Comments about ‘Lack of 2-party process creates political imbalance’

While the "extremists" in the Republican party slept the past several years, elected Republicans had everything to do with budget nightmares we're currently experiencing, especially since the Democrats took over. They took over because the Republicans didn't do what they were elected to do. We never hear any references to how the "moderates" took over the party back in the day. People with firm beliefs are letting their voices be heard, and while some angry comments may get the headlines, what most Americans want right now is to return our country to a fiscally responsible nation with a basis in law and fairness to the taxpayer... the ones who pay the bills. Is that so "extreme?"

Lack of two distinct popular parties ensures imbalance and has for decades. Both parties are Statist, regressive and intrusive and repeatedly offer only lip service to the legitimate aspirations of the majority of the nation. Those desires may be summed up as the desire for smaller government, less taxes, more freedom.

Let me enlighten you, "Lack of 2-party process creates political imbalance", Bob Bernick Jr. - YOU have those on the far right, and those on the far left, but what really creates political imbalance, is there's NO ONE in the middle, and, when that happens, for those people, from the poor to the middleclass to the "Joe Sixpacks", the same thing will happen, as it did in 2008, and cost the Sarah Palin's and the John McCain's the White House and most all of Congress to sit at home watching conservative Road Runner cartoons while reading Glenn Becks new book. When will you ever learn this?.

Bob,

Utah's delegate system is certainly one that deserves a spirited debate and discussion but blaming LDS culture for voting in "only 25%" women delegates in the GOP is kind of silly.

Nationwide the numbers of women elected to such positions is even lower. Female representation at all levels of politics (everywhere in our nation) is significantly lower than male representation.

That is a valid and significant fact to debate. It may deserve some valid remedies. But blaming it on "the heavy dominance of LDS participants" and "LDS Society" is a rather backwards stretch. Regardless of your feelings about LDS doctrines, I would find it quite easy to show you hard numbers indicating that the net result of LDS society is *more* women's participation in the political arena.

Again, this doesn't make LDS doctrines true (or false). It just points out that your bias is needless and actually detracts from the facts you are trying to discuss.

LDS Women had the vote *before* most women in the nation. They lost that vote for years when Utah became an official part of the United States of America.

I thought this article has quite accurately described what is going on this year. The most valid point many delegates make this year is that we shouldn't have career politicians. Disclosure, I support Bennett. But I've always believed we need Congressional term limits. For all states, not just Utah.

I agree with Senator Bennett and sound logic, that until we have a constitutional amendment for Congressional term limits, states can't afford to punt their seniority every two terms and expect to be key players and fully represent their states in Washington. I don't say this just for this election cycle. I also agree Bennett should never have made such a naive promise.

I do not agree with many delegates that Utah's two conservative Senators are part of the problem or are liberal. If you look at their records overall, and really understand the votes and issues, this is not a difficult assessment to make. By any measure they are conservative Senators.

Many forget there are two parties and diverse political views in this nation. I don't see a freshman senator, no matter how right, changing that fact. Even the Constitution required compromise.

Bernick puts his finger on the hearth of the problem. Utahns love republicans! Seems to me that "worship" might be a better word.

People can't find 2 hours once every two years to go to their precinct caucus meetings and participate in electing (or becoming) delegates. Then they complain that they don't get to participate in the process. Everyone can participate. Most choose not to. No one is keeping people out of the process except themselves.

Mike in Zion: In order to participate in the Republican caucus you are FORCED to join the party. I'm not a Republican, I'm an American and a registered voter who thinks for himself. If these caucuses are paid for by my taxes, then IMHO they should be open to any registered voter to participate in.

Especially since the types of candidates coming out of both major parties have been severely lacking.

Mike in Zion,

I've voted in every election for the last 34 years I could legally vote. I've been to a majority of my mass meetings. I agree with you that everyone who can vote should, and that as long as we have a caucus/convention system everyone who can should participate. Apathy is the problem!

However, unlike an election where absentee votes are allowed, it is not true that everyone can participate. Some examples of people who are disenfranchised include,

Military personnel putting their lives on the line serving our country.
Service and Church Missionaries.
Ex-patriots.
People who travel on business or extended vacations, who in a primary could vote early or by absentee.

And finally, independent voters who would like to support a party candidate but can't do so without joining the party. And to all those who say they should join a party, you'll have to take it up with George Washington, who believed a party system would be the ruin of the republic.

I'm not suggesting that today, but I see no good reason why an independent voter has to join a party to participate.

Thereyougoagain::: Republicans are still not doing what they were elected to do. Voting NO on everything is not doing anything. I hope this country is not stupid enough to vote more of these do nothing idiots into power. Less of them would make more sense. The house has over 200 bills and nominations waiting for the fillabuster senate to even bring them to the floor. The house has a democrat majority, and they are getting things done. The problem is the senate, where nothing gets done because it needs a super majority, and the republicans will not do ANYTHING. Lets get rid of more republicans in November so our country can move forward instead of backward, or NOWHERE

I had to swear to my precinct that I would not vote for Bennett. I am sure that many others did the same. There were over 80 voters at my precinct, that made their voices heard, "don't vote for Bennett!"

Now that it appears that he will lose, the DesNews is trying to discredit the process. As long as the citizens were uninformed on how the process worked and failed to attend their local caucus meetings the DN was satisfied, because it helped those with big money get elected at the general election.

Anyone could attend a caucus meeting. The democrats didn't even care if you were a democrat or not. The same for their primary. Is Mr. Bernick thinking that we need more "token" democrats, just to be fair?

To CKS007 (11:52am):

I can assure you the political caucuses are not paid for with your taxes; they are paid for by the respective political parties.

But even though you are '…a registered voter, who thinks for himself,' you need to understand that a political caucus (here in Utah and in many other States) is generally for the registered voting members of that specific political party. It is the process by which any political party chooses their respective candidates to represent that specific party for all elected offices in the General Election.

If you want to participate in selection of those candidates within a specific party to appear on the ballot of a General Election, then you need to be a registered voting member of that specific party. Some other parties may differ in this procedure as deemed by their by-laws, but that is the process with the Republican Party in the State of Utah.

To you, that may not seem fair, but that is our political system. It is fully legal and Constitutional. With variations, this has generally been the process within this country since way back to the early 1800s.

To Mike in Zion | 10:21 a.m.

The two party system in Utah is broken.

Everyone "can participate" only if they're willing to give lip service to one of the two major parties. Those of us who can't stomach either one, and have the etihical strength and courage not to pander, have no voice. It's way past time for the delegate system to be discontinued, and have open primaries so all who wish to vote can work to select the final candidates for the general election.

There is an arrogance of power. Again, I suppose I'm a lone conservative in the wilderness here, but there is something more to politics than just the issues of the day and whether someone is right or left. There is human nature and history involved here too. I understand the competition of ideas. But may i suggest that absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Fact is we have a history of very fine and capable public servants and elected officials in Utah who are Democrats. Governor Calvin Rampton, Governor Scott Matheson, Governor and Mayor of Salt Lake, J. Bracken Lee, Senator Frank Moss and several others. At one time in the 60's the Democrats owned a majority of the Congressional delegation and the state legislature. Not only are Republicans more conservative in Utah, so are Democrats.

Here's the heresy for a life long Republican. A more powerful Democratic party in Utah would be the best thing that could happen for both parties, and more importantly for Utah citizens.

Not all the far right ideologues can brand me a liberal sympathizer. I just call it having a brain.

To Furry1993 (1:58pm):

What kind of open primary?

Are you suggesting just one Primary of all candidates from all the different political parties on one single ballot? If you are, then that is not political reality — it will never happen.

VST,

Where have you been? Up until somewhere in the late 1980's anyone could vote in either the Republican or the Democratic Primary.

Independents could vote in either primary. Also if a Democrat or Republican wanted to vote for the candidate of his or her choice in the other party nothing stopped them from doing so. George Washington would have turned over in his grave with the change.

In Washington's and my opinion, that is the way it should be again.

Apparently, the Republican party made the change in order to prevent destructive cross-over voting, which had been a limited problem in other states, but never in Utah. Another reason was to encourage more voters to register and become active in the Republican party, and relatedly to consolidate power and to dominate Utah politics.

The primary was held in September or early October, I can't remember which. The party moved it back to June, and this is one reason for the lowest voter participation rates in the nation. I've made every vote regardless, and people should go anyway, but there is no reason to make it more difficult.

To facts_r_stubborn (4:14pm):

With due respect, and without the sarcasm, my question was directed Fury1993 - not to you.

I am well aware of what existed prior to 1990 and the fact that Independents could vote in either Primary. I believe the main position of Fury1993 is the current delegate method should be replaced with a Primary with all candidates on the ballot - not just the top two vote-getters off the Convention floor.

I want Fury1993 to clarify his/her position on what is considered an Open Primary in his/her mind.

@facts r stubborn: your preaching about the benefits of Bennett are foolishness and nonsense. You are insufferable with your support of him. No one cares that you've voted for 34 years and attended the majority of your caucuses.

The caucuses are a great way to be involved. Bernick and the Dnews are a bunch of babies trying to whine about the lack of what? People being involved?

If you don't like the system then attend your caucus and convince your neighbors that you are the person to represent them and be the delegate.

I can attest that this system is a balance to keep the party insiders in check. I've seen the whining and complaining by those 'in charge' that the delegates weren't voting for those they wanted to win.

Delegates are very informed on the issues and don't get swayed by the sound bites that the general public hears.

Bob Bennett has served his time and needs to come home and be released with a vote of thanks.

@VST -- your comments are spot on. If you want to have a say in who represents-a-particular party then you have to-join!

I for one like the current system. I do not have the time to research out all of the candidates running for office. I am a caucus carcass relying on the "political junkies" to help me understand the issues and candidates. I have learned enough about these individuals to be able to trust their judgment and am more than happy to send them to the convention to represent my interests.

Come to think of it, that is why we have Congress instead of putting all laws to a popular vote.

Works for me.

I was under the impression that this is an open blog. VST, I apologize for misreading what you said. You seemed to be suggesting that there is no chance the primaries would be open. I'm merely stating my opinion that they were open and should be open again and moved closer to the general election.

Charles, we probably agree on a few things. I think it's wonderful that more people participated in their caucus meetings this cycle than most. For the last few election cycles only about 7 or 8 people showed up to my caucus. This year we had well over 100. I just think a primary is better.

I'm curious when you say that supporting Bennett is foolishness and nonsense. What do you mean by that? Most of the anti-Bennetts make comments like this. I give well-grounded facts, which no one has refuted or addressed. If it's just my opinion, I so state.

It's not important whether anyone knows I have voted in every election. It is very important that people who don't participate know how important voting is. I want you and everyone else to participate.