Are Non-Partisan Local Elections a Positive Thing?

Seriously, internets, I need your help.  Google is failing me on this.  I’m curious as to the history of our nonpartisan local elections in California.  Why are they nonpartisan?  Are they non-partisan in other states?  How often? Do people still believe this is a good thing anymore?  Any and all links or books or info or opinions will be helpful.  This will be an ongoing research project/interest of mine because I seem to be in the minority on this.  Oh, and it seems so obvious to me that, well, I’m right?  If I can say that without losing all of my reader.

I can’t find this source among all the voting rights shenanigans that is happening now in the Carolina’s after the VRA was gutted, but I read or watched a piece about one of the changes a county? in, I think it was South Carolina?…. One of the things they were trying to do was make the local races non-partisan.

The closest I can come to this is this quote:

Ten years ago, Republican lawmakers approved a bill changing the Charleston County School Board elections from nonpartisan to partisan — a move that came after a record number of blacks won election to the board and as Republicans were dominating other elections countywide.

The law didn’t go into effect because the Department of Justice blocked it, saying it would be harder for minority candidates to win seats under partisan elections.

There’s been no talk recently of changing back — and there might not be, particularly now that Democrats are enjoying new success in Charleston County races.

I don’t know if it is what I remember, I think the opposite was the case.  The VRA changes were allowing the Republicans to make the races non-partisan which would have aided their cause (and hurt the African-American voters).

But that is the one data point I have, and it’s obviously fuzzy.  The smart thing to say we all want non-partisan elections, policies should be about issues, not politics.  Which is of course true.  But there is the tiny fact that these decisions are not made in a vacuum.  Here is another data point – Glenn Beck on Common Core.

This is just an example.  Free speech means free speech.  People have the right to say whatever they want, even if it’s crazy.  Thing is, if it’s said with authority and by someone people trust and repeated a bunch then it has purchase in our society.  Right now our society has a bunch of craziness with a bunch of purchase and I do think it is important that we stand against them.  One place to do this is during our elections.  John Fullerton will have some Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh listeners.  These influencers are obviously partisan.  I think their ideas need to be addressed.  That’s were I am coming from.

I realize in promoting putting the partisan back in elections, I am in danger of being characterized as a brown shirt who is always wants decisions to be made along party lines – nothing could be further from the truth.  I just believe, and it may be because Dems have such huge electoral advantage in this county, …but I believe that partisanship is important to allow in local elections.  It open’s of the dialog, imho.  I think the truth is that many people, including myself, don’t have the time to focus on each election so they do vote party line.  I also think that there are some fundamental principles and/or philosophies that will effect the day-to-day administration of whatever local board we are speaking of that do fall on either side of the partisan divide. Not all day-to-day decisions, but many.

So this is my request internets.  Google has kinda failed me on this.  Let me know what your thoughts are and why I’m wrong. (or right)

Is there such a thing as a non-partisan election?  Shouldn’t the dividing line be partisan elections but non-partisan governing/administration?

You report – I decide!  KIDDING!

John Fullerton Is in the (Blogo-sphere) House

I of course join the Eureka Teacher’s Association and the Humboldt Democrats as a proud endorser of Lisa Ollivier.  In fact I put in a little time yesterday (not enough) canvassing my neighborhood for Lisa’s campaign.  It was the first time I had ever done this and was a great experience.  I hope we can start getting more people involved in this first hand, grassroots democracy.  It’s very rewarding.

With that disclosure, I am also a strong believer in public participation.  I think our side (progressives, liberals, Democrats, whatever) has an important message to deliver and we need to do as much as we can to get our message out there.  While I will probably disagree with John Fullerton on a bunch (not all, but a bunch), I DO appreciate his willingness to engage in the local blogs.  I have seen him on Fred’s blog (9/29 post on Eureka School Board) as well as Sohum Parlance.  I recommend you to both, especially his detailed posts on Sohum.

I don’t ding Lisa for not being as involved because a) I’m biased and b) I am very aware that working people (and parents) don’t have the time to be everywhere all the time – but I do hope she will join the fun.  It’s not going to decide the election, but I am a believer that the blogs and digital realm more generally are going to be increasingly important to elections.  Which I consider a great thing over the alternative (television campaign ads).

 

Also, rather than generating a new post for each update, I think I’m going to update this post (here not the comments) with my opinions on the daily opinion page talley for the TS.  I’m going to offer a judgment (as fair as possible) on their coverage of this election.

 

 

More on This Saturday’s Human Right’s Commission Meeting

Janelle Eggerd has been busy.  Today she has a “My Word” published in the TS explaining why it is important to show up this Saturday.  In short, it’s about supporting our 1st Amendment rights and ensuring that the county returns to the pre-emergency ordinance guidelines (ie before Occupy Eureka).  Democracy and free speech is not always pretty, but it’s fundamental to who we are as Americans.  I don’t know if this is related, but I’m concerned that I see more corporations and private interests out on what remains of public space in our commercial and business areas.  (ie Round Table and Check Cashing on our public sidewalks)

Let’s cling tight to what remains of our right to protest.  Democrats and Tea Partiers and libertarians and even Republicans should all be united on this.  I hope we are.

Here is a quote from Janelle’s piece…

 To protect our rights we need a more rigorous process before laws enact restrictions on free speech and peaceful assemblies. Until there’s an opportunity for a public discussion of such a process, at least their recommendation to remove codes enacted by the “urgency ordinance” should be acted on to protect future unpopular individuals or groups.

Here is a link to the previous dHF! post with the who, what, why and where.

Also in today’s Times-Standard opinion page news …  There are side-by-side letters to the editor for both candidates in the Eureka School Board election;  one for John Fullerton and one for Lisa Ollivier.  I know one of the authors, Bob Service, new Chair of the Humboldt Democrats.  I’m really glad that the TS has given an opportunity to present each candidate this space, but the pieces were not particularly informational in the sense I wasn’t given a great reason why to vote for one or the other candidate. (Bob’s piece was great for 250 words, but what can you do with 250 words?)

That’s kinda why I started this blog.  I want the conversation to be less formal, more conversational, and above all little more in depth.  I have emails in to both campaigns to see if they would be interested in having a thread of their own here.  I am very concerned about what havoc trolls could wreak, but we’ll see .. a) if the candidates can be coaxed into the blogo-sphere and b) if we can get the trolls to behave.

Also… don’t forget to show up on Saturday if you believe in protecting the 1st Amendment and are able to.

Public v Private: The Affordable Care Act

Two landmarks in politics happen today – one from each governing philosophy.  I’m actually not sure if it’s a coincidence or not that they both happen on the same day.  On the one hand the Affordable Care Act’s health insurance marketplace opens today.  On the other hand the government is shut down, again.

In the end, after all the hot air and legalese, this is about one thing.  Should government be empowered to act in society?  The Right might frame the question like this, does government have the constitutional right to act in society?

What’s happening today, on both fronts the ACA and the impasse between the House and Executive is ultimately about this question, should government be empowered to act on universal health care?

Democrats say yes, Republicans say no.  The current debate on a national health care plan goes back to the early 1990’s*.  At the time the Right deemed the Left’s attempts to solve our national disgrace Hillarycare today it’s Obamacare.  Back in the 1990’s in response to Hillarycare the Right got behind The Heritage Foundation’s plan which actually is the heart of Obama Care today.  So in a real sense the Right has won this argument, at least so far.

Of course you will never, ever hear them say that.  To jibe with their narrative where the Democrats have rammed the ACA through the process in a strictly partisan manner, they have to completely forgotten that a) the framework for this plan started as their approach to a public response to our national health care crises and b) that the first largely successful and popular experiment with this approach in Massachusetts was passed with a Republican Governor, one who was the Republican’s standard bearer during the last election, btw.

In order to win his party’s nomination, Mitt Romney had to run as far away from his plan as possible.  Ultimately the conflict over the ACA is not about the ACA itself, it’s about how far right the Republicans have shifted.  The ideology that the free market will solve all problems is as much a crazy Utopian dream as the far left’s defunct dreams of a purely socialist state.  Unfortunately the right wing/libertarian free-market fantasy is an ideology that wins hearts, minds and votes because it has an unbelievable amount of money behind it.  With that money the ideology can buy a narrative that turns truth on it’s head.

It’s a narrative you are going to hear a great deal about until this impasse is over.  You can hear it anytime you like before or after the government reopens and the ACA is up and running on Rush, Glenn or Fox.  Please don’t buy it.  In the end it’s a lie – a golden lie that is making a lot of people a lot of money all the while destroying the fabric of our country.

And, btw, it was fun to take the Right’s challenge to call the ACA Obamacare.  Well, we won the last election largely on Obamacare despite the Right’s attempt to tarnish the ACA by attaching the President’s name to it.  We  owned it for the election, now it’s time to call it by it’s proper name.  It’s not the Democrat’s law or Obama’s law.  Despite the Right’s tantrum, it’s the law of the land and we will be better for it.

Related articles

• Bernie Sanders: Obamacare is a ‘good Republican program’ (politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com)
• GOP lawmakers bridle at calling Affordable Care Act the law (thehill.com)
• ObamaCare: The Latest and Greatest Bastardization of the Constitution (americanthinker.com)
• ObamaCare and the “let it burn” theory of socialist collapse (humanevents.com)

Blog note:  the articles above are a selection I made from several offered by WordPress for each post based on the text of what I have written.  I don’t get a thorough preview, but often I’ll choose articles that look good and come from different perspectives.  It’s fun and easy and interesting to see how effective text-based searches can be.