Archive for category Elections
The Election After the Election
Posted by Jedidiah Smith in Elections on October 31, 2010
The unprecedented activism of the past two years has all lead up to what will take place this Tuesday, the general election. Many Missouri citizens, however, are also interested in what will follow the election.
Two days later, while most of us are still in recovery mode, Missouri Senators will meet to determine by a secret ballot process who will serve in the highest position in our state legislator, the Senate President Pro Tem. Among other things, the President Pro Tem of the Senate has the power to place senators on various committees and to choose the leadership of those committees. These appointments have a profound effect on which proposed legislation will actually make it to the floor for consideration.
Missourians will remember the current Pro Tem, Charlie Shields, served as a major roadblock to the passage of the Healthcare Freedom Act during the last session. Prop C (HCFA) eventually went on to pass on the August ballot by a 71%-29% margin, a clear indication that Shields and the Senate leadership were out of touch with the people. Sen. Shield’s further displayed his power late in the session when he removed Sen. Chuck Purgason from his committee chairmanship in order to consider a bill which would have given preferential treatment to the Ford plant in Kansas City.
Sen, Shields is leaving office as a result of term limits, and it’s time to elect a new President Pro Tem.
Since the leadership positions are chosen by the senators, it would seem that the election of true conservatives into the Missouri Senate would guarantee strong, conservative leadership, right? Unfortunately, this is not necessarily true.
Kevin Engler is the presumed choice for the Pro Tem position – not because of his legislative history of liberty-driven legislation, but because he is the current Senate Majority Floor Leader. It is generally understood in Jefferson City that the floor leader is next in line to become Pro Tem, regardless of his track record. In fact, Engler has made it clear that anyone who dares to oppose him will suffer the consequences, but those who support him will be rewarded.
These bullying techniques are not new to Jefferson City politics, but they typically are kept out of the view of citizens. The truth, is, that really understanding what goes on behind the scenes of the legislature is next to impossible.
Because the people have historically been left out of this decision, a group of of grassroots activists (of whom I am honored to be a part) has launched the Missouri Leadership Project. The project was designed with several goals in mind:
- To help inform the public of the importance of leadership in Jefferson City. Everyone understands how important the roles of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are in Washington D.C., but little attention is given to the significance of leadership within our own state legislature.
- To begin the process of increasing transparency in government by shining some light on the happenings within Jefferson City, specifically on the election of leadership.
- To illustrate that although Sen. Engler is the presumed Pro-Tem-To-Be, he is not the choice of those (many activists) who have spent the last two years asking for transparency and smaller government.
- To give the people of Missouri an opportunity to voice their opinion by signing a petition urging the senate to “select leaders from among those who have clearly demonstrated a commitment to protecting the liberty of all Missourians alike and conduct the business of the senate in a fair and even-handed way.”To date, hundreds of Missourians have signed the petition. Many have also contacted their senator personally to express their views. In addition to these individual citizens, many patriotic and Tea Party organizations have endorsed the project.
Although citizens do not have a direct role in electing legislative leadership, we should work to be informed and involved in the process as much as possible, and to hold our elected officials accountable for their decisions.
For more information about the Missouri Leadership Project, visit www.MoLeadershipProject.com.
A Product of Ignorance
Posted by Jedidiah Smith in Elections on October 7, 2010
Below is an op-ed from the Joplin Independent, written by Missouri Rep. Ed Emery. This is an excellent, common-sense column on how Prop B violates our most basic rights.
Proposition B will be on Missourian’s November 2, 2010 ballot. No matter how it is promoted it is fundamentally the product of ignorance. It reflects ignorance about breeders, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), the power of the free market, property rights, and liberty. It is being driven by propaganda rather than truth and depends on emotional appeal rather than the achievement of meaningful reform.
Missourians love their pets and hate to see animals abused. Dog breeders, and I have met a number of them, raise dogs because they love dogs and enjoy seeing others find just the right dog for their family. The goal of these small business people is to satisfy the public’s longing for pets at a cost most can afford. My family used to raise basset hounds, and I remember that even a single flea bite on an otherwise perfect puppy meant an unacceptable price penalty along with the determination to find and fix any problem. If a puppy had anything more serious, they might just be refused. It simply does not pay to mistreat animals. But the best breeder would be hurt the most by Prop B.
Many are ignorant about the nature and objectives of HSUS– the organization behind Prop B. A visit to www.humanewatch.org or www.activistcash.com will help you assess whether their intentions have anything at all to do with the treatment of animals. While less than $500,000 went to animal shelters (less than 0.5% of HSUS’s budget in the same year HSUS’s own website lists 14 executives who, it is reported, received $2.5 million in 2008 in pension benefits alone; their salaries are not available.
However, most harmful is ignorance of the significance of property rights to basic American freedoms. There is no more important unalienable right that our constitution secures than that of property rights. Personal property – almost unheard of before the United States exceptional founding – is the right that guarantees all others. It is the only right that once lost will almost certainly not be restored short of armed conflict. Prop B directly assaults property rights and for that reason alone is completely unacceptable and should be ruled unconstitutional. But the courts aside, no issue is important enough to concede to government our last defense against its abuse of the people.
Dispelling ignorance about what is actually in Prop B will help defeat it at the ballot box. First of all, the use of the word “cruelty” is to invoke prejudice, not reason. For example, keeping 51 dogs is cruel but keeping 50 is not; keeping a dog in a 5′ by 5′ 11″ enclosure is cruel while adding one inch to the length makes it kind; kennel temperature of 45 degrees F is kind while 44 degrees is cruel. “Cruelty” is not for the dog; it is for the emotional appeal. We’re told Prop B is for “large-scale” breeders, but just 11 female dogs makes you a “large-scale” breeder, and your animal quarters will have to be heated and air conditioned. Finally, if Prop B is about animal cruelty then why are hunting dogs excluded from the regulations?
Proposition B is not about animals or about cruelty, it is an assault on property rights, small businesses, and the free market. It employs a proven strategy for stripping rights from the people and empowering the elitists: 1) find an innocent lovable party – puppy, 2) make them a victim with an emotion-stirring label – puppy mill, 3) make “more government” the solution – Prop B. If voters take a broader and thoughtful perspective and if they insist that freedoms be protected and that policies be logical rather than emotional, then American ideals will win, and Prop B will fail in November.
Constitutional Conservative Drops Out; Endorses Chuck Purgason
Posted by Jedidiah Smith in Chuck Purgason, Elections on May 18, 2010
This was released last night from the Chuck Purgason campaign:
Sen. Chuck Purgason received the endorsement of Jim Schmidt, a constitutional conservative who was running for the Republican nomination in the U.S. Senate Primary until he announced his withdrawal today. “Jim Schmidt’s endorsement underscores the importance of rallying the grassroots around the best candidate to take on the establishment’s anointed one,” said Sen. Chuck Purgason. Mr. Schmidt urged the public “to vote for Chuck Purgason in the August 3rd Republican Primary Election.” “We need to send someone to Washington D.C. who has the courage to stop the federal government spending spree that is escalating the federal debt and threatening our nation’s economic stability. We need to send someone to Washington D.C. who is not entrenched in the corruption and abuse of an expanding federal state. Most importantly, we need to send someone to Washington D.C. who understands and can represent the interests of our great state,” said Jim Schmidt in his press release.
“I would like to thank Jim for his great endorsement and the confidence that he has in me. Jim and I share the same concerns about the direction our country in heading. Unless we return our nation to the conservative value of balanced budgets, and end government’s runaway spending, our children and grandchildren will pay the price,” said Sen. Purgason.
Schmidt’s endorsement adds to the momentum for Purgason’s campaign. Last week, Purgason won an online poll from the Missouri Sovereignty Project. The poll asked people to choose between Chuck Purgason and Roy Blunt. Purgason won the poll 75% to 25%.
“Carnahan and Blunt represent more of Washington D.C. business as usual,” said Sen. Chuck Purgason. “They both have years of experience in D.C. Both of their campaigns are being funded by out of state special interests. The mood of the country is quickly changing. The recent losses of a Republican Senator in his Utah primary and a Democrat House member in his West Virginia primary are proof that Americans are fed up with Washington D.C. big government policies.”
Franklin County Patriots Strategy Meeting Tonight
Posted by Jedidiah Smith in Activism, Elections on May 18, 2010
There will be a Franklin County Patriots’ Strategy Meeting tonight, May 18, in Union. We will begin at 7:00pm at the Franklin County Baptist Association Gymnasium. The building is located at 785 Butterfield Dr., South Hwy 47 in Union. We have several items to discuss, but our primary goal will be to strategize about the upcoming elections. We all understand how vital it is that we all be as informed as possible as we head into the election season.
Agenda items will include voter registration drives, phone banking, Get Out the Vote campaigns and planning for upcoming Franklin County Events. Our input and involvement are now more needed than ever. The freedoms we enjoy are under assault as never before. We know how critical the vote in November is, but if the most conservative candidates do not win in the August primary, we may not be enthused about our choices in November. We have less than 100 days until the November 3 primary.
This will also be a great recruitment opportunity. If you know of someone who is interested in learning more about Franklin County Patriots, invite them or bring them to this event. E-mail your lists and notify your friends.
Candidates will not be speaking at this meeting, but we will be giving an opportunity for individuals who are currently working on campaigns to briefly (very briefly) discuss those campaigns.
Purgason versus Blunt Poll
Posted by Jedidiah Smith in Chuck Purgason, Elections, Roy Blunt, Senate on May 11, 2010
The Missouri Sovereignty Project recently posted a poll on their website with a simple question “Who would you vote for in the U.S. Senate Republican primary?” The two options were Chuck Purgason and Roy Blunt. The results were released today, and Senator Purgason won by almost 50%. The actual numbers were 74.9% to 25.1%.
The new poll asks who you would vote for in the general election. Head back to the Missouri Sovereignty Project’s website to cast your vote for Chuck today.
Franklin County Candidate Forum Tonight
Posted by Jedidiah Smith in Elections on May 6, 2010
There will be a candidate forum in Union tonight for all of the state representative and senate races that affect the citizens of Franklin County sponsored by the Franklin Countywide Republican Club. You will have an opportunity to hear many of the candidates who you will have the opportunity to vote for August 3rd.
English Only in Alabama
Posted by Jedidiah Smith in Elections on April 29, 2010
English in America? What a thought!
Let the Campaigning Begin
Posted by Jedidiah Smith in Elections on March 31, 2010
The filing season has officially closed, but not before a few more candidates found their way onto the ballot in the U.S. Senate race. That now makes 20 in all – three Democrats, three Libertarians, eleven Republicans and three Constitution Party candidates.
We are in for an exciting election year. There will be no shortage of opportunities to get involved in races on all levels. Get ready to start receiving loads of campaign mail, emails, phone calls and online messages. I think this year we will all take a little more time to look over those mailing before tossing them into the garbage. Americans want to be as informed as possible before they cast their votes.
So let’s do the research, choose our candidates and work to get them elected. The fun starts now!
The 17th Amendment and the U.S. Senate Race
Posted by Jedidiah Smith in Elections, Senate on March 30, 2010
A common debate this year has been that of whether the 17th Amendment was a good idea or if it should be repealed. There are many arguments against the 17th Amendment, but perhaps the best is before us now with the current U.S. Senate race. Senator Kit Bond will be retiring at the end of the current term, and 18 candidates have filed for that spot. According to media and even local bloggers, however, there are really only two candidates who are vying for the seat – Roy Blunt (R) and Robin Carnahan (D). We have the 17th Amendment largely to thank for that.
No other candidate can compete financially with these two candidates. Conservative estimates say that the race will take over 10 million dollars to win. This is out of control.
According to Article I, Section III of the U.S. Constitution, “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.” This was the states’ way of protecting themselves against an overreaching federal government. According to the “Father of the Constitution,” James Madison, “The state legislatures also ought to have some means of defending themselves against the encroachments of the national government…And what better means can be provided than by giving them some share in, or rather make them a constituent part of, the national government?” The state legislature provided a check on the senators in DC.
With the ratification of the 17th Amendment, the states lost that power. Now, rather than U.S. Senators getting elected by proving to state legislatures that they will act in the best interest of the state, they are forced to raise tens of millions of dollars to saturate the television, internet and radio with advertisements promoting themselves and attempting to discredit their opponents.
So if the 17th Amendment were repealed and we were once again governed under the original intents of the Founders in the Constitution, and the Senator were being chosen by the legislators based on his loyalty to the state of Missouri, would Roy Blunt and Robin Carnahan still be the only two candidates that the media were willing to talk about? Probably not.
Notes from the U.S. Senate Forum
Posted by Jedidiah Smith in Elections, Senate on March 25, 2010
Below is my review of the U.S. Senate Forum in Jefferson City Saturday for Missouri Record. After reading, visit MODecides.com and vote for your candidate choice.
Despite the wintry conditions in much of the state, about 100 people from all over Missouri gathered in Jefferson City for a US Senate Forum for candidates running for the seat of retiring Senator Kit Bond. The forum was co-sponsored by 60 grassroots groups from across the state. The goal of the forum was to give Missourians the opportunity to properly vet each candidate in the race and to encourage them to get engaged in this primary season.
Sixteen candidates from four parties were invited to the forum. Initially, all candidates except for Robin Carnahan and Roy Blunt confirmed their intentions to come. During the last day before the forum, four candidates either canceled or simply did not arrive. All were notified with ample time to adjust their schedules–apparently some of the candidates do not consider the Senate race to be a top priority or are not seriously interested in standing before the citizens of Missouri. This in itself was quite revealing.
Ninety-second response times were given for each question, with 30-second rebuttals allowed. There was also a lightning round, which required answers of only “yes,” “no,” or “undecided.” This was somewhat out of the ordinary for a candidate forum but proved to be very informative.
It was an educational experience for those in the crowd and viewing online. The US Senate seat is one of the most powerful offices in the country, yet several of the candidates had little or no legislative experience and were unable to answer some basic questions. Candidates were stumped by questions regarding the 16th and 17th Amendments and the purpose of the Federal Reserve. Many of the candidates did show an impressive knowledge of the Constitution and the current state of our federal government, however.
This year, Missouri broke a record with the most candidates filing for state and federal races in the state on opening day of the filing season. Sixteen of those candidates filed for Kit Bond’s seat. While this shows that more and more citizens are becoming politically engaged, the US Senate seat is not the place to “get your feet wet” politically.
One of the questions posed to the six Republican candidates was: “If you realized during your campaign that your momentum had stalled and you could not win the race, yet there is a true conservative who reflects your voice and values that has the potential to win the primary, would you be willing to withdraw from the race and throw your endorsement to that candidate to help elect a true conservative?”
The majority of candidates promised that they would be willing to step aside. After listening to some of the candidates on Saturday, several should seriously consider this option.
Readers are encouraged to watch the video from the forum in order to become better educated on those who are running for this office. Videos are available online by visiting www.modecides.com.
-
You are currently browsing the archives for the Elections category.
Sign Up to Receive Updates
