Partisan Or Nonpartisan?

[Big Unit]

At the luncheon forum of the Sedgwick County Democratic Party today, Secretary of State candidate Sen. David Haley stated that he believed it was appropriate for the office of Secretary of State should remain partisan. Primary opponent Robert Beattie disagreed, stating that he believes that we should have a State Election Commissioner whose primary job it is to ensure full, fair and accurate elections, and that such an office should be nonpartisan, though still elected by the voters. The primary is Tuesday, and some of us are voting even now. This is an issue that starkly contrasts the Democrat candidates for Sec. of State. Is this an important issue? How do others feel about it?

[CadenBlaker]

1. I think oversight is needed.

I think it would be smart to have a non-partisan party looking over our elections. To keep everything fair, voter machines should be checked before to make sure there is no pre-hacking and after, and kept in the same room under armed guard. The machines should not be allowed to leave the polices presence until the non-partisan party comes in to verify the vote. Something needs to be done, I'm not sure if Beattie has the answer, but he is on to something.

[newyawker99]

9. Hi CadenBlaker!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. That's a tough one.

If the SOS remains partisan, how about a SEVERE penalty, including prison time, for tampering with elections? It happened in Ohio, and not many realize it happened in MO also. The current governor was SOS for the 2004 election, as well as bush's campaign chair in MO. And I can tell you stories of voters turned away from polls here in KC that match the crap that went on in Ohio. Same deal in St. Louis. One more reason that voter ID bill passed in MO is so despicable.

[Andy Sandler]

3. Partisan Or Nonpartisan?

Bear in mind that nearly anyone who would run for this job on a non-partisan basis would likely be declaring as unaffiliated only after leaving his or her respective party. Essentially this office would be non-partisan in name and intent only; there would still be a nod and a wink from both parties toward the candidates who most closely reflect their principles and platforms. Frankly I think it's a good idea to keep this job partisan; I would rather everyone know upon which side of the fence each candidate truly stands in order to restore and ensure balance to the electoral process. If Mr. Beattie wishes to make this a non-partisan race, he could easily declare himself not to be a member of any party.

[proud2BlibKansan]

4. Welcome to DU!!

:hi:

Great post!

:woohoo:

[Big Unit]

5. Give Up on Removing Politics from Election Management?

You are correct that there are no guarantees of pure objectivity in running elections that would necessarily follow making SOS a nonpartisan post, or alternatively creating a new nonpartisan State Election Commish. But I think we do need a new system that will do a better job of providing these guarantees. Like School Bd. or City Council races, you are right that most "nonpartisan" candidates come from the ranks of the Repub. or Democratic Parties, and often support for those candidates follows to some degree (at least for those voters who were well-informed enough to learn) those party affiliations. And pure gubernatorial appointment also doesn't remove politics from the selection process. But we could consider a system like that which is used for selecting appellate court judges in Kansas where a blue-ribbon commission nominates three candidates, and then the governor picks among those whose names and interviews pass muster. Despite complaints about "activist" judges, I think the system we currently have for selecting appellate judges works pretty well, and could be emulated for the selection of a State Election Commissioner. The voting public could then retain or remove the Commissioner from office every so often.

[evlbstrd]

7. Welcome, Andy!

I'm glad you joined us.

[newyawker99]

10. Hi AndySandler!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[beyurslf]

6. I don't believe any election of a person is non-partisan. Our city

council members may not say they are Dem or Rep but they all belong to one party or another. And we know which ones are Dem and which ones are not.

[NoodleBoy]

8. let's see-- we'll have at least a partisan Governor's race, Attorney

General race, state-specific races (state mine inspector, agriculture secretary, labor secretary), and usually corporate regulatory commission races, and depending on the year, partisan Senate races, along with partisan US House races, (except in Nebraska) dozens of partisan state legislature races, probably a great number of partisan county races, but but but...

In the middle of all this, a nonpartisan Secretary of State race?

If it were nonpartisan, honestly, I think it would be more dangerous, for two reasons, the first being candidates could run vague campaigns without ever comitting to any position on anything, and won't have to worry about running a campaign on easily-identifiable issues--hell, I wouldn't be suprised if most voters had no idea what a Secretary of State does. So it would enable candidates to run some plastic, smiles-and-handshakes campaign, with no actual substance and no real incentive for them to reveal their agenda, because they can't be tied to electoral corruption undertaken committed by either party, and the potential for too many challengers to attempts to knock out a bad SoS and thereby splitting the vote and allowing the bad incumbent to win would be too high.

Second, a bad SoS wouldn't have to face a primary, where if an honest member of their party sought to race the issue of electoral fraud and shed light on the incumbent's dishonest ways through a campaign and potentially get defeated, either in the primary, or the general, where many of the same primary issues would likely be raised.

So in the end, I think it's a little naive to suddenly think making the SoS slot nonpartisan will make our problems with electoral fraud disappear. In races where the issues aren't clear or clearly understood, a population will likely vote for whichever candidate looks, talks, or acts the most like they do, which in Republican states would probably only contribute to the status quo of electoral fraud remaining the same.

The best idea is still organizing local groups to monitor elections on the precinct level. Yes, it takes work, but if you never expected to actually have to work (for free!) for democracy, maybe you should get out of the game.