@ Jbarr: I hate to burst your bubble, but we are actually
"celebrating" the 100th anniversary of the United States'
transition from a Constitutional Republic to a Democracy. How so? Read the
17th Amendment, ratified on April 8, 1913. When both the Representatives AND
the Senate became elected by the masses (Senators originally were appointed by,
and represented the sovereign States, who paid for much of the Federal
Government), we became a Democracy. Thomas Jefferson stated (and I
paraphrase) that all Democracies eventually bankrupt themselves when the people
discover that they hold the purse strings to the Treasury. It took the citizens
of the U.S. about 60 years to begin discovering that - today you see the last
throes of this Democracy. The Great Compromise was about dividing
the House and Senate in such a way that the Senate ultimately held the purse
strings (remember, they represented their State Legislatures, not the masses -
because in those days the States carried most of the financial burden of funding
the Federal government). The masses, through their Representatives, inevitably
want to spend government money; the Senate was in place to check spending and
keep the Federal government solvent. Hope that is helpful.
It should be called the "Buy my vote" group, as that is what will
jbarr,They also warned us against political parties. I will sign
the petition to do away with those if you want to run it.
The founding fathers warned us about the dangers of becoming a Democracy. We
live in a constitutional Republic. Let's keep it that way in Utah! If you
don't know the difference between a Democracy and a Republic then do some
honest research and find out. It is important for us to keep our caucus system.
If we get rid of it then the media will decide who gets elected and who
doesn't get elected. Get involved and elect delegates that represent your
views at your local caucus meetings.
Procuradorfiscal,Not surprising to anyone with half a brain that the
entrenched interests who refuse to listen to their constituencies would oppose
allowing the people, the members of a party, to select that party’s
candidates.Ignore my vote partisans should be ashamed of their
blatant attempt to hold on to abused power. One person, one vote is NOT
embodied in the current system. No absentee ballot, no vote by mail; what if you
are out of town for work? Do you choose between feeding your family and
voting?What is really disgusting is their attempt to further confuse
the issue by launching a counter-initiative with a deceptively similar name
– my vote counts (which it doesn’t, really)To those who
claim the current abusive system allows the little guy with little money to
compete, let me ask – how can they compete in the general election with
little money? Don’t be so arrogant that you say “all they need is
the (R) after their name”.rok, Boise, CA. what concern
is it of yours? Or are you just looking for an excuse to call names?
A Chem Engineer,Lets see, what if I have to work the night of the
caucus, what if I am in the military, what if I am out of town on business, etc.
etc. etc. I think it is pretty arrogant to assume that simply because people
are not at their local caucus they don't care. I didn't say it was
right or wrong even though I don't like the idea of electing someone to
elect someone. Especially when the person I elected is under no obligation to
vote the way I or the caucus voted. I said lets be Americans and
vote this idea up or down. I think there is a group though that is afraid of
letting the people vote. Many of them are current elected officials and
delegates who represent the extreme views of the predominant party. It is funny
to read peoples comments about there concern about a power grab, I think the
real concern is about losing power.Bottom line though lets have a
vote. Let the people decide if they want to keep the caucus system.
A direct primary is needed or else you get the kooky, far-right RINOs ruling the
party and taking it down the toilet bowl with them.
"One person, one vote? That's what we have now."Back
when I was a Republican and attended my local caucus, I didn't vote for a
candidate. I voted for a delegate. That delegate is under no obligation to
vote how I (or the other attendees) would want them to. How is that "one
person, one vote?"
What about people who cannot attend a caucus meeting? This could be people on
military duty, people confined to a hospital, people required to work, people
serving Missions; any number of things can cause a person to not be able to
attend a caucus meeting. Should these people not have their voices heard?
Vanceone,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 primaryThe
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.
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".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.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.
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.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.
P.S. - that was before we moved to Idaho, which sadly does NOT use a caucus
@ Fred44:As has been said, the caucus system IS "one person, one
vote". Anybody wanting to vote needs to attend their mass meeting - THAT is
where and when they vote. My wife and I were both selected as electors in our
mass meeting, consisting of about 8 people in attendance. Where were the other
100-150 voters that could've voted, but didn't? Who knows; but they
had their chance and chose not to exercise it. People who don't care
enough to attend their mass meetings, find out what is going on, and VOTE, and
maybe even SERVE as electors - are EXACTLY the type of voters the "Buy My
Vote" campaign is intended for. Big Money & Media want to buy their
ignorant, "couldn't-care-less" votes, for all the reasons stated by
others above.Just think - a national caucus system might have
actually given us a Presidential candidate who would respect the Constitution,
instead of King Obama, elected by the "gimme a cellphone and a check"
crowd, who probably wouldn't attend a mass meeting in their own living
We all know that 'Count My Vote' is just an elitists operation and
every thinking person in the State of Utah needs to kill their plan to move it
forward. RINOs and progressives are attempting to control the state politics and
segregate the rural areas from having a voice any longer. It is time to save the
caucus system as that is the only true method for the basic citizen to retain
their ability to affect state government. I saw this in action as a GOP State
Delegate and the RINOs and progressives are everywhere in the GOP.
Re: "One person, one vote. That's the America I support."Me too. That's why I can't go along with this coup, that turns over
candidate selection to the big money crowd. We won't even get a chance to
vote until they decide who the right candidates are.One person, one
vote? That's what we have now. And that's why big money hates the
Utah Sports Council and other, well supported, fringe groups want to keep the
power in a few hands. Either you're for a democracy or your not. One
person, one vote. That's the America I support.
The internet has been a big boon to ferreting out misinformation. Gone are the
days when the party "big shots" can dictate how/why the electorate
SHOULD feel.The "buy my vote" power players get frustrated
that WE can't/don't do what they say. After all THEY know best. THEY
have the money, and the political connections that come with it.Vote
down the "buy my vote" initiative. Its' ALL about power and
control. YOU have it, THEY want it!
If we really care about what Utahn's think why don't we let them vote
on this initiative? What are we afraid of, to many low information voters? It
can't be that, because republicans outnumber democrats at least 5 to 1. I
would think that those of you who know whats best for Utah would want this on
the ballot then it could be defeated and go away for ever. Or maybe......you
are afraid that this is what Utahn's want, and it will take the power to
select our candidates from the few and give it to the many.
All I needed to know about "Count my vote" was when I read how the
"Establishment" GOP were hoping to take out people like Mike Lee with
this. This is a deliberate attempt to weaken conservative influence in Utah.
It's their stated goal, in fact: They blather on about
representing "every Utahn" and not the "conservative base." When their motives are so transparently partisan, why should we listen
to anything they have to say? Heck, Doug Wright, alleged "Republican",
sounds like Harry Reid's press secretary anymore. He's a huge
supporter of Count My vote. Wonder why....
Re: "University of Utah political science professor Matthew Burbank said
it's not surprising that the shooting sports council would oppose the
change to a direct primary."It's not surprising that ANYONE
with half a brain opposes the big-money Buy My Vote crowd's attempted coup.
Buy My Vote partisans are ashamed of what real Utahns think and
feel, so they're attempting to take over and substitute what they think and
feel.Which is almost never what we think and feel.