Darryl Perry at Free Patriot Press:
When elections first began in the United States of America voters did not use government printed ballots. In fact no one in the world used a government printed ballot before 1856. This idea spread slowly to the America’s where the idea was adopted first in 1888. Richard Winger writes, “Originally, there were no ballot access restrictions whatsoever in the U.S. … no petitions, no filing fees, no loyalty oaths, no declarations of candidacy. The government had no control over who could run for office, or whom voters could vote for. This is because, before the 1890’s, the government didn’t print the ballots! Instead, parties printed them and distributed them, and any voter was free to make his own ballot or to alter a party- printed ballot.
Even after the state took over the job of printing the ballots, it was easy to get on the ballot in virtually every state.” And, “In the 1896 general election, every single congressional district in the nation had at least two candidates on the ballot. The average district had 3.1 candidates on the ballot.”
Since that time, the Republicans and Democrats have been crafting rules to favor themselves and keep off “minor” competitors. They’ve been so “successful” in some States that it’s virtually impossible for an independent or “minor party” candidate to make the ballot. James Bennett in the book “Not Invited To The Party” asks semi-rhetorically if the Republicans and Democrats would be able to meet the ballot access hurdles laid out for the “minor party” and independent candidates.
In the dissenting opinion of Lippit v Cipollene (1972) Justice William O. Douglas writes, “The right to run for public office seems a fundamental one.” Yet at every turn, the powers that be hinder not only the rights of those seeking office, but the right of the voters to choose whom he wishes for that office.
In attempt to decrease voter choice, while claiming to increase it, Californians are being offered Proposition 14 which asks, “Changes the primary election process for congressional, statewide, and legislative races. Allows all voters to choose any candidate regardless of the candidate’s or voter’s political party preference. Ensures that the two candidates receiving the greatest number of votes will appear on the general election ballot regardless of party preference. Fiscal Impact: No significant net change in state and local government costs to administer elections.”
Christina Tobin of StopTopTwo.org states, “What the ballot language fails to mention is that in the election that counts, the general election, we wont be able to choose “any candidate”. We’ll have only two choices — and if you want to write in a name, forget it. Write-in votes will be banned. An odd way to “increase the right to participate” !
In reality, we’re being sold the illusion of participation. A blanket primary like Top Two requires more money to win, making the influence of money even greater. Then, the candidates with the most special interest money will be our ONLY choices in November.” Unlike Prop 62 which Californians voted down in 2004, Prop 14 would curtail “the ability of voters to cast a write-in vote for anyone they wish in the general election,” states Richard Winger, “If this passes, California would be one of only 7 states in which no voter could cast a write-in vote for Congress or state office in a November election, and have that write-in counted.” And Proposition 62 had a provision in it to make it easier for smaller parties to remain ballot qualified , “It it (Prop 14) becomes law, the only way a party will be able to remain on the ballot will be to have registration above 1% of the last gubernatorial vote.”
This is just another attempt by the Republicans and Democrats to maintain power. Writing in dissent of Timmons v. Twin Cities Area New Party (1997) Justice Stevens concluded, “it demeans the strength of the two-party system to assume that the major parties need to rely on laws that discriminate against independent voters and minor parties in order to preserve their positions of power.”
Peg Luksik, 1994 Constitution Party candidate for Governor of Pennsylvania, says, “This is supposed to be a participatory democracy. But they don’t want you to participate.”
We, the independents and members of “minor parties” need to join together to stop these attempts to limit voter choice. We need to Stop Top Two.
In Liberty,
Darryl W. Perry
2016 candidate for President of the United States of America
http://dwp2016.org
At-Large Representative Boston Tea Party National Committee
http://BostonTea.us
Managing Editor Free Patriot Press
http://FreePatriot-Press.com
Trent Hill: ‘Tobin would have none of it and send me a very harsh message telling me to stop commenting on that status immediately because she considered it to be “online defamation” ‘
Don Lake: Our group contacted the organization MONTHS ago. As ‘not as an already’ or instant 100% ‘on board’ type I initially did not gush and or offer to throw my self on the barricades.
I asked sincere questions, like: if this is so important and or terrible why have alternative political activists been touting things like IRV as bright shiny new toys?
Folks are getting real tired of last minute ‘October Surprise’ tactics. (Don’t worry ’bout the details, yet vote like we tell you, trust us!)
Citizens For A Better Veterans Home has sure been frozen out from the beginning. We got to the point where we have voted NO via absentee ballots.
We are not ready to endorse. We are cautioning a NO vote. But we do this with out confidence or enthusiasm.
We are not going to the roof top —– we are in the fetal position in a dark corner. We are not shouting NO. It is a hoarse whisper!
Tobin for November California Secretary of State ????? Once a lock with us; we are now afraid, very afraid!
Leaders, lead. It is part of the job description. A big part!
I had one just yesterday where a long-time friend (we had commented frequently on each others’ posts, so I know he was friended at one point) had been unfriended and I know I didn’t do it (he noticed when I sent a friend request his way).
I’m surprised Facebook works as relatively well as it does. With that many users, there has to be a lot of cross-server refreshing, etc. with opportunities for data loss.
Ive had 2 cases where i was unfriended and the people swear they didnt , must b a glitch
Weird.
Not that I know of. I certainly didn’t de-friend you.
Yeah, the personality conflicts really do get in the way of getting work done. It’s a shame.
But some work is getting done anyway, which is good. Maybe we can beat this thing yet, depending on who shows up to vote.
If not, I have some Plan Bs to present to the California and National LP and some other folks.
Speaking of unfriending people on facebook, didn’t we use to be facebook friends a while ago?
“Trent,
Christina told me you and her had some kind of personal falling out, but she now added me in addition to Ross. Dave Schwab is also listed, but not as an IPR contributor. I’m sure other people here have contributed articles to help stop top two as well, but they’ll have to contact Christina individually.”
Ms. Tobin is showing her leadership skills. By removing IPR and only listing individual contributors, she lessens the argument against Prop 14. She ought to be able to keep work separated from the personal, methinks.
Tobin should have been busy building bridges instead of using her facebook to complain about Ron Paul, Jesse Benton, Kevin Takenaga, Bill Redpath, and others in the LP. Similarly, if she’s going to be involved in politics–she needs to grow thicker skin and learn to take criticism. Her job isn’t to like everyone in the ballot access reform movement, it’s to work with them.
Basically, Ms. Tobin through a hissy fit when I told one of her supporters that she was doing damage to the ballot access reform movement through her ego. She was airing out her grievances against Kevin Takenaga, Bill Redpath, and the National LP on her facebook–saying they disenfranchised her vote and that they didnt truly care about ballot access reform.
I criticized her for these statements. She removed me as a “friend” on facebook. I never got the opportunity to respond to one of the people, apparently a friend of hers, so I messaged him. I told him that I thought her ego was getting in the way of what could be a good organization.
She removed IPR from the StopTopTwo.org page (after just having complained that Kevin Takenaga wasn’t using StopTopTwo in CALP ads) and then send me a message, via facebook, telling me not to contact her again because she didn’t want my “negativity”. A month or so ago, I had similarly criticized her for airing out a grievance against Jesse Benton/Ron Paul–two men who have done quite a lot for ballot access reform. Ms. Tobin was complaining that Ron Paul hadn’t made the $500 donation to Free&Equal that Jesse Benton had promised her–so she was suggesting Benton/Paul had no integrity and that it reflected badly on them. I gentle chided her, at fist, that this was likely a bad tact to take—that Paul/Benton had done a great deal to help ballot access reformers. She, however, was only really concerned about the $500 donation. Paul had, in the last week or so, made a $500 donation to COFOE, Richard Winger’s ballot access group which Tobin is a board member of. I suggested that perhaps they had gotten confused and Paul/Benton had made the donation there–a seemingly innocent mistake and one that seemed plausible considering the situation. Tobin would have none of it and send me a very harsh message telling me to stop commenting on that status immediately because she considered it to be “online defamation” (One wonders what her comments about Benton/Paul were?). I stopped, at her request, despite feeling that Ms. Tobin was being disingenuous about the situation.
Trent,
Christina told me you and her had some kind of personal falling out, but she now added me in addition to Ross. Dave Schwab is also listed, but not as an IPR contributor. I’m sure other people here have contributed articles to help stop top two as well, but they’ll have to contact Christina individually.
That doesn’t really answer the question at all.
Yes, Paulie, IPR was listed at StopTopTwo.org.
Ross Levin, Contributor, Independent Political Report is listed at http://www.stoptoptwo.org.
Didn’t IPR use to be on your list of organizations against prop 14 at http://www.stoptoptwo.org/ ?
Thank you Darryl!
Independent voters need to start registering as candidates with whatever laws exist in order to preserve their right to be candidates. As George Washington pointed out, political parties are self-created societies which assume artificial authority in government.
The way to oppose them is to just push back. An independent candidate does not need to be elected in order to have a good effect on government.
Election reform plan:
* Allocate Electoral Votes to all candidates reaching at least 30,000 votes, both statewide and in a Congressional District
* Immediate Presidential ballot access to the 5 parties with the most votes nationwide
* Immediate U.S. Congress ballot access to any candidate that gets at least 30,000 votes for any race