A book will soon be published called “The Oxford Handbook of American Election Law.” It will have a chapter by Law Professor Derek Muller on ballot access laws.
This book should not be confused with an older book, “The Oxford Handbook of American Elections and Political Behavior”, which had no content relating to ballot access laws.
SIMPLE- TOTALLY UNEQUAL BALLOT ACCESS LAWS FOR PARTISAN OFFICES.
REMEDY –
EQUAL BALLOT ACCESS LAWS FOR ALL INDIVIDUAL CANDIDATES FOR SAME OFFICE
EQUAL NOM PETS / FILING FEES
Sounds like a good book to read.
The all write-in encrypted ballot receipt eliminates duopoly partisan censorship of candidates and voters and restores the control US citizens had before the 1890s ballot confiscation call the secret ballot reform.
DFR-
SOME SORT OF E VOTING WITH AT LEAST THE PROPER SPELLING OF *DECLARED* CANDIDATES ???
OTHERWISE – WILL DFR VOLUNTEER TO DECIPHER ANY OF THE BAAAADE HANDWRITING IN A MARGINAL/DECISIVE STATE IN A USA PREZ ELECTION ???
AGAIN- SEE 2010 USA SENATE ELECTION IN AK FROZE LAND WITH WHAT’S HER NAME MABCDEFGHI ETC.
AZ please write in English. I don’t understand Retardese.
Why are the previous commenters so stuck on ballots? Voting can be in person standing count as is already done at many caucuses, town meetings, and conventions, but in a general (and only) election. Party access can be by having a precinct captain living in the precinct and representing his party in the precinct in between elections, and showing up in person on election night to lead his men.
There should be no nomination petitions or filing fees.
Also no written ballots, but rather a standing count. This eliminates any handwriting or form design problems, as well as electronic vote count fraud and other types of vote count fraud. The standing vote count can be videotaped and broadcast or streamed, as well as archived for subsequent public viewing by anyone, so there can be no question of vote count fraud, ineligible votes or voters, people (should be men) who voted more than once or in the wrong jurisdiction, etc.
MAXZIM —
NO VOTES FOR PRECINCT FOLKS NOT IN PRECINCT ON ELECTION DAYS ??? —
STUDENTS / WARRIORS FIGHTING BARBARIANS / ETC ???
No, of course not. Education is easy enough to obtain within a precinct, especially with modern technology. Typical students would not qualify for voting in any case, as they would have to be, among other things, married heads of households with at least two biological children, of which at least one would be a son, gainfully employed or independently wealthy, property owners, and capable of paying a substantial poll tax which would pay the salaries of peace officers. Given that only about a hundred people would be voting the poll tax would be far from trivial.
The national defense military is an honorable pursuit, and one many men would undertake, particularly given that being a member of the military or veteran would be one of the voting requirements. But, contrary to what A”Trump=Hitler”Z seems to imply, men would almost certainly rather be deployed guarding the border than attend election night for precinct peace officer. In fact, as I am considering this potential problem, it occurs to me that the opposite problem might be more likely to be a real issue: voting or serving as a peace officer would be rather like jury duty, and expensive at that. I hate to make anyone’s labor compelled, other than criminals, women, and indentured servants, so there would have to be a lot of cultural emphasis on the importance of voluntary civic duty. I think other aspects of my proposal would ensure that.
I’m not sure exactly what your etc is supposed to mean, but if you recall, or have not read that part of my proposal yet, there would be a lot less travel for work or family than there is now. Goods and people crossing precinct lines would be taxed and limited and people crossing precinct lines even more so. Especially if the movement is permanent or for protracted periods of time.
Thus, commerce, employment, family, education etc would all be with rare exceptions within the precinct. I think people can schedule vacations so as not to fall on election day. Remember, I’m not for universal voting; if some people miss one year’s vote, it’s not that big of a problem.
ETC = TRANSPORTATION FOLKS OUT OF PRECINCT. TRUCKS / PLANES / TRAINS
BIZ FOLKS OUT OF PRECINCT
—-
ABSENTEE BALLOTS IN USA — MAJOR INCREASE IN USA CIVIL WAR- UNION ARMY/NAVY FOLKS FIGHTING SLAVERS IN SLAVE STATES.
Legal chattel slavery for noncriminals in European and European based Christian nations was ended without war in all of those many nations except your country and Haiti. I addressed the issue of out of precinct travel and commerce in my prior comment. Anything else? A”Trump=Hitler”Z or, preferably, anyone else?
MAXZIM UTOPIA-
EXACT DEFINITION OF ELECTOR//VOTER IN EACH PRECINCT.
EXACT LEGAL CODE.
WHAT HAPPENS WITH A LAWLESS TYRANT PRECINCT BOSS AND HIS ARMED GANG ???
MaxZim V Zaslon on May 22, 2023 at 9:36 am said:
There should be no nomination petitions or filing fees.
Thank you.
A”Trump=Hitler”Z should rephrase his questions without reference to a utopia, which I don’t advocate for. I’ve repeatedly explained that I don’t advocate any utopia, oppose utopianism because it has a very bad track record, and have an evolving set of proposals which I think would make things better if implemented, but certainly not perfect. The recommendations are subject to being revised, depending on what arguments are offered against them, what alternative proposals are offered, and the rationale for those.
I do welcome questions, but the same exact questions from the same exact people asking them do eventually get tiresome. I’ve told A”Trump=Hitler”Z my proposed voting criteria more than once, including very recently. He can search the archives as well as I can. If someone else asks, I might bother.
I already told AZ that precinct laws would be set down at the founding of the precinct, and very difficult but not impossible to change. They would not be dictated from above, least of all by me. They would probably be very similar within a nation state or military defense area or whatever you would like like to call that.
They would probably also be fairly similar globally, given that a short set of written laws would be fairly common sense – for example don’t kill humans except in self defense, defense of others, or as a peace officer for cause or in military defense in war; do not take or damage other men’s property, including their women, children or servants, without their permission; that sort of thing. But, that’s just a guess. The bottom line is there would be some local variation, and probably more so in places with different dominant ethnicities, religions, races, culture, traditions, etc.
There would be no precinct bosses, unless you mean the precinct captain of that year’s winning party. The overwhelming mistake you make there is that peace officers would “run” the precinct, sort of like how governments run countries now. I envision peace officers as people few people would ever encounter in their official capacity, although they would quite likely be well known in various other capacities and roles.
It would actually be more like jury duty than like being part of an armed gang. Ideally, it would be part time, with peace officers having other full time jobs or businesses they own. Power in a precinct would be dispersed, with families, extended families, churches, businesses, business associations, professional guilds, voluntary neighborhood watch and civil defense groups, neighborhood councils, charities, fraternal organizations, and voluntary associations of all kinds playing much larger roles than what we’re used to, because government sucks a lot of life out of other ways of solving problems.
In my proposal, this would extend to most minor disputes and transgressions. Peace officers would only deal with the most intractable disputes and serious crimes. Those would be extremely rare, because punishment would be draconian and immediate, and also because societies less distorted by government force tend to be more peaceful, especially when traditions are respected. People would be well armed and trained, and it would be normal for people to belong to a variety of associations and interest groups with different sets of neighbors from the precinct in each.
Thus, presumptuous questions about precinct bosses and lawless armed gangs make no sense. They make even less sense when presented repeatedly as if they had not already been answered more than once previously by the same individual or entity, in this case A”Trump=Hitler”Z. The more he does this, the less believable it is that he isn’t arguing in bad faith.
At best, he might be as senile as Beijing Joe Biden. If I answer him it’s only for the benefit of others, not him. To that end, it might occasionally be useful if there was some indication of other people wanting to know answers to questions which A”Trump=Hitler”AZ asks.
BDLU, you’re welcome. Did you notice the recent set of questions posed to you about Trump vs Hitler? I’ll go find the link in case you hadn’t.
Perhaps you didn’t see the questions because the comment was too long for you to read and covered more than one subject.
https://ballot-access.org/2023/05/17/three-oregon-state-senators-appear-to-be-barred-from-running-for-re-election-under-new-provision/#comment-1156263
Generally speaking, any idiotic questions about some utopia I explicitly do not call for, or repeated questions I already answered by the same person who asked them the last few times, may have to be asked to be reframed, asked by someone else, or ignored. The idiocy and time wasting nonsense from a moron who it is becoming harder and harder to believe is not trolling (arguing in bad faith) is becoming increasingly boring.
Max, I am secretly attracted to you.
You’ll have to keep it in your pants. I only have sex with my wife, and am only attracted to women.
AZ: There are handheld printers that a voter can use to make machine readable OCR scanning effective. NO scribbling allowed. My proposition is about voter control of ballot content in choosing candidates.
If you’re going to go that far you may as well let them type. But then electronic ballot security becomes an issue.