No Affiliation Alliance

The Thirteen Points of Why Independents Have the Right to Vote in the 2018 Primary Elections. pt 3

Each week we have researched and brought to you more information revealed by our research which includes some of the feedback we have engaged on our blog at www.Facebook.com/VotersrightsinPa/

So let’s get a few facts straight which is often part of the debate on whether independent candidates have the right by law to run off in the primary election rather than to be subordinated to obscurity by barrier laws created and enforced by the Board of elections to protect the two party system.

Point one; No-Affiliation. Unaffiliated and all voters that leave their voter designation blank on their voter registration are not members of a third Party. We are by the Board of Elections criteria recognized as members of the democrat and republican parties. We are more than one million voters in the state Pennsylvania that have been denied our constituted right to participate in the Primary selection of our representatives.

Point two; The May 16 Primary election is the perfect example of why these barrier laws must be challenged and as I pointed out on earlier shows the May 16 primary listed independent candidates on the ballot and No-affiliation and other undesignated members of the democrat and republican parties were denied our right to vote in an election casting independent candidates. Any candidate that runs without a party designation is officially by the Board of Elections definition an independent.

Point three; The Primary elections that we currently use did not become a national event until the 1970’s with the 1968 conventions being the transgression point from the closed primary where only the electors participated – chose the representatives and then ran off in the general election. Since we have modified the election process to full use of a popular vote system the parties began to grow in strength to the point that the two parties have merged into one party with two absolutes – the democrat party is for big government and the Republican Party is about big corporations. Most independents have come to realized we fit into neither party agenda and have withdrew our support and many more would withdraw but stay attached only because they feel that to have some participation is better than none at all.

Point four; there are no laws – Not constitutional, federal or state that require a voter or candidate to belong to a party to run or vote in a primary or general election. The only obstruction there is is an operational statute being enforced by the Board of Elections that requires independent candidates to wait until after the primary election to file their qualification papers. Filing these papers is merely to certify that a candidate meets the age, resident and citizenship requirements set by the state for that office.

Point five; the states are limited to making laws that regard the election process to age, residence and citizenship by the 14th Amendment. This barrier law that excludes independents from participating in the primary election to select independent candidates goes beyond the state’s ability allowed by the constitution.

Point six; The 1965 voter’s rights act makes intellectual discrimination a violation of federal law. This barrier law is not enforceable.

Point seven; Any number of independent candidates can run in the general election – it causes no confusion but instead has become a device used by the two parties to divide votes and siphon votes off from one candidate to get another elected. For instance there were groups circulating nomination papers to get as many independents on the general election ballot as they could for the purpose of dividing the vote or reducing another candidates chance to win. It may not be exactly election fraud but has the same effect as stuffing the ballot box and by allowing independent candidates to run off in the primary election will reduce the ballot to one democrat – one republican – one independent. So where is the counter argument that by allowing independents to run off in the primary election will disrupt the primary?

Point eight; The primary election purpose is to reduce the number of candidates that will run in the November election. Independents to run off in the primary election coincides with this goal – there must be another reason the two major parties are opposing independents to run off in the primary.

Point nine; the primary election is not a private election reserved to the two major parties. It is paid for by the state and federal grant. The primary election is a public event and all citizens have the right to participate. The barrier laws excluding independents are an obstruction to the fundamental rights of all voters. The primary election is the appropriate time for the voters to hear all candidate platforms. The primary is a high point for media circulation. It is a time for debates between candidates – democrats with democrats – independents with independents – and republicans with other republicans. The theory of a free for all is just a fear tactic by the two parties that fear a strong independent candidate would derail their agenda.

Point ten; There is no requirement by the constitution, federal or state that there needs to be a minimal amount of registered voters to support an independent in a primary. There is no law that requires a candidate to be a party member. Private organizations can invite independent candidates as well as republican and democrat candidates to deliver their platforms and debate issues. Independents are not demanding that independents have access to compete in the party’s conventions but independents do have the right to participate in public debate and the voters – to include the voters of the two major parties – have the need and the right to know what all the candidates represent.

Point eleven; The primary prelude of getting to know the candidates running for office is a crucial part of candidate selection. Republican and democrat candidates have six months prior to the primary and six months after the primary to develop and promote their platforms where the independent has 40 days prior to the general election to reach as many groups and media and after the primaries the media has no interest in wasting space in their newspaper on candidates that likely have no chance to win. To have a chance to win a candidate must have the time to secure support both financially and among the voters. From August until October people are involved in vacations and returning children to school and most have already made up their minds on who they will vote for.

Point twelve; The two parties are beginning to buckle to the pressure to allow independents the right to participate in the primary election. An authority they never had in the first place. The exclusion of the independent voter and candidate in the primary election is built upon party dogma that developed since the 1970’s; that you have to belong to a party to run or voters need to designate a party to vote in a publicly funded primary election. More than 38 states have developed open elections but these open elections are nothing less than a fancy over coat to divert dealing with the real issue; that independents voters are not allowed to vote in the primary because their candidates are being excluded from running in the primary by a barrier law that defies constitutional and federal law.

Point thirteen; The constitutional amendments that states are ratifying that institute the premise of allowing independents to vote in the primary are voluntary. It was determined by the Supreme Court that the parties have a right to assemble under the First Amendment and it is the right of the party to choose who they will allow to vote in their primary and who they will not.

To me this just aggravates the problem by suggesting that the parties actually do have an authority to decide who can and who will not vote. It may be the right of the parties to use closed conventions to elect their representative but so is it the First Amendment right of independents to assemble as individuals in a primary. Under the current system of primary – Independents can run hap hazard in the general election – then why is it so opposed that independents want to organize as individuals in the primary? This isn’t an outrageous or even radical approach. It gives our election process more conformity. It gives the voter more selection. It gives the voter more time to evaluate independent candidates. It gives independent candidate more access to public venue to include meeting with group, organizations and building a foundation of support – The question is ; is the election process about the party gaining power or the voter selecting the best representation?

Filed Under: No Affiliation Alliance Voter News

Tags:

RSSComments (0)

Trackback URL

Comments are closed.