On May 4, the Iowa legislature passed HF 716, will requires all votes cast in presidential caucuses to be in-person. Caucuses are run by parties, not the government. Assuming Governor Kim Reynolds signs the bill, Iowa Democrats plan to ignore the law. The U.S. Supreme Court freedom of association cases make it clear that states cannot tell parties how to run their own caucuses.
Every vote in favor of the bill in both houses was cast by Republican legislators, and every vote against it was cast by Democrats.
The best compromise would be to make general elections in the style of the Iowa caucus, with in person and on the record public voting.
They are not presidential caucuses. They choose delegates to county conventions.
Nominations for public offices vs internal clubby stuff.
later – public 12 Amdt Prez electors
Marchioro v. Chaney, 442 U.S. 191 (1979) referred to in Eu 1989 footnote.
—-
possible MAJOR chaos
national party stuff [conventions and natl party officers / natl comts] vs state party stuff
re nominations for public offices
A”Trump=Hitler”Z say what?
I guess A”Trump=Hitler”Z might be trying to say that it should be party business since it’s electing delegates to county conventions, but I’m honestly not fluent enough in AZ to tell.
NO EXTRA-TERRITORIAL STUFF IN STATE GERRYMANDER HACKS – IE PARTY NATIONAL CONVENTIONS
BUT-
HOW STATE 12 AMDT ELECTORS ARE CHOSEN/NOMINATED = STATE CONTROL.
CONNECTION OF NATL CONVENTIONS AND STATE PARTY REGIMES.
ALL ROTTED TO THEIR MINORITY RULE GERRYMANDER CORES — STATE LEGIS AND EC
—-
P-A-T
Someone please translate what AZ said from Retardese to English.
My name was the only part I understood.
I think he said something about how Trump is as bad as Hitler, or maybe even worse.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/kremlin-presidential-academy-gets-hit-183217868.html
Kremlin’s ‘Presidential Academy’ Gets Hit With a Mass Purge
Shannon Vavra
Thu, May 18, 2023 at 2:32 PM EDT
A prestigious Kremlin-funded university that trains up Russia’s top civil servants is about to fire all of its employees living abroad, according to current and former employees, in what appears to be Moscow’s latest wartime attempt to secure a vice-like grip around possible dissent.
The Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration under the President of Russia (RANEPA) is targeting employees who left during Russia’s war in Ukraine in 2022 and 2023, in addition to those who have been living elsewhere for longer, according to a report from Agentsvo, or The Agency. Sources told the outlet that “the order came from above,” without specifying further.
—-
HOW SOON BEFORE BULLET IN HEADS PURGES ???
SEE 1930S – STALIN PURGES
Eu v. San Francisco Democratic Central Committee, 489 U.S. 214 (1989)
[Footnote 22]
Marchioro v. Chaney, 442 U. S. 191 (1979), is not to the contrary. There we upheld a Washington statute mandating that political parties create a state central committee, to which the Democratic Party, not the State, had assigned significant responsibilities in administering the party, raising and distributing funds to candidates, conducting campaigns, and setting party policy. Id. at 442 U. S. 198-199. The statute only required that the state central committee perform certain limited functions such as filling vacancies on the party ticket, nominating Presidential electors and delegates to national conventions, and calling state-wide conventions. The party members did not claim that these statutory requirements imposed impermissible burdens on the party or themselves, so we had no occasion to consider whether the challenged law burdened the party’s First Amendment rights, and, if so, whether the law served a compelling state interest. Id. at 442 U. S. 197, n. 12. Here, in contrast, it is state law, not a political party’s charter, that places the state central committees at a party’s helm, and in particular assigns the statutorily mandated committee responsibility for conducting the party’s campaigns.
@AZ,
In Iowa, precinct caucuses select delegates to county conventions and county committee members.
ABOUT ZERO *** 1 PARTY MEMBER – 1 PARTY VOTE *** MATH FOR PARTY CAUCUSES / CONVENTIONS IN STATES.
– IE GERRYMANDER PRECINCT WINNERS GO TO COUNTY CAUCUSES / CONVENTIONS / ETC REGARDLESS OF HOW FEW OR MANY VOTES EACH GETS IN PRECINCT.
SOME STATES HAVE MIN VOTES TO GET CHOSEN.
SOME STATES MAY HAVE 2 OR MORE PRECINCT WINNERS.
SAME ROT MATH FOR DELEGATES TO HIGHER BODIES — CONG DIST BODIES / STATE CONVENTIONS.
RESULT — MORE / MORE EXTREMISTS – NOMINATING CANDIDATES FOR PUBLIC OFFICES — IF NO PUBLIC PRIMARIES.
—–
NOOOO CAUCUSES, PRIMARIES AND CONVENTIONS FOR PUBLIC OFFICE NOMINATIONS
ONE ELECTION DAY
EQUAL BALLOT ACCESS NOM PETS / FILING FEES
If the state is not paying for it, it is none of the state’s business how a party conducts its primaries, caucuses or conventions.
So what if the Democrats accept paper ballots at their caucuses?
It’s their party.
A”Trump=Hitler”Z is confused, as is par for the course. Perhaps it’s because he has never actually experienced life under a communist dictatorship, Biden puppetry to Xi and CCP notwithstanding, he can’t tell the difference between a few spies and traitors losing their double dipping jobs while they’re still being paid by foreign adversaries on the one hand, an and bullet to the head purges and gulags on the other.
@WZ,
The body that Iowa recognizes as a “party” is the voters who have registered with the party. There is a state interest in ensuring that those voters control the party, in much the same way they protect shareholders of private companies.
If parties were truly private, there would be no reason to have state recognition of “nominations” which are a method of excluding candidates, voters, and other parties.
At most, a state can only compel a recognized party to allow participation of its registered voters – if a party HAS registered voters – in any primary or caucus it holds. Beyond that, it ought not to tell them HOW to run those primaries or caucuses.
Relying on fake news, as A”Trump=Hitler”Z does, is not recommended, to say the least.
As for voting arrangements, ideally:
One election per year – no caucuses, primaries, petitions, or filing fees
Vote by party, no ballots, no candidates; winning party picks officeholders as it sees fit and replaces them easily during the course of the year
Voting by public standing count
Party access by party precinct chair publicly representing the party in the precinct between elections, say for at least 6 months right before the election, and physically present at the vote on election night
Voting in the general election in the style of caucus and convention voting, but no separate caucuses or conventions needed
Jim Riley, if you haven’t answered elsewhere by the time you see this, thoughts?
https://ballot-access.org/2023/05/15/turkish-presidential-election/#comment-1155792
@Max,
At one time Democrats in Texas were so dominant that the Democratic primary was effectively the decisive election. Turnout in the primary was greater than in the general election.
Texas does not have party registration. So a candidate can just file in the Democratic primary and any voter can vote in the Democrat primary.
This meant all elections were de jure partisan but were de facto nonpartisan
Primaries were quite volatile and incumbents were regularly defeated.
I think Dooley’s question had more to do with the opposite situation, which is what we would be more likely to encounter now. Did you read his argument?