Categories
Accountability ballot access folly ideological culture nannyism national politics & policies

The Anti-​Democratic Party Establishment

Democrats aren’t very good at democracy.

Consider the party’s presidential contest, as I did yesterday at Townhall.

As an appetizer, I noted the Democratic National Committee policy of hiding their debates from viewers by placing them on weekend evenings pitted against major sporting events.

For meat and potatoes, ponder my warning of the very ugly scenario of Sen. Bernie Sanders capturing as much as 58 percent of the primary and caucus vote and resulting delegates, but still losing to Hillary Clinton.

How could that possibly happen?

Because of folks designated as “superdelegates” — those awarded voting delegate status for holding a party office or being an elected or former elected official.

Democrats brag that they’ve reduced these insiders’ impact. Democratically-​unaccountable superdelegates once accounted for 30 percent of Democratic Party convention delegates; now it’s only 15 percent of the total. Still, Clinton leads Sanders 380 to eleven among superdelegates.

At that rate, she could lose the actual state elections and still win the party’s presidential nomination.

The Democrats’ dereliction of democratic duty doesn’t end there, either.

The process by which various powerful party “interests” endorsed either Sanders or Clinton is quite telling. Journalist Zaid Jilani reports in The Intercept that, “Every major union or progressive organization that let its members have a vote endorsed Bernie Sanders.”

“Meanwhile,” Jilani found, “all of Hillary Clinton’s major group endorsements come from organizations where the leaders decide. And several of those endorsements were accompanied by criticisms from members about the lack of a democratic process.”

Seems the insiders have decided Mrs. Clinton will be on the Democratic Party presidential menu, whether Democrats like it or not.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


Printable PDF

superdelegates, democracy, democrats, Sanders, Clinton, voting,

 

Categories
folly general freedom ideological culture term limits

Congo Prez Prizes Service

Congo-Brazzaville’s president, Denis Sassou Nguesso, is quite the statesman.

He’s actually done what many an illustrious American pol with an obsession about “campaign finance” would merely like to do, but cannot (that darn First Amendment!): prohibited all talk about politics prior to the next election.

Indeed, the government has shut down the Internet and cellular SMS services, simply to prevent undue influence prior to the upcoming votes. Democracy requires a veil of ignorance, we’re told, and Nguesso’s taken that august philosophical scheme to its logical conclusion: no information running through the information superhighway of the modern age … at gunpoint.

And like many a long-​term American insider, he’s balking at term limits, too. He has served his legally limited two terms. So he and his fellow statesmen put a referendum onto the upcoming ballot to overthrow them.

Just so he can serve longer.

Think of the sacrifice! He really must be looking out for his earnest and ardent supporters.

But he didn’t stop there. To fulfill his mandate, and continue in office, he has to entreat the people to overturn Congo’s mandated retirement age. At 71, he’s now too old to legally run, even if he were a first-termer.

Trifecta! — a pol so insistent at continuing his life of never-​ending public service that he fights against ageism, term limits, and the corrupting influence of free speech!

I’m sure he has many, many secret sympathizers in our Congress, and in the legislatures of our several states.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


Printable PDF

Congo-Brazzaville’s president, Denis Sassou Nguesso, Nguesso, Africa, democracy, voting, elections, collage, photomontage, illustration, JimGill, Paul Jacob, Common Sense

 

Categories
Accountability term limits

A New Tammany?

“We’ve been there and done that and voted not to do it,” St. Tammany Parish Council Chairman Richard Tanner explained last week. “I don’t know why we’d do it again.”

There’s a lot Tanner doesn’t know.

Like that his job is representing the people. You see, Tanner wasn’t one of the three members of the 14-​member council who favored a public vote on enacting term limits.

“What are the other 11 worried will happen?” asked a New Orleans Times-​Picayune editorial. “They must be afraid that voters will like the idea. What reason other than self-​preservation could they have for refusing to even put the question on the ballot?”

According to a 2014 poll commissioned by Concerned Citizens of St. Tammany, a group that has long urged the council to put a term limits measure on the ballot, just a mere 92 percent of residents favor term limits.

The Home Rule Charter Committee and the St. Tammany West Chamber of Commerce have also implored the parish council to permit a democratic vote.

“Our members believe firmly that voters should be allowed their constitutional right to vote on this issue, rather than have this right outright denied,” read the Chamber’s resolution.

The old Tammany Hall political machine that once ruled New York City was corrupt. Criminally so. No one has suggested criminal wrongdoing by the gang running St. Tammany Parish.

No, theirs is an intellectual corruption, an embracing of power and self-​interest and a rejection of republican and democratic principles.

Either form of corruption makes a strong case for term limits.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


Printable PDF

Louisiana Term Limits

 

Categories
ballot access First Amendment rights initiative, referendum, and recall

Feeling Sorry for Oklahoma?

I’m beginning to feel sorry for Oklahoma.

That may seem a little strange to regular readers. They know that Oklahoma Attorney General Drew Edmondson is prosecuting me, along with two other activists, for work on a 2005 petition drive to cap state spending. He’s trying to throw us in prison for ten years.

This legal assault is “unjust” and “politically-​motivated.” Those words aren’t mine: An Oklahoma City University law professor argued that this prosecution is “unjust,” and a state senator charged the AG’s actions are “politically-​motivated.”

Since Edmondson began his chilling attack on the right to petition one’s government, poor Oklahoma has been compared to some horribly tyrannical regimes. An editorial in Forbes asked, “Has Oklahoma Been Annexed by North Korea?” A Wall Street Journal editorial connected the Sooner State to the kind of repression practiced in Pakistan.

And now, columnist Paul Mulshine with the New Jersey Star Ledger condemns Edmondson, saying Russia’s Vladimir Putin “could learn a thing or two from the Oklahoma boys.”

But wait a second. There are great people in Oklahoma. They don’t support this outrageous abuse of power.

As those of us threatened in Oklahoma finally have our preliminary hearing, I’m confident that this vicious attack has awoken Oklahomans … and Americans. Eyes wide open, Americans in Oklahoma and elsewhere will fight to protect the initiative process.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.