Fixing the caucus system

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 22, 2012 4:47 p.m.

    When people talk about our Liberty, our freedom, and our rights, the first question that pops into my mind is just who is the our that that they are talking about. The truth is they are most often only talking about their own group, business, union, religion etc. etc.

    Thus they completely miss the point that freedom, liberty, and rights are not totally infinite things that can be given out to all in an infinite quantity. These things are merely bargaining chips of life that are bought, sold and traded mostly by the people we elect to govern us.

    And the gain of freedom for one means the loss of freedom of another.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    March 22, 2012 3:41 p.m.

    Having an "open mind" has its place in politics, but being "open minded" takes a back-seat to standing up for liberty.

    We expect those we elect to hold our liberties inviolate. We expect them to abandon their office before they would ever vote against our liberties. We expect them to honor those who have lived and died securing those liberties for us. NO ONE, who expects an office holder to put liberty above office could ever vote for a candidate who had voted to take our liberties away from us.

    If 535 members of Congress were held to that simple requirement, we would not be subjected to illegal wire-taps, illegal "pat-downs" or "X-rays" at the airport. We would not have a Congress who forced us to buy a product from them or face imprisonment. We would not have a Congress who held themselves exempt from the laws that they had passed. We would not have a Congress who failed to pass a budget. We would not have a President who presumed that he was a king who ruled by dictate.

    The process starts at the Caucus.

  • Gildas LOGAN, UT
    March 22, 2012 10:49 a.m.

    I think Utah's caucus system is fine with the exceptions that:

    I think that nominees should not commit to voting for a particular candidate but should inform us of their preferred candidate if any. All caucuses should do better job of encouraging speeches of up to five minutes from nominees, and pertinent questions from attendees.

    Nominees should know who the candidates are but the parties should be required to post the names and positions of all the candidates well in advance, say a month ahead, of the candidates who have filed up to that point. Perhaps it would be even better just to hold the caucuses at least a month AFTER filings have closed.

    The caucus rules for each party should be printed in local newspapers in addition to the times and places that caucuses meet. Media should prominently publish the names and postitions of all candidates.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    March 22, 2012 9:47 a.m.

    A counter proposal.

    . Stop all commercial and special interest groups from influencing the election and representation in the government for the people.

    . Throw out the notion of representation by a persons physical residence in favor of representation by chosen political philosophy or wants.

    . Allow any one and every one to apply for the position of government representation.

    . Require each candidate to prepare, post and maintain a resume similar to those for employment. Do not allow other campaigning.

    . Hold a state wide election. Voters would first choose from a list of political philosophies or special wants. Second, the voter would choose the candidate desired in that persuasion.

    . Counting the votes twice, one time by persuasion and Then by candidate. The first count would determine the number of representatives for each political philosophy the second for the candidate for positions in the philosophy.

    The object of this being to stop improper influence of government, allow all people to participate and provide government more like the wants and desires of the people.