---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 16:57:08 -0400
Subject: [blind-democracy] The Trouble With Anti-Donald Trump,
Anti-Hillary Clinton Write-Ins Monday, 06 June
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
The Trouble With Anti-Donald Trump, Anti-Hillary Clinton Write-Ins Monday,
06 June 2016 00:00 By William John Cox, Consortium News | Op-Ed Hillary
Clinton speaks during a campaign event at Camden County College in
Blackwood, New Jersey, May 11, 2016. (Richard Perry / The New York Times)
With the increasing likelihood of a presidential contest between the
generally despised Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, millions of angry
voters are considering protesting the lineup by either sitting out the
election or writing in alternatives.
With almost one-third of all eligible voters already failing to participate
in elections, a greater abdication of voting responsibility in an election
between the lesser of two evils could lead to a tyranny of the minority. On
the other hand, by carefully writing in the names of their true choices,
voters can exercise the only power available to them. If sufficiently
widespread, such a protest could have a lasting effect on the course of the
nation, including the abandonment of the two major political parties and the
emergence of new -- more relevant -- alignments.
Under state laws, political parties must "qualify" for their candidates to
be listed on the ballots and counted. The two major parties are qualified in
every state, but the Libertarian Party candidates will appear on the ballots
in only 33 states, the Green Party in 21, and the Constitution Party in 13.
By definition, the names of write-in candidates are not listed on ballots;
however, interested candidates must still file various forms of paperwork in
35 states for their votes to be counted, and seven states do not allow
write-in votes for presidential candidates. While permitted in the remaining
eight states, votes for write-in candidates may not be counted or reported
by local registrars.
Even after the end of this year's political conventions and the statutory
period to qualify for the ballots in individual states, steps could still be
taken by alternative candidates, such as Bernie Sanders or an establishment
Republican, to register a willingness to accept write-in votes in those
states where they are permitted.
A Possible Amendment
All of this could change with the enactment of the US Voters' Rights
Amendment (USVRA), which would finally guarantee that every citizen has the
right to cast effective votes in all elections. In addition, the USVRA
mandates a national, hand-countable paper ballot in all federal elections,
allows write-in candidates for all federal offices, and requires that all
such votes be counted.
Moreover, for presidential elections, the ballots would list the 12 most
critical questions facing the Nation, compelling all candidates to actually
address the true issues. The People would be better informed and empowered
to make their own national policy -- and to elect representatives most
qualified to carry out their policies.
A national policy referendum, in conjunction with presidential elections,
would create broad federal guidelines, rather than binding laws. Elected
representatives would be expected to carry out the policies and direction of
the People, and could be held accountable if they fail to do so.
Rather than responding to billions of dollars in negative advertising about
the inadequacies of opposition candidates, a barrage of slick promotional
propaganda concealing those deficiencies, and misleading party platforms,
voters in the 2016 election should have the power to create policy for
themselves.
They should decide whether international trade pacts should be approved; the
cap on Social Security withholding taxes should be eliminated; a
supplemental national retirement system should be enacted; space-solar
energy should be generated to energize the national highways in lieu of a
reliance on polluting petroleum products; and whether the crumbling national
infrastructure should be repaired and upgraded.
The People should have a direct say about whether the war on drugs should
end and private prisons should be prohibited. Those most affected by
domestic policies should decide whether everyone has a right to national
health care; whether paid maternity leave should be provided; women should
have the freedom of choice in childbearing; and everyone should have the
right to marry whomsoever they chose. Voters who are smart enough to earn a
paycheck and pay taxes are certainly qualified to decide if a national
minimum wage should be guaranteed; all existing student loans should be
forgiven; the right to education extended through college; and whether
military spending should be reduced.
Instead of an income tax disproportionally imposed on salaried workers and
small business owners, the People should have the right to decide whether
government initiatives are to be paid for by a tiny tax on the movement of
all money in the economy, including stock and currency transactions and the
financial manipulations of all banks, insurance companies, and other
corporations. In doing so, the burden of taxation would be lifted from those
who work the hardest and shifted to those who profit the most from our
economy.
Archaic Rules
Those who founded the United States and drafted its Constitution did not
trust the vast majority of its citizens to vote. They left voting questions
up to the states and established the Electoral College -- rather than a
majority vote of the People -- to elect the president and vice president.
At first, only white males owing sufficient property were permitted to vote,
but slowly over the years, others have been allowed to participate. These
rights are fragile and can be taken away at the whim of state legislatures
-- as is being done by the widespread enactment of voting suppression
schemes, such as voter identification laws.
The USVRA would eliminate the Electoral College and implement a national
popular vote for the offices of president and vice president. It also would
establish a uniform presidential primary, limit the length of campaigns,
require universal voter registration, and outlaw voter suppression. Finally,
it would declare that corporations do not have constitutional rights and
that campaign contributions are not the same as free speech.
If America is to continue as a representative democracy, it must transform
its government into one that actually represents and cares for those who
elect it -- rather than the corporations and financial elites who are now
paying for election campaigns and bribing the candidates.
The USVRA would provide a constitutional basis for the transformation of the
United States government; however, the energy to compel its enactment must
come from the incredible power of the pen literally held in the hands of the
People.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not
be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.
WILLIAM JOHN COX
William John Cox is a retired prosecutor and public interest lawyer, author
and political activist. His efforts to promote a peaceful political
evolution can be found at VotersEvolt.com, his writings are collected at
WilliamJohnCox.com. Contacted him at: u2cox@xxxxxxx.
RELATED STORIES
Five Reasons No Progressive Should Support Hillary Clinton By Joseph
Mulkerin, Truthout | Op-Ed Donald Trump Set to Be GOP Nominee Despite Links
to Organized Crime By Juan González, Amy Goodman, Democracy Now! | Video
Interview Hillary Clinton: The Neocon in Democrat's Clothing By Pierre
Guerlain, Truthout | Op-Ed ________________________________________
Show Comments
Hide Comments
<a href="http://truthout.disqus.com/?url=ref";>View the discussion
thread.</a> Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
The Trouble With Anti-Donald Trump, Anti-Hillary Clinton Write-Ins Monday,
06 June 2016 00:00 By William John Cox, Consortium News | Op-Ed
• font size Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.Error! Hyperlink
reference not valid.Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.Error! Hyperlink
reference not valid.
• Hillary Clinton speaks during a campaign event at Camden County
College in Blackwood, New Jersey, May 11, 2016. (Richard Perry / The New
York Times)
• With the increasing likelihood of a presidential contest between the
generally despised Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, millions of angry
voters are considering protesting the lineup by either sitting out the
election or writing in alternatives.
With almost one-third of all eligible voters already failing to participate
in elections, a greater abdication of voting responsibility in an election
between the lesser of two evils could lead to a tyranny of the minority. On
the other hand, by carefully writing in the names of their true choices,
voters can exercise the only power available to them. If sufficiently
widespread, such a protest could have a lasting effect on the course of the
nation, including the abandonment of the two major political parties and the
emergence of new -- more relevant -- alignments.
Under state laws, political parties must "qualify" for their candidates to
be listed on the ballots and counted. The two major parties are qualified in
every state, but the Libertarian Party candidates will appear on the ballots
in only 33 states, the Green Party in 21, and the Constitution Party in 13.
By definition, the names of write-in candidates are not listed on ballots;
however, interested candidates must still file various forms of paperwork in
35 states for their votes to be counted, and seven states do not allow
write-in votes for presidential candidates. While permitted in the remaining
eight states, votes for write-in candidates may not be counted or reported
by local registrars.
Even after the end of this year's political conventions and the statutory
period to qualify for the ballots in individual states, steps could still be
taken by alternative candidates, such as Bernie Sanders or an establishment
Republican, to register a willingness to accept write-in votes in those
states where they are permitted.
A Possible Amendment
All of this could change with the enactment of the US Voters' Rights
Amendment (USVRA), which would finally guarantee that every citizen has the
right to cast effective votes in all elections. In addition, the USVRA
mandates a national, hand-countable paper ballot in all federal elections,
allows write-in candidates for all federal offices, and requires that all
such votes be counted.
Moreover, for presidential elections, the ballots would list the 12 most
critical questions facing the Nation, compelling all candidates to actually
address the true issues. The People would be better informed and empowered
to make their own national policy -- and to elect representatives most
qualified to carry out their policies.
A national policy referendum, in conjunction with presidential elections,
would create broad federal guidelines, rather than binding laws. Elected
representatives would be expected to carry out the policies and direction of
the People, and could be held accountable if they fail to do so.
Rather than responding to billions of dollars in negative advertising about
the inadequacies of opposition candidates, a barrage of slick promotional
propaganda concealing those deficiencies, and misleading party platforms,
voters in the 2016 election should have the power to create policy for
themselves.
They should decide whether international trade pacts should be approved; the
cap on Social Security withholding taxes should be eliminated; a
supplemental national retirement system should be enacted; space-solar
energy should be generated to energize the national highways in lieu of a
reliance on polluting petroleum products; and whether the crumbling national
infrastructure should be repaired and upgraded.
The People should have a direct say about whether the war on drugs should
end and private prisons should be prohibited. Those most affected by
domestic policies should decide whether everyone has a right to national
health care; whether paid maternity leave should be provided; women should
have the freedom of choice in childbearing; and everyone should have the
right to marry whomsoever they chose. Voters who are smart enough to earn a
paycheck and pay taxes are certainly qualified to decide if a national
minimum wage should be guaranteed; all existing student loans should be
forgiven; the right to education extended through college; and whether
military spending should be reduced.
Instead of an income tax disproportionally imposed on salaried workers and
small business owners, the People should have the right to decide whether
government initiatives are to be paid for by a tiny tax on the movement of
all money in the economy, including stock and currency transactions and the
financial manipulations of all banks, insurance companies, and other
corporations. In doing so, the burden of taxation would be lifted from those
who work the hardest and shifted to those who profit the most from our
economy.
Archaic Rules
Those who founded the United States and drafted its Constitution did not
trust the vast majority of its citizens to vote. They left voting questions
up to the states and established the Electoral College -- rather than a
majority vote of the People -- to elect the president and vice president.
At first, only white males owing sufficient property were permitted to vote,
but slowly over the years, others have been allowed to participate. These
rights are fragile and can be taken away at the whim of state legislatures
-- as is being done by the widespread enactment of voting suppression
schemes, such as voter identification laws.
The USVRA would eliminate the Electoral College and implement a national
popular vote for the offices of president and vice president. It also would
establish a uniform presidential primary, limit the length of campaigns,
require universal voter registration, and outlaw voter suppression. Finally,
it would declare that corporations do not have constitutional rights and
that campaign contributions are not the same as free speech.
If America is to continue as a representative democracy, it must transform
its government into one that actually represents and cares for those who
elect it -- rather than the corporations and financial elites who are now
paying for election campaigns and bribing the candidates.
The USVRA would provide a constitutional basis for the transformation of the
United States government; however, the energy to compel its enactment must
come from the incredible power of the pen literally held in the hands of the
People.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not
be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.
William John Cox
William John Cox is a retired prosecutor and public interest lawyer, author
and political activist. His efforts to promote a peaceful political
evolution can be found at VotersEvolt.com, his writings are collected at
WilliamJohnCox.com. Contacted him at: u2cox@xxxxxxx.
Related Stories
Five Reasons No Progressive Should Support Hillary Clinton By Joseph
Mulkerin, Truthout | Op-EdDonald Trump Set to Be GOP Nominee Despite Links
to Organized Crime By Juan González, Amy Goodman, Democracy Now! | Video
InterviewHillary Clinton: The Neocon in Democrat's Clothing By Pierre
Guerlain, Truthout | Op-Ed
Show Comments
