/Notice%20of%20Public%20Hearings.pdf
Update2: It appears the meetings are not cancelled.
Update:
It appears they have seen the light and cancelled the the notice of the 7 public meetings.
http://www.utah.gov/pmn/sitemap/notice/183017.html
The Count My Vote group has scheduled the two meetings representing the Bear River region - Box Elder, Cache or Rich County along with the Mountain region - Summit, Utah or Wasatch County during monthly Legislature Interim Session.
This month the Legislature Interim Session includes a special session called by the Governor of Utah to fund the National Parks staying open, keeping our rural economies alive and also to provide funding for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC).
The Count My Vote has complained that not everyone can attend their neighborhood elections, and so they have scheduled 4 of their 7 public statewide meetings at noon during the week with 2 of those during a Special Session of the Legislature.
They also scheduled 2 of the required regional public meetings during UEA, so they don't seem to want the UEA teachers or their invited parents to attend their Count My Vote public meetings.
http://www.elections.utah.gov/Media/Default/Initiatives/Notice%20of%20Public%20Hearings.pdf
Update2: It appears the meetings are not cancelled.
Update:
It appears they have seen the light and cancelled the the notice of the 7 public meetings.
http://www.utah.gov/pmn/sitemap/notice/183017.html
Monday, October 7, 2013
Do you like Sen. Mike Lee
Whether you like Sen. Mike Lee or not you should consider the following. The delegates almost eliminated him at convention.
re: Sen. Bennett in 2010. He was not in the top 2 coming out of convention. In fact the more moderate of the two, Tim Bridgewater was selected by 57% of the delegates in the last round of voting by the delegates. If he had received 60% Tim Bridgewater would have been the party nominee and Mike Lee would have been eliminated.
Sen. Bennett endorsed Tim Bridgewater during the primary, but with voters ticked at TARP and ObamaCare, they went with Mike Lee.
Sen. Mike Lee was the party nominee after the primary
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 have a system that that does NOT favor the incumbent, the wealthy or the famous. This is a good thing, and should be preserved.
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.
re: Sen. Bennett in 2010. He was not in the top 2 coming out of convention. In fact the more moderate of the two, Tim Bridgewater was selected by 57% of the delegates in the last round of voting by the delegates. If he had received 60% Tim Bridgewater would have been the party nominee and Mike Lee would have been eliminated.
Sen. Bennett endorsed Tim Bridgewater during the primary, but with voters ticked at TARP and ObamaCare, they went with Mike Lee.
Sen. Mike Lee was the party nominee after the primary
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 have a system that that does NOT favor the incumbent, the wealthy or the famous. This is a good thing, and should be preserved.
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.
Tuesday, October 1, 2013
Why Neighborhood Elections in Utah
The
purpose of our current neighborhood election system is for parties to
nominate their best candidates and not necessarily their richest ones.
It provides an opportunity for the average voter to help decide their
party's nominee (along with their party officers, platform, constitution
and bylaws). 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.
Thursday, September 26, 2013
Saturday, September 21, 2013
A Resolution to increase Voter Participation and defend the Utah Neighborhood Election, Caucus and Convention Candidate Nomination Process
The following passed the Utah Republican State Central Committee on September 21, 2013 with none of the members voting against it.
------
A Resolution to increase Voter Participation and defend the Utah Neighborhood Election,
Caucus and Convention Candidate Nomination Process
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.
Keep Fair Elections in Utah. Reject the Count My Vote initiative.
Submitted by Fred C. Cox, Salt Lake County
http://www.1888932-2946.ws/ComTool6.0/ckfinder/userfiles/files/A%20Resolution%20to%20increase%20Voter%20Participation%20and%20defend.pdf
------
A Resolution to increase Voter Participation and defend the Utah Neighborhood Election,
Caucus and Convention Candidate Nomination Process
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.
Keep Fair Elections in Utah. Reject the Count My Vote initiative.
Submitted by Fred C. Cox, Salt Lake County
http://www.1888932-2946.ws/ComTool6.0/ckfinder/userfiles/files/A%20Resolution%20to%20increase%20Voter%20Participation%20and%20defend.pdf
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
If you Can't come to the Neighborhood Caucus Meeting, don't be left out
If you Can't come to the Neighborhood Caucus Meeting, don't be left out.
If someone can't make the caucus, for state wide races, they have as much as a month to tell their delegates, who represent them, who they are supporting. The nomination vote isn't that night.
If someone doesn't make their parent teacher night, does that mean they can't talk to the teachers all year long?
Candidates need volunteers. You can help the candidate you want to win. You can help with yard signs, flyers, phone calls, meetings, etc.
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.
If we change to an open primary, we are apt to have "flyover" counties and communities. One of the reasons that candidates and elected officials campaign and visit the smaller counties is the Caucus / Convention System.
I’m not sure if the Count My Vote / Buy My Vote groups has half-a-million or a million-and-a-half it will matter, people are still going to want fair elections. They’re still going to want the ability to have incumbents replaced. They’re still going to want people not to have to be rich or famous to get elected.
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 in time? Can't we learn from the past?
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.
[Update, the Utah GOP has passed a very narrow Same Day Ballot system]. See:
http://fairelectionsutah.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-same-day-ballot-for-neighborhood.html
If someone can't make the caucus, for state wide races, they have as much as a month to tell their delegates, who represent them, who they are supporting. The nomination vote isn't that night.
If someone doesn't make their parent teacher night, does that mean they can't talk to the teachers all year long?
Candidates need volunteers. You can help the candidate you want to win. You can help with yard signs, flyers, phone calls, meetings, etc.
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.
If we change to an open primary, we are apt to have "flyover" counties and communities. One of the reasons that candidates and elected officials campaign and visit the smaller counties is the Caucus / Convention System.
I’m not sure if the Count My Vote / Buy My Vote groups has half-a-million or a million-and-a-half it will matter, people are still going to want fair elections. They’re still going to want the ability to have incumbents replaced. They’re still going to want people not to have to be rich or famous to get elected.
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 in time? Can't we learn from the past?
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.
[Update, the Utah GOP has passed a very narrow Same Day Ballot system]. See:
http://fairelectionsutah.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-same-day-ballot-for-neighborhood.html
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.
Saturday, August 31, 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. (updated Dec. 31)
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. Utah also has lower turnout because of a dominate party.
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. Utah also has lower turnout because of a dominate party.
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, August 5, 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/
Friday, June 21, 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 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 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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)