This New York Post editorial blasts the New York Commission on Public Funding for considering a plan to toughen the definition of “political party”. The Post doesn’t like the Working Families Party, but still condemns the plan as a ploy to eliminate it. The Post also says it is a conflict of interest for the state chair of the Democratic Party to be a member of the commisison.
The editorial would be better if it mentioned that the proposal would eliminate the Green Party and the Libertarian Party, which are the two leading nationally-organized third parties in the United States.
How many instant cases the day of and next day when the NYCPF shows its junk stuff about ballot access ???
— copy and paste as Exhibit in Complaints.
i dont get the hate for the WFP and electoral fusion.
Electoral fusion, as practiced in NY, is essentially a means for the Red Team & Blue Team to gain additional ballot lines. The WFP rarely fields its own candidates, and is effectively controlled by the Democratic Party; the Conservative Party is the same for the GOP.
I’m curious why the election officials in NY haven’t considered switching away from the Party Column ballot?
DWP –
due to olde 1890s clunky voting machines with levers — often rigged in rear in real corrupt regimes –
voter lever vote for AB = actual counted vote for YZ.
Modern regimes – office areas/blocs – all candidates – no blank spaces [except for write-ins].
@DWP,
Before the Australian ballot, political parties would distribute their own ballots, and attempt to disrupt distribution of other parties. Party thugs would beat up supporters of other parties, and throw ballots in the river. There was ballot stuffing, and bribing voters. If you were a party boss who controlled printing ballots, you might charge candidates a fee to appear on your ballot (the candidate’s contribution to the team). A corrupt politician could appoint building inspectors and policemen who would look the other way at prostitution, or gin joints, or numbers rackets.
The party column ballot is a continuation of the old party ballots stitched together. Party bosses like to keep control. The old party thugs sent their children to law school to learn how to keep other parties from getting on the ballot. The old graft continued.
When mechanical voting machines were introduced, New York became a leading manufacturer. It was efficient to arrange the levers in a grid pattern which matched the old paper ballots. When New York switched to scanned paper ballots, the contracts insisted that the party lines be continued. That is why upstate ballots under the control of the NYSBOE have party rows, and city ballots under the control of the NYCBOE have party columns, and why the number of party lines is different. The old machines were that way. The requirements were so strict that most bidders dropped out. It might be impossible to switch.
Election officials don’t make the decisions. At best they get to go on junkets to the Caribbean to view the latest offerings from vendors. Legislators make the decision. They may think that they are legislators because they have particular merit. They are legislators because they received more votes under a particular set of rules. They are wary of changing those rules. They are surrounded by sycophants. They might listen to doctors, nurses, other medical practitioners, insurers, patients, etc. when legislating medical services and insurance. But the equivalent persons with an interest in election matters are political advisers, campaign managers, and party chairs.
More olde JUNK iron voting machines or olde JUNK punch card devices gathering dust/rust in museums / scrap yards ???
How many ANTI-Democracy ENEMY [domestic and foreign) efforts to subvert New Age scanner ballot machines ???