Petition supporters say legislation shows 'shocking disregard' to will of people
David: I think the problem is there are a certain group of people that DO NOT
think the majority of Utahns should vote upon a subject. Oh wait... That's
an obvious one.
pby47,The CMV petition is an effort to simply put this to the
voters. Those who signed the petition, like I did, are not forcing any type of
change to the current caucus system. It simply puts it to the voters to
decide.So please explain how "These people are guilty of the
very problem they say they are seeking to correct--a minority of the people
deciding policy, law, and nomination of candidates".Let me be
clear: If the CMV effort is successful, all that will happen is the issue will
be placed upon the ballot in November for Utah voters to decide.Are
you opposed to petitions? No?Are you opposed to voting? No?Do you trust a majority of Utahns' to vote upon a subject? Yes?Then you too may wish to support Count My Vote. It is simply an effort
to put forward a primary voting system for Utahns to decide who will represent
them. Many states use the methods proposed in Count My Vote. You
may wish to think again.
I haven't made a decision yet where I stand on CMV, because I can
understand the arguments and concerns of both sides. But I am concerned that
there are those that would silence a group of people that are seeking, by the
proper means, the right to be heard. If the caucus system is so wonderful, and
the "hundreds of thousands" that didn't sign the petition are in
favor of it, then nobody should get their nickers in a knot over a group asking
for change. Let the chips (votes) fall were they may and find out what the true
"Voice of the people" is. And lets lay off the name calling and
There are also hundreds of thousands of voters who did not sign this petition.
These people are guilty of the very problem they say they are seeking to
correct--a minority of the people deciding policy, law, and nomination of
candidates. I am opposed to this phony CMV initiative. Why would anyone want to
eliminate the grass roots aspect of American politics? Utah's nominating
process is as grass roots as it gets. Those opposed to it are leftist
progressives who cannot bear the fact that conservatives have a voice here, are
active in politics here, and dictate, to a large degree, who gets nominated for
office. Leave things alone, nothing is broke, so don't do the liberal thing
and go fix things that work very well.
Sen. Lyle Hillyard, R-Logan, said he's protective of residents' right
to run an initiative petition "but they are no more important than we are up
here."Hmmmm. I'd have to agree. But I would rephrase that.
"They are MORE important than we are up here. They put us here."Wasn't it Bill Cosby that used to say "I brought you into this
world and I can take you out" ?
Political parties are independent entities. They should have the right to decide
for themselves how they will select nominees for office. And if voters
don't like the process a party chooses for selecting nominees, there's
an easy alternative. Just vote for the other candidate.How would
Mormons like it if somebody decided they didn't like the Mormon church
process for choosing an apostle, and so passed a law to force a change in the
process? The same could be said of Catholics and the process to choose a new
Pope. It's ludicrous. These are independent organizations, and they have
the right to decide the process they will use to select their leaders.The same is true of political parties. They are independent organizations.
They should be free to follow the processes they choose. Nobody's stopping
Democrats in Utah from changing their process and going to a direct primary
system. That would give people a choice. They can vote for a Democrat who was
nominated by a supposedly open process, or vote for a Republican who was
nominated by a supposedly closed process.Freedom. That's
America. Let freedom ring.
@JustmythoughtsThen maybe it will stop the legislator from trying to
neutralize my vote in SLC. The fact that the west side of SLC, West Valley, and
all of western utah (Washington County to Box Elder) are part of the same
congressional district is nothing more than an attempt to keep the kind of
people that my neighbors and I would elect out of office. Rural Utah has got
more than their fare share for years. Lets balance it back out.
Web Geek,Past presidents of the US have not managed to garner 50% of
the vote.If a candidate captures more votes than his opponents, then
he/she is the winner. Justmythoughts,How is your
scenario different for the CMV proposals as opposed to what is happening now?
Representatives are specific to a geographic boundary established by political
bodies. I doubt a rural candidate running for the Utah House will neglect
campaigning within his area of representation.
As usual, those with selfless agendas like to give a title to something that
misleads. IN this case, the move should be called "Buy My Vote". And then they like to spray it with a nice fragrance so the true stink
doesn't get noticed as easily. With a pile of manure, no matter what you
call it or how much you spray it, it's still "count my vote".
srw,I read the 20+ page bill (something many signers of the petition
probably haven't done) and didn't find any language about it. If what
you says is true, are you ok with a candidate winning with 20%, 30%, or even
40%? I'm not. If a candidate is to represent my party of choice, they need
to get at least a majority - 50+%.
Pay attention to which legislators support SB54 then vote for delegates who will
not support these legislators. If my Senator makes it through to the general
election I will vote for a Democrat and not for Senator Bramble. He refuses to
recognize the will of the people.
If candidates are elected directly through primary elections.....They will camp
out where most of the votes are located. Rural Utah will become irrelevant.
That is not what I call representation.
How is moving to direct primary thwarting the will of the people? How would
putting a name on the ballot discourage participation? Plus you have several
hours in which to vote, not the 1 or 2 hours of a caucus meeting, where people
full of hot air throw their weight around. The powers that be are upset at
this. The people shouldn't be.
Rich McKeown admits to the very thing that supporters of the caucus system worry
about! He basically says that we have money and connections and we'll
control the messaging to the public through the media. That's what will
also happen in a direct primary. Those who have the money and connections will
have the influence. It's silly that this initiative is called a
"citizen" initiative. It would be better renamed a "corporate"
I generally vote Republican. I have been a Republican delegate to my county GOP
convention. I attend my caucus meetings each year. I support
County My Vote and have signed the citizens petition to get it on the ballot. I
think Utah voters should have the opportunity to vote on this because the
legislature has failed to take the initiative, until now, to address troubling
trends and concerns surrounding elections. It is too common for
those in power to act in their self-interest to maintain their position and
power, so it is not a surprise that the legislature has been slow to act...until
they realized that the CMV effort was moving forward.I would be very
concerned if, as was stated at the end of this article, the Protect Our
Neighborhood Elections successfully voided all or most of the signatures on the
I sure hope there is a third party candidate running in my senate district,
because I cannot vote to re-elect my senator who voted for this and I cannot
vote for the dem.
Just a thought, Is having almost 100,000 signatures the will of the people when
there are3,000,000 of us in this state? Is it the will of the people when
statewide candidates never have to visit a rural county ever again? And why
exactly is this group spending all this money and what do they get out of it?
Another example of people who love power wishing to retain their positions.
Democratic elections aren't about making "accurate" decisions, as
one commenter puts it — they are about letting people decide for
themselves who should legislate and govern. For better or worse, democratically
elected governments should represent the will of the people, and not just the
will of people who are "educated" about candidates and issues.SB 54 strikes me as a tool for the legislature to override a broadly-popular
voter initiative. There is no need for the "principled compromise"
legislators are seeking — they missed their opportunity, and now voters
intend to deal with the issue directly. Please don't get in our way.
SB 54 is (at least) a couple years too late. I have no problem with the concept
of a legislative compromise on a policy issue, but SB 54 looks and feels like a
way to circumvent a likely-successful voter initiative. That feels as
undemocratic as our caucus system!I would prefer not to legislate
how a political party chooses candidates, but Utah's unique political
demographics necessitate a fundamental change in the way our system works. If
Republican primaries are the de facto general elections, it is in the
state's interest to design an more inclusive process that better fosters
participation.I understand the caucus system often produces
delegates who are well-informed on issues and candidates — I respect how
seriously many delegates take their job — but I can't support a
system that excludes so many while placing outsized influence and power in the
hands of a few.
liberty or ...?:Please let us know where we can read the text of the
bill/legislation concerning Common Core.Web Geek:Where did you
hear about these fundamental flaws? Your message prompted me to read the text
of the initiative at the Count My Vote web site, and it clearly says that the
candidate with the most votes wins. There is nothing about requiring a
I'm a big fan of CMV. These legislaters have a lot of hubris. I am a
Republican but this vote is shameful. I hope voters wake up and vote supporters
of this out. I hope we aren't all lemmings just because we live in Utah.
If there is no room in the Republican party for moderates in Utah my vote will
go else where. There are more moderates in this state than people realize and
getting rid of the caucus system will show that. Gov. Herbert please veto this
bill if it passes!
If there is anything that Republican leadership fears, it is CMV and the Citizen
The CMV petition is fundamentally flawed. There is no provision for what to do
when there is no clear majority vote. If 5 candidates are in the primary and no
one gets above 50%, what happens then? Also, if a representative resigns (like
Spencer Cox did to become Lt. Gov.) who decides his replacement? A special
election?Citizens initiatives are good for repealing laws, not
drafting them. Give them credit for getting the ball rolling, but SB54 is a much
more fully vetted solution.
I am sorry but I am sick of this blanket statement the will of the people and
why don't I trust my neighbors vote? I challenge the supporters of CMV. I
will support CMV now if you can show me that within the last 5 years 65% of all
Utah citizens (Cause thats what you are requiring as a majority in this petition
and why the libretarians and democrats should get a voice in who I pick for my
Republican candidate)Have attended or completed at least 65% of the
following-Neighborhood Caucuss,Town Hall meeting,School board meeting,Read the
bills and legislation being discussed (not comments and opinions the actual
bill)including SB116,Common core,ACA,net neutrality,NSA 3rd and 4th amendment
proposals,attended a protest or rally,veted the candidates by meeting them face
to face, going to their websites checking their voting records, emailed or
contacted their congressman or senator at least 5 times (for major issues that
have been in public eye) in the last five years, checked the voting records,
reported to peers. Thats what I have done as a delegate. If they do this then
you are informed to make an accurate decision.