|
|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
Let's pull out all the stops |
Current rating: 0 |
by An Urbana Voter
(No verified email address) |
22 Feb 2005
|
|
Don't put constraints on voters. |
|
If voters are going to be challenged today when they vote, why not institute other restraints as well? How about instituting the poll tax and the literacy test as well? Yes, at one time those were legal, but did it make it right? Restricting voters from who they can vote for in a primary sounds just as ridiculous as the above mentioned constraints. If people can sign a green party's petition and then request a Democratic primary ballot, then someone who wants one Republican to win one office can also support other Democrats. If Prussing wins because she restricted who could vote- then it isn't a true win, but a stolen election and she is no better than Bush's supporters who prevented students and blacks from voting in Ohio in the last election. |
This work is in the public domain |
Comments
|
No Green Primary |
by Dose of Reality
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 Feb 2005
|
While an interesting theory, the law that prevents those who signed petitions for candidates running as Republicans from voting in the Democratic primary will not apply to Green voters -- whoever they choose to vote for. AFAIK, no Green candidates circulated petitions for this election cycle, so there is no similar Green list of illegal cross-over voters like there is of Republicans.
BTW, a principled complaint against Illinois' arcane voting laws would include a call for instant run-off voting (IRV) and other proportional representation ideas. Trying to blame one side or the other that is taking advanatage of the way things are is cyncial without a call for substantive changes in the law, as the News-Gazette has done in its coverage of this issue in the last few days. Illinois law is meant to enshrine just two parties -- Dems and Reps -- while leaving much of the rest of the population with no electoral alternatives. |
|
Let's Vote! Remember, Urbana's Future Depends on It |
by just another voter
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 Feb 2005
|
I just got the call from Tod -- he was reminding me about how much today's vote matters to Urbana. For once, Tod is right. The future of Urbana does depend on our votes, which is why I'll be casting my vote this morning for Laurel Prussing.
But I didn't really need Tod's call this morning for that. The last twelve years of Tod in office are all the reminder I needed. |
|
Re: Let's pull out all the stops |
by Just got a call from Prussing campaign
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 Feb 2005
|
|
..I just said no way. I am voting for Tod. |
|
Greens say yes to electoral reform |
by Joe Futrelle
futrelle (nospam) shout.net (verified) |
Current rating: 0
22 Feb 2005
|
> BTW, a principled complaint against Illinois' arcane voting laws would include a call for instant run-off voting (IRV) and other proportional representation ideas.
Bingo. |
|
Re: Let's pull out all the stops |
by Tod Supporter
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 Feb 2005
|
|
I just voted for Tod. See you, Laurel, in next 4 years for another office run (she is a perpetual loser) |
|
Re: Let's pull out all the stops |
by rporter
rporter (nospam) newtonbigelow.com (verified) |
Current rating: 0
22 Feb 2005
|
By "vote often", I'm sure hizzoner means "vote in all your your local, state, and national elections", not "go out and commit election fraud".
[edit] This would make more sense if the comment I was responding to still existed. |
|
Re: Let's pull out all the stops |
by gehrig
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 Feb 2005
|
UV: " If voters are going to be challenged today when they vote, why not institute other restraints as well?"
If you want to change the current law, feel free. But if what you're saying is that the current law should be ignored because you don't like it -- well, okay, as long as everyone else also gets to pick a law to ignore.
@%< |
|
Re: Let's pull out all the stops |
by Urbana Voter
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 Feb 2005
|
|
Gehrig- some people complain about some laws, but weasle out when the law applies to them. Don't you think there were some people who signed Green Party petitions in previous elections but then they voted as a Democrat in a primary? People no longer have to declare their party when they register to vote. Just because they choose to select one primary ballot does not mean that they are full-fledged member sof that party- What about Independents? Can they sign different candidates' petitions or do they have to be either Republican or a Democrat- How do Independents have to operate- what is the law about them?????? |
|
Re: Let's pull out all the stops |
by gehrig
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 Feb 2005
|
The law doesn't care about previous elections. The law specifies that you can't sign a petition for a candidate in one party (or an independent) and then vote in the primary of another. The Greens don't enter into this, as has been pointed out repeatedly here, because they didn't run anybody for this election cycle.
Whether or not it's a stupid law, it is the law, and Tod is suggesting pretty plainly that in this case election law should be ignored.
@%< |
|
Re: Let's pull out all the stops |
by Call Me Dense
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 Feb 2005
|
|
I just want to know why Greens weren't held accountable in previous elections and previous petitions? Regardless of THIS election, why wasn't this law an issue before this election????? I know I have signed petitions of one party and voted for another party- before-- oops I guess Kerry got one less vote. |
|
Re: Let's pull out all the stops |
by Only in Urbana
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 Feb 2005
|
...will you find Republicans fighting for the right to vote in the Democratic primary...against the Greens.
All that being said, for perhaps the first time ever, I find myself agreeing with Dose of Reality on one thing: the partisan primary system, especially at the local level, is an affront to democracy. In a mayoral election where we'll be lucky to have 5,000 people vote, and in ward elections where we're lucky to have 500 people vote, the partisan system adds zero value and in fact considerably impairs the right of the citizenry to elect the most qualified candidates. I know how you folks feel about at-large voting, but I think a nonpartisan system based on an instant-runoff system or some other way that two qualified candidates from the same ward could still be elected, yet minority or limited-issue coalitions could still influence the process and elect candidates, is far preferable to the party- and ward-based throwback system we have now.
(Waiting to see if I'm branded a "troll".) |
|
Re: Let's pull out all the stops |
by Urbana Voter
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 Feb 2005
|
|
You're not a troll- you just have an opinion that is different (god forbid)-- Some wards have more than 500 votes000 some have 3 times as many.--yet some only have a couple hundred. |
|
Re: Let's pull out all the stops |
by gehrig
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 Feb 2005
|
"Only in Urbana will you find Republicans fighting for the right to vote in the Democratic primary...against the Greens."
It's a funny little planet, but I call it home.
@%< |
|
Greens support increased ballot access |
by Joe Futrelle
futrelle (nospam) shout.net (verified) |
Current rating: 0
22 Feb 2005
|
> ...will you find Republicans fighting for the right to vote in the Democratic primary...against the Greens.
The Greens are very much open to the possibility of non-partisan elections, although the most critical reform we want is ranked voting. We're not fighting Republicans on this issue. We obviously don't advocate that anyone violate election law, but we would very much like to see any reform that lowers the barrier for getting on the ballot--and that almost certainly means doing away with laws that unnecessarily restrict who can sign what petition.
Any Republicans who want to help the Greens advocate for these kind of reforms are more than welcome to. |
|
Re: Let's pull out all the stops |
by Voted Early
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 Feb 2005
|
Apparently this is a relatively new law. It'll be used against Greens and progressive Democrats in future elections, especially since progressive Dems used it against Republicans in the mayoral election. It seems designed to disenfranchise third-party voters and is just plain lousy.
How many Greens in Urbana have signed Democratic petitions (for Danielle Chyoweth, for example) and how many progressive Dems have signed Green petitions over the past few years? This new law will be used against them in future primaries now that the Prussing campaign has pointed the way.
Partisan primaries are bad enough; this makes it worse.
Maybe Urbana should consider non-partisan city council elections, like Champaign. We already have non-partisan school board elections here in Urbana. |
|
Not A New Law |
by just another voter
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
22 Feb 2005
|
No, the relevant Illinois law is nothing new. It's just usually not the case where violations of the law would lead to a different result.
Given the mayor's open appeal to Republican voters to crossover to vote in a Democratic primary, the Republicans using a startegy that forced a Republican candidate off the ballot to facilitatae Tod using this strategy, and the fact that themayoral election will only be close if a number of Repubilcans show up to vote for Tod (he's not a reall Democrat anymore than Zell Miller is), then it should be no surprise that Prussing's poll watchers were watching for illegal voters.
As for non-partisan elections, they are only meant to fool unattentive voters. Everyone pretty much knows who the Republicans and Democrats are -- and now even the Greens -- in such elections. "Non-partisan" is nothing except deceptive advertising. That's the candidate's responsibility.
;>) |
|
Re: Let's pull out all the stops |
by Zach
zach (nospam) chambana.net (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
23 Feb 2005
|
There has never been a case in Champaign County where Green Party petition signers could not vote in the Democratic Primary because the Green Party has not had established party status for any elections in Champaign County. The Green Party does not exist as a party for the purposes of the primary election process.
The laws governing "new parties" like the Greens and "established parties" like the Dems and Republicans (and occasionally the libertarians) are completely different. It's different parts of Illinois' Byzantine election code.
The Greens are now an established party for the county board race in 2006 for Districts 7, 8, and 9. The law that prevents Republican petition signers from voting in the Democratic primary will (if upheld) also prevent people who sign a petition to get Greens on the ballot in 2006 from voting in the Democratic or Republican primaries for those county board seats (but they can receieve a Green Primary ballot with Greens for the county board seats but either Democrats or Republicans for the other seats since the Greens aren't an established party for those other seats). |
|
Re: Let's pull out all the stops |
by Zach
zach (nospam) chambana.net (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
23 Feb 2005
|
I'm sorry let me clarify something from my previous comment. People who sign petitions to get Greens on the ballot FOR COUNTY BOARD DISTRICTS 7,8, or 9 in 2006 will not be allowed to vote in the Democratic or Republican primaries for those county board districts. That is because the county board ballot access petitions for those county board seats will be governed under the Established Party laws.
Greens who sign petitions in 2006 for a gubernatorial or federal or state representative office will be signing petitions that are governed under the New Party laws and should be able to vote in the Democratic or Republican primary if they choose just as they have been able to for the past 5 years. |
|
Re: Let's pull out all the stops |
by voter
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
23 Feb 2005
|
|
zach- sounds like you can have your cake and eat it, too. Interesting how the rules apply for some people, but not for others. Are those fair laws, no-- |
|
Re: Let's pull out all the stops |
by Zach
zach (nospam) chambana.net (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
23 Feb 2005
|
|
There is NOTHING fair about Illinois' Election Code. Greens would love to see the code completely overhauled. |
|
|
