Count My Vote taking away accountability of elected officials.

Updated based on current version.

Whether or not you agree that the caucus and convention system which did NOT favor the incumbent, wealthy or famous, as being a good thing, the New Count My Vote 2.1 is worse.

Currently you can at least watch what your legislator does during the session and if you don't like it, you can either run or help someone run against them by filing after the session ends.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What is the major problem technically? 

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

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

Other major problems?

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

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

What should Count My Vote 2.1 actually change?

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

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

Ranked Choice voting Video

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

Count My Vote or Blank Check Vote

So the Incumbent protection for the Utah Legislature and Governor is in the Count My Vote?

Currently you can at least watch what your legislator does during the session and if you don't like it, you can either run or help someone run against them by filing after the session ends. (March 1st, Line number 321).

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

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

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

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

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

Is this the only problems?

No, there is a typo on line 95, with a reference that isn't correct. How many other errors are there in this initiative? It clearly isn't ready.

What is the major problem technically? 

The new CMV2 violates the Utah Constitution Art VI sec 1, (2) (a) (i) (B ) for lines 88 to 95.

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

Other major problems?

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

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

What should Count My Vote 2 actually change?

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

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

Ranked Choice voting Video

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

How did we get to the point where the Utah GOP is suing the State of Utah

How did we get to the point where the Utah GOP is suing the State of Utah when most of those that supported 2014 SB 54 were Republicans? 

Pretty simple. The future Count My Vote backers showed up to conventions and picnics in 2009 (Jowers and Doug Wright for example). People at the time were tired of being over taxed and the Feds trampling our rights, (same as today). The delegates didn't fawn over them at the time and then Tim Bridgewater beat Sen. Bennett at convention in May of 2010 (yes Mike Lee squeaked out as well) and the backers met at the Alta Club and decided they wanted to get rid of the current system. Sen. Bennett backed Tim Bridgewater for the 2010 Primary, but Mike Lee won. Professors at both BYU and UofU plus Doug Wright have been blasting the caucus/convention system ever since. Some had been blasting it already when Gov. Walker got in the 2004 race too late and lost.

When polls and stats (Y2/BYU) showed Sen. Bennett would have lost even with the 2012 "Hatch" delegates they (the CMV backers) decided to work on changing the delegate voting threshold and "other" changes by threatening demands from the outside the Party.

When those changes failed (other changes later passed, such as helping fire fighters, etc. vote), they launched Count My Vote. They used a deceptive and poorly written "bill" and legal analysis from a DC lobbyist expert and had trouble getting the signatures in several parts of the state as required. They hired a group to help who violated the laws and official complaints were filed against them. So they compromised with the Utah Legislature directly, bypassing the Parties, and got things they didn't even try to get with CMV because they thought they would lose in court.

Members of the Utah Legislature believed CMV would still get the signatures and already had the media and so agreed with the compromise. When the party announced just before the grand Compromise in March 2014 that they would protect their rights and that at least CMV violated their rights - people ignored them. When almost 4000 state delegate said we should protect our rights against SB 54 in April of 2014 people ignored that as well. So when the Party did sue in Dec of 2014 people wondered why.

Notes:
Jowers 2009 GOP State Convention ice cream social, Wright, Salt Lake County GOP 2009 Constitution Day Picnic.

Alta Club Meeting

Bennett/Bridgewater
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700030688/Utah-GOP-delegates-dump-Sen-Bob-Bennett-at-state-convention-Bridgewater-Lee-to-battle-in-primary.html?pg=all


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/06/11/bennett-endorses-former-rival/


Poll and Stats released publicly by Quinn Monson at the State Young Republican meeting Nov. 9,  2013.

Threatening demands
http://www.publiusonline.com/lavarr-webbs-insiders-weigh-in-on-utahs-nomination-system-poll/

Writers of CMV
Matthew T. Sanderson
Stephen W. Owens.
Source: Nov. 9, 2013, CMV, Taylor Morgan

Poorly written, CMV
http://fairelectionsutah.blogspot.com/2014/03/a-resolution-declaring-count-my-vote.html
http://fairelectionsutah.blogspot.com/2013/11/5-reason-not-to-sign-their-petion.html

Volations:

http://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/legislature/group-questioning-count-my-votes-petitions/article_d7e74a33-e847-58cb-9d7e-0b9c8a7a0a70.html

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865597116/Count-My-Vote-ballot-initiative-attacked-on-two-fronts.html?pg=all

Lose in Court, Unaffiliated Voters
http://www.countmyvoteutah.org/s/Constitutional-Memorandum-and-Letter-wso2.pdf
(notice it specifically says CMV doesn't open the primary to unaffiliated)

Poorly written legal analysis
http://www.scribd.com/doc/211089967/Memorandum-rebuttal-of-initiative-constitutionality-2-25-14-3-pdf

Prior to the Grand Compromise, Party to protect it's rights

Delegates back Fight.
2014 Utah GOP Nominating Convention vote, estimates of over 95%

Conclusions are those of Fred C. Cox, and may not represent others or parties.

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?

Perhaps Mitt Romney should be blasting Count My Vote having no run off

Perhaps Mitt Romney should be blasting Count My Vote for having no run off. 

"I’m concerned that that kind of approach (some caucus/convention systems) could end up with a minority deciding who the nominee ought to be. And that I think would be a mistake," he told The Globe.    "I think we should have the majority of the party’s voters decide who they want as their nominee."

Utah's Count My Vote / Buy My Vote (CMV) doesn't get a majority of the parties voters to decide who they want. We do that now. CMV has no run off and almost eliminates the possibility of the party picking between 2 candidates, so virtually no majority candidate.

Count My Vote is proposing a primary with no run off and unlimited candidates. If the poorly drafted proposed law passes, the nominee will be selected by a minority almost every time. Currently a nominee is selected by 60% of the delegates or the majority at a primary between 2 candidates.

There have been 10 times the numbers coming to the neighborhood caucus elections than would be required to get signatures or votes to be the nominee under Count My vote. For a legislative district, there could be as few as 100 signatures vs 1000 caucus attendees and depending on the number of candidates, fewer votes for the nominee than caucus attendees.

in 2008, Jason Chaffetz beat 12 year incumbent Chris Cannon 60/40 in the prmary with Rep. Cannon endorsed by Pres. Bush and the 1st lady, Mitt Romney, Sen. Hatch and Bennett. When Jason Chaffetz won the nominee, the endorsers backed Jason.

I am thinking about why Utah changed from the neighborhood caucus election system in 1937 (just so one democratic state senate president could get elected governor for 8 years) and Count My Vote / Buy My Vote is proposing to change the system again (just so one former republican governor can get elected to the US Senate)

I really hope the public is smarter than that. In the 1937 case, it was the taxpayers that got stuck with the bill, and the current poorly drafted proposed law would do the same thing again. This time it will cost taxpayers, about 1/2 of it born by smaller counties, almost $1,000,000 and then about $900,000 every two years if Count My Vote / Buy My Vote were to pass.

Someone has to have a pretty big ego to want to buy a state's entire election system (or get Mitt to jump in as well) just to get elected to a specific office. I know, Sen. Hatch spent a ton of money but still faced a primary. At least he worked to win with the current system. 

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.

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

Mitt seems to be worried about Tea Party Wins.

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 protected.

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

Fair Elections Utah

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fair Elections in Utah vs Count My Vote

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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


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

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

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

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

Why Keep the Utah Neighborhood Caucus and Convention System

Why Keep the Utah Neighborhood Caucus and Convention System?

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

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


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

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

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

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


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

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

and

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

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

 

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

 

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

Keep fair elections in Utah.

Can the Neighborhood Election Caucus and Conventions be improved

Can the Neighborhood Election Caucus and Conventions be improved? Yes!

We need to make sure the Utah neighborhood election caucus system is set up so it could be done in 2 hrs. and we get the election results, not just back to the county and state parties, but to those that missed it so they can still contribute and let their elected delegates and precinct leaders know what they think. The person that got a babysitter for 2 hrs to attend their neighborhood caucus should be able to vote

We need to coordinate with college and university campuses in Utah to make sure students know where a caucus meeting is, and Utah residents can register to attend and participate. Perhaps we should increase the number of locations the neighborhood caucuses are on college and university campuses. We can add another hundred thousand new caucus attendees in 2014.

Keep it at 60 Percent

The 60% works, allowing a shot of a challenger to eliminate an incumbent and yet requires a challenger to be a strong candidate. 

Based on the party released sheets since 2000 for state wide races or congressional races, At 60%, threshold to avoid a primary, 1/2 of contested races went to primary. If at 2/3 threshold to avoid a primary, 67% of contested races go to a primary and at 70% threshold to avoid a primary, 70% of the races go to primary. The last 2 numbers do not have to match, but they ended up doing so. 

They tracked 44 races, 14 of which were not contested for the nominee. We realize it is only 5 or 6 contested races difference, but when you are looking at 30 contested races, a change of 5 is 17%.

70% would not have helped 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.

Sen. Hatch just barely missed eliminating Dan Liljenquist by hitting just under the 60% threshold to avoid a primary, and Jason Chaffetz just missed eliminating Chris Cannon by hitting just under 60% threshold to avoid a primary. 

Both races went to primaries. The 60% line works fine. Raising it decreases the chance of eliminating an incumbent, and we get weaker challengers. 

It was the caucus system that got Sen. Hatch, Sen. Bennett, Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr., Gov. Leavitt & Lt. Gov. Walker, etc. elected in the first place. The system is fine when they win, but if any of them lose, it is bad?  

The democrats in SLCo. just added an additional vote at the end of their conventions to see if they can avoid a primary. They have no interest in the initiative passing and have been vocal not to support it.

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

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

We appreciate the grassroots nature of this process, with neighbors gathering to discuss political issues and candidates.

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

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

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

When people realize this "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.

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

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

We need to make sure the Utah neighborhood election caucus system is set up so it could be done in 2 hrs. and we get the election results, not just back to the county and state, but to those that missed it so they can still contribute and let their elected delegates and precinct leaders know what they think. The person that got a babysitter for 2 hrs to attend their neighborhood caucus should be able to vote

We need to coordinate with college and university campuses in Utah to make sure students know where a caucus meeting is, and Utah residents can register to attend and participate. Perhaps we should increase the number of locations the neighborhood caucuses are on college and university campuses. We can add another hundred thousand new caucus attendees in 2014.

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