Tag: candidates

Categories
Local politics State

Strengthening Our Caucus System

Caucus meeting
Image by Cherie Priest

I really appreciated Paul Mero’s take on efforts to change our caucus and convention system. Unlike Mr. Mero, I’m not well enough connected to be invited to take part in private meetings regarding how to change Utah’s caucus and convention system. On that particular issue that is the largest of our differences.

Like Mr. Mero I have been annoyed at the misinformation that I have seen spread by and among delegates with extreme positions on a number of issues – HB 166 among them. Like Mr. Mero, I have tried to pay attention to the efforts to change the caucus/convention system but I have not found those proposed changes to warrant any particular support from me. The core of where my views align with those expressed by Mr. Mero are summed up in the following quote:

Yes, I’m sure some delegates have stated that they don’t want increased participation in the political process. But, to be fair, most of those voices are more concerned about how blissfully ignorant most Utahns are about the world around them than those voices are about consuming political power. So, yes, these delegates do believe they are better informed and for good reason – most of them are! Not all of them have the right answers, for sure. But it’s a bit disingenuous of my friend to chastise any serious citizen for wanting her candidate to be elected or her policy to become law – for heaven’s sake, that’s exactly what everyone wants!…

If reformers want their candidates elected to office, they should make a case that appeals to the most responsible citizens who take time to engage in a democratic process that has served this state since its founding.

Continue reading “Strengthening Our Caucus System”
Categories
politics technology

Have Your Say

At the blogger briefing this morning with Mark Shurtleff I was reminded of why I believe that every public official ought to have a blog of some sort. Mark started by talking about how important he things that transparency in government is and how he has used his time in office to try to make more information available to citizens and help citizens work with their government – specifically with law enforcement (he is the AG after all).

Later, the discussion began to focus on blogs and media and I realized that running a blog as an elected official amounts to a certain degree of personal transparency. It indicates a willingness to put yourself out there on record where others can challenge you through comments and other responses. It also provides original source information about your positions where you can explain yourself without a media filter. This can prove very beneficial to any honest public official because anyone who is taking the time to look will be able to see how well you do at sticking to principles or how thoughtful you are in correcting a mistaken opinion as you gain more information.

For those who would say anything to get elected, that inconsistency would become apparent quickly when they blatantly ignore the positions they espoused on the campaign trail or else offer up lame excuses for changing their positions.

Of course blogging politicians will not solve all our problems, and those who do blog are not all perfect, but that willingness to leave a lasting trail and be held accountable is definitely suggestive of a good candidate and a good public servant.

Categories
National politics State

A Timely Request

Kip, at the Wide Middle, invites others to share Questions for the Candidates. This comes the very day that I have a question that I would ask any congressional candidate.

What part, or parts of the Change Congress movement would you pledge to support (if any). The four principles of the movement are that:

  1. Candidates and congressmen should accept no money from lobbyists or PACs
  2. Congress should vote to end earmarks
  3. Candidates should agree to run publicly-financed campaigns
  4. Congress should support reform to increase Congressional transparency

Candidates and citizens can pledge to support any combination of the above principles and citizens should hold candidates responsible for their campaign promises (this pledge and others).

Categories
culture politics

Four Good Criteria

I’m always looking to quantify what makes a candidate acceptable or not. Thus I was drawn to four criteria that Scott suggested we should seek in candidates we would support. They should be Honest, Good, Wise, and Constitutional. Scott does a good job of expanding on each of the criteria, but this qualifier should guide all our political decisions:

All of the criteria we are called upon to apply to candidates is highly subjective and/or runs on a sliding scale. It requires a fair amount of personal effort to find out about each candidate and determine how well each measures up to the criteria. We should avoid a knee-jerk reaction to any candidate.

As I have been thinking about these criteria the idea came to me that we might be well served to apply the same criteria to the laws we sometimes vote on. Doubtless there is plenty of disagreement on whether vouchers are honest, good, wise, or constitutional. Different people will come down to different conclusions on each criteria, but it might elevate the debate if we would focus on those fundamental qualities rather than stooping to political maneuvering and scare tactics.

As citizens we do not directly vote on most of the laws that are made, but if we are able to choose representatives with these four characteristics, and then those public servants were to evaluate the laws they are called to vote on by applying those criteria we would be more likely to get laws that are in the best interests of the people and not merely the best interests of a special interest group, or a lobbyist, or the candidates hopes for reelection.

Categories
culture politics

Someone to Believe In

After talking about my opposition to Rudy Giuliani and the dangers of the “select someone electable” mentality I thought it would be a nice change to talk about the kind of candidate that I would like to back. My example is Sarah Palin, the Governor of Alaska, who I recently learned about. Much of the discussion about cleaning up national politics comes in the form of the need for an outsider or a newcomer. Condidates in both parties like to lay claim to being an agent for change. One of the tough aspects of political office is that the outsider who gets elected often becomes an insider very quickly. Governor Palin is a refreshing exception to this trend. Before her election she gained a reputation as a whistleblower against insider political activities. After a year of being governor she shows no signs of resting in her efforts.

This week, it was Palin who singlehandedly killed the leading symbol of Republican spending excess in Washington: the Bridge to Nowhere.

The Bridge to Nowhere was actually a state project, to be built with funds earmarked by the state’s powerful Congressman Don Young. Last week, Palin killed the $398 million bridge to Gravina Island (pop. 50), directing that the money be spent on more “fiscally responsible” projects.

In a small state that generally votes Republican, the divide between Alaska’s Republican elected officials could not be more clear. Palin was elected as a whistleblower, and routinely rails against the state’s transactional Republican establishment. Don Young has screamed “It’s my money!” when conservative lawmakers challenge his pet projects and blamed the Republican loss of Congress on conservatives who want to cut spending. And Senator Ted Stevens’ record as a porker is rivaled only by the patron saint of the West Virginia highway system.

With Palin now in office for the better part of a year, we have some data points to evaluate whose brand of politics works better. A poll out last month put Palin’s approval rating at 84%, and Fred Barnes has noted that she probably America’s most popular elected official in any party.

One of the things that makes newcomers become insiders is the perception that you have to join the system to get things done, and that you have to bring home the pork to get re-elected. Real change can only come about when we start electing people who are more interested in doing the right thing than they are in retaining their seat.

For voters, we have to vote consistent with our conscience even at the cost of losing the election. If the majority of the country disagrees with me then I have to accept that. I don’t do any favors by voting for someone who can win if they are not the kind of person that I would like to see in office. The political image of this country is taken from the reflection we cast in the voting booths. If we intentionally distort the reflection we can’t know the real character of the country – all we can see is that it is grotesque, like the monsters we see in fun-house mirrors.

Categories
National politics

Power Struggle

This is nothing new in politics (power struggles in general or this one in particular) but it is starting to get more press coverage – the question is, “Who controls the nomination process – the states, or the parties?” The struggle is most public among the Democrats as their candidates have now promised to honor the Party primary calendar. The Republicans are dealing with the very same issue but without the same level of publicity. The struggle between the parties and the states seems to be a direct result of a struggle among the states to gain influence in the candidate selection process. I am left to wonder how the traditional set of early states was initially established? Was that set by the parties, or by the respective states? (Can anyone enlighten me on that?)

In my mind the parties should not control the process. On the other hand, they are choosing representatives for their respective parties so they should have control of how those representatives are chosen. I believe that experience had led the parties to value a process where they largely mimic each other through the primary cycle. (I’m not sure exactly why that is although I have a few guesses) While I believe that states should be able to choose how and when they participate in the primary selection process I’m not convinced that voters win when the primary season is pushed so far in advance of the general election. Imagine if the candidates for the election of 2000 were chosen in mid 1997 and then had 9/11 occur in mid 1998. We could find that the candidates we had chosen were ill suited to our new reality. (I know that’s an extreme example – almost too ridiculous to comprehend, but you can’t miss my point) There’s always a certain amount of risk that changes will occur between the primary selection and the final vote, but the earlier we push the primaries the greater that risk becomes.

What do other people think? Who should control the primary schedule? What would the ideal schedule look like (in general terms)? Is the current reshuffling power-struggle good, bad, or neutral for voters and the country?

Categories
Local politics

Going Public

Rather than waiting for everything to fall in place first, I went ahead today and set up Utah-Candidates.com. That was the site I was inviting candidates to participate in. The invitation still stands, but I purchased the domain. If candidates and citizens are interested I will keep the domain and use it in the various elections each year. Right now it only includes the candidates for Lehi City Council but I have sent invitations to a number of cities in the area and will continue to invite candidates and cities to participate (so long as it’s manageable).

I hope this proves to be a useful resource for our elections – especially the smaller ones, like city and county positions, where candidates are on smaller budgets and where the resulting officials are closer to their constituents.

Categories
life Local politics technology

Open Invitation

As I was researching the candidates for Lehi City Council this year I found a site that had information on most of the candidates. The site was run by one of the candidates and some of the other candidates chose not to participate because of that. I thought it would be beneficial to create a site that would provide a neutral place to learn show candidate profiles (provided by the candidates) and links to their websites. This would help prevent the mental runaround:

“Was it yes2george.com or vote4george.com or am I mixing up the sites for George Perkins and Mike George? Nevermind, I’ll stick with the flyers.

I have created a basic website but I’d like to know how much interest there is for this. If you are a candidate, or know one, who would be interested in having a profile on such a site let me know in the comments. I would also be interested to know if other people would want this as a resource for information. What I do with this will depend on the level of interest generated. (I do not expect enough interest to try charging for the service – ever)

Categories
life Local politics State

Active Citizenship

When I think of ways that people can be active citizens in their political community the easiest action to consider is running for office. I know there are other ways to participate, but that’s the most prominent that I can think of. I was pleased today to see another great example of active citizenship. Pete Ashdown posted a letter to mayoral candidates by Tony Weller. Tony expresses his concerns and asks for feedback from the candidates in order to make an informed choice when he votes for his new mayor. He even invites the candidates to explain why they disagree with him when their position differs from his. For Tony, the key issues are related to local businesses and the vitality of downtown Salt Lake. I think any reasonable person who read the letter would have to concede that it is well thought out and respectful, just like political dialog ought to be.

The results of this kind of effort can be very rewarding. I am interested in the transportation situation currently and as Lehi continues to grow. That interest caused me to contact one of our candidates for city council to ask her for her perspective on that issue. She subsequently arranged to meet with me to discuss the issue. I’ll have to wait until the meeting to know how her position compares to mine, but because I took the time to ask I will not be voting blindly on this issue. That being said, I am starting to think that I might get even more information by querying all the candidates generally, such as Tony Weller did, rather than relying on meeting as many candidates as possible.

Categories
politics

Caught Up

The 9th snuck up on me this month, but I consider myself to be caught up on candidate endorsements. Admittedly I did not do an endorsement for Fred Thompson, although I had him on my list. I consider myself caught up because Fred has not formally announced his candidacy and there’s an outside chance that he will not choose to run. I have been watching closely and he is very interested in running, but unless he is holding several aces up his sleeve he is not ready to run a presidential campaign yet.

As I indicated last month, I will be writing a post to clarify all the endorsements I have made. I will list who I think are the best candidates and why. I will discuss my perspective on what our nation needs in 2008 and how that differs from the current political rhetoric. I will also be seeking feedback on that post from any of my readers so that I can refine my thinking.

As we draw closer to the election season (primaries included) one of the things we most need is informed discussion from mainstream Americans which can hopefully influence parties and override the extreme viewpoints that often dominate party primaries. This informed discussion might also have the power to generate more participation from the electorate as people choose to vote who otherwise might feel unprepared to make an informed decision at the ballot.