Seminar On Gerrymandering Upcoming

The gerrymandering of districts is the act of drawing a map with political boundaries that serve to assure that the party in power stays in power. Libertarians, myself included, have long campaigned against this practice, urging instead for districts that are compact and geographical in nature, thereby allowing voters to more accurately select representatives that reflect the geography.

Common Cause Indiana is hosting a lunch seminar that addresses these issues.

When: Friday, December 17, 2010, 11am - 1pm
Where: Senate Chambers, Indiana State Capitol

Panelists include The Honorable Theodore Boehm, Indiana Supreme Court; Dr. Michael McDonald, Associate Professor of Government and Politics at George Mason University; and Virginia Martinez, Esq., Legislative Staff Attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF).

Register via this link. I'll be there. Look for me!

This is extremely timely, as the Indiana Legislature is charged with redrawing the map this year once the 2010 Census data is released. The release is expected to happen in February 2011, and the Legislature will be looking to act quickly. Proponents of an honest redistricting need to be active right away.

Poor Coverage

I was really miffed to read an Evansville Courier & Press article on the Indiana Secretary of State's race. It was bad enough that it read like a paid advertisement for the Democratic candidate and not filed under 'Opinion'; but it also failed to mention Libertarian Mike Wherry at all.

So, I wrote a letter to the editor. It follows:

I found it ironic and unfortunate to read Sunday's article on the Indiana Secretary of State race. Ironic that the article quoted one of the candidates about not forgetting those with a right to be heard. Unfortunate, in that the Libertarian candidate, Mike Wherry, wasn't even mentioned.

The Secretary of State race is crucial to the Libertarian Party, as its' candidate needs to secure a minimum 2% finish in this race in order for their party to remain on the ballot for the next four years.

But more to the point of the article, regarding whether or not paperwork irregularities make a candidate fit for office or not, it is incredibly ironic that Republican's errors are commented on, while the Democrat, who has also committed plenty of irregularities, was given a pass.

Both parties have slung a fair amount of mud at their traditional foes, and both parties are fairly convincing when they both make the case that the other is unfit to be Secretary of State.

Libertarian Mike Wherry stands heads and shoulders above this. He is a veteran US Naval officer, having served on the USS Indianapolis. He is on the ballot and is an eminently qualified candidate. He should have had equal consideration in the recent article on the basis of being a balloted candidate alone, but when you consider the relative merits of his paperwork, perhaps he should have been the feature.

Sincerely Yours-
-Mike Kole
Libertarian Candidate for Secretary of State in 2006

I'm fond of this clip:

Some Animals Are More Equal Than Others

(Broadview Heights, OH)- Bob Barr is an inch from being kicked off the Pennsylvania ballot. Why? He did the same thing Obama and McCain did in Texas- file post-deadline, because his party's convention nominated him post-deadline. Shane Cory of the Barr Campaign comments:

It's been clear that if you are running for office as a Republican or a Democrat, you are somehow above the law.

If you are a Libertarian or independent, you not only have to abide by the letter of the law but you have to be prepared when the law is twisted and turned to be used against you. (emphasis supplied, -ed)

Didn't McCain just encourage people to run for office? Isn't Obama's campaign about inclusion

How about both of them step up to the plate and show that their words have some meaning. McCain can be the maverick he purports to be. Obama can be the agent of change he purports to be. Playing the game of duopoly collusion is pure status quo.

But, ok ok. If the law is the law, very well. If the law is the law, then Obama and McCain are off the Texas ballot, because like Barr in PA, those two failed to file on time. Same law, same failure to comply. Same results? Here's some interesting stuff from a New York Times blog:

I am confident that the two parties will find a way around this problem, and that Texans will be able to vote for either major candidate. The polls show Senator McCain well ahead in Texas.

That's the typical commentary for this. McCain and Obama will 'find a way around this problem'. Barr will not.

Why should they get around it? Didn't Republicans and Democrats write election laws in this country? And, in Texas? Shouldn't they, as exemplars of fairness, abide by their own stinking laws?

I don't know how anybody supporting McCain or Obama, who has INTEGRITY, can know that their candidate's campaigns will do anything they can with regards to the law, to make sure it doesn't apply to them, but does apply to everyone else. How can you simply gloss over it, if you have any idealism, and consistency, any integrity, AT ALL, about you?

Or, is winning the only thing. The means be damned, the end is all that matters.

If that's what it's about, be scared if your side loses, because you can expect the victor to run roughshod over you when it becomes expedient to do so.

Here's a $100 Wager

(Fishers, IN)- Let's see if there are any takers. Both McCain and Obama apparently have failed to file necessary papers in Texas to qualify for that state's ballot. This is because the filing deadline occurs prior to either of their parties' conventions.

So, does anyone want to take my bet that the law will be overlooked to accommodate McCain and Obama?

As we saw here recently in Marion County, when the slightest error is found on a form submitted by a Libertarian candidate the bi-partisan, ie: Republican and Democratic colluded Elections Board votes to strenuously uphold the letter of the law. As we see across the USA, those same bi-partisan Boards tend to wink at the law when it involves their own candidates.

For now, Bob Barr is on the Texas ballot. It would be pretty cool for Barr to scoop up all 34 of Texas' electoral votes. I think on this basis alone, Barr should now be brought into the debates... if the allegedly non-partisan Commission on Presidential Debates would hear of it.

(h/t Advance Indiana)

More On Disenfranchisement

WISH-TV reported on the partisan booting-from-ballot of three Marion County Libertarian candidates for township office. From WISH-TV's report:

A look at the 2008 form shows that it can be mistaken for a dividing line instead of a line for information.

"We were properly nominated at our convention. This was simply a certification of that nomination and we missed a line. I don't think it hurts the voters to have more people on the ballot just for a technical glitch. And I actually think it hurts the voters to take people off the ballot," said Maguire.

The forms come from the state. I-Team 8 tried to find out why they're changed year to year. The Indiana Election Division did not respond.

Chris Ward of Lawrence Township was the other booted.

The Marion County Elections Board is comprised of two Democrats and one Republican. All in favor of booting? "Aye!" Interestingly, word was that in Chris Ward's particular race, both the Democrat and Republican were off the ballot for improper filing. Their parties were permitted to "fill their vacancies" in time to be certified. Hmm. Interesting that their parties were notified well enough that they could do that, but the Libertarian Party was not.

"The Indiana Election Division did not respond". Big surprise. Why are the forms changed from year to year? For the purpose of eliminating candidates from the ballot, plain and simple. That's not hte kind of music the Election Division wants to face, so they'll continue to not respond. That's a very convenient solution.

Tim Maguire makes the important point: Which is more key to our system of government? A pristine form, or the opportunity of the voters to have the widest choice?

The bi-partisan Marion County Election Board has spoken- in favor of maintaining their duopoly.

Links to previous posts about the unethical treatment of the ballot by Republicans and Democrats in Indiana:

8-23-2006: Election Follies #12 - LaPorte Republicans mess up forms, pay fines, stay on ballot. What was germaine here was "intent". Funny how that wasn't germaine for the Marion County Libertarians.
8-9-2006: Election Follies #11 - 10 Allen County Republican candidates fill out forms incorrectly, stay on ballot.
8-4-2006: Exclusion Coverage - My press conference and press reports on the Election Follies.
7-27-2006: Election Follies #7 - LaPorte Republicans mess up forms, pay fines, stay on ballot.
7-24-2006: Election Follies #5 - Legislature passes law designed to trip Libertarian candidates, and is successful.
7-23-2006: Election Follies #4 - 4 Hancock County Libertarians bounced on technicality, but a-ok to run instead as Democrats.