GOP acts to ban Libertarians & Greens from the ballot

GOP Fears Democracy May Break Out

• A corrupt Ohio GOP rammed through the John Kasich Re-Election Protection Act which would disenfranchise every Ohio voter by taking away their right to vote for smaller political parties. 
• It is all about power and fucking over the average voter.

Here we go again!  -  Just last week the corrupt GOP & Dem ruling Elites in Virginia banned the Libertarian Party from the debate for Governor even though the party was polling 11% of the vote.

Now we see the Ohio Republican Party trying to "fix" the 2014 election for Governor by effectively banning all smaller political parties from the ballot.  So much for freedom.

A measure of oppressive new election rules for minor political parties passed the state Senate on Tuesday despite concerns from members of the Libertarian and Green parties that the changes would obstruct their access to the ballot and create huge hurdles for their candidates that the "major" parties do not have to face.

 

The proposal was rammed through the Republican-controlled Senate on a 22-11 vote, with one GOP senator joining Democrats in opposition. The bill now goes to the GOP controlled House.

 

Gary Daniels, associate director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, told a Senate committee earlier Tuesday that the proposed petition requirements are onerous for third parties and that the changes come too close to the 2014 election, especially for candidates who are collecting signatures for office reports the Associated Press.

 

GOP Gov. John Kasich
"Corruptus in Extremis"

The proposal comes as Ohio Republicans face growing competition from tea party supporters who say they may support a third-party challenger to Republican Gov. John Kasich next year.

 

Seitz's bill would require minor parties to gather petition signatures from at least 1 percent of the total vote cast in the most recent election for governor or president.

 

That's more than 56,000 valid signatures using last year's election numbers just to appear on a ballot.  A massive task for smaller parties.  It also means parties must collect far, far more that this minimum because of signature attrition.

To remain a qualified political party, groups must get 3 percent of the total votes cast in the following gubernatorial or presidential election.

 

No third-party candidate in the most recent elections has reached those numbers.

But the law discriminates against any new party that may not want to run a candidate for President.  Perhaps a new party might only want to address Ohio issues, not Federal issues.

 

Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson garnered 0.9 percent, or 49,493 votes, in the 2012 presidential election. In the 2010 gubernatorial race, Libertarian candidate Ken Matesz got 2.4 percent of the vote, while Green Party candidate Dennis Spisak won 1.5 percent.

 

Charlie Earl, a Libertarian candidate for governor, opposes the bill and predicted it would unite disenfranchised voters.

 

"What I believe they've done is taken four or five pockets of resistance and combined us into one bag of fury," he told reporters. "And we're coming after them. We're not going to stop."

Banned by the GOP?

 

Many third parties choose to build support by running in small, local campaigns before progressing to expensive and challenging presidential elections, but the Ohio bill only bases its judgment on presidential elections.  Any third party candidate from a party which chooses to focus its limited time and money on winnable campaigns would be at an immediate disadvantage.

Many Americans who want limited government are dissatisfied with both parties. They feel there is no real opposition party that seeks a responsible fiscal policy. Establishment Republicans are threatened by the growing competition from tea party supporters and liberty activists who are say they may support a third-party challenger to incumbent moderate Republicans.

.
A statement from the Libertarian Party of Ohio’s website says, “The bottom line is that the John Kasich Re-election Protection Act would disenfranchise every Ohio voter by taking away their right to vote for a candidate for governor other than a) John Kasich, a governor who has miserably failed the state of Ohio and betrayed millions of fiscal conservatives who expected him to follow Ohio law and oppose Obamacare, or b) the nominee of the other big-government party who is promising to double down on most of Kasich’s failing policies.”

Read more: Ben Swann.com

 "Corruptus in Extremis"

 In 2010 Republican John Kasich only won by 2.5% of the vote.  In the Attorney

General's race right-of-center parties took 6.2% of the vote.  Banning other

parties is a naked attempt to hold on to power.   

 

Former Ohio State Representative Charlie Earl announced that he is running for governor as a Libertarian Party candidate next year. By Tuesday, Seitz was holding hearings on his new bill that would make it difficult for Earl to stay on the ballot.

 

Earl ran as the Libertarian candidate for Ohio Secretary of State in 2010 and received nearly 5 percent of the vote. In his announcement, Earl claimed he had “Tea Party support.”

Green Party congressional candidate Bob Hart told the Senate committee that the bill was blatantly unfair, “by eliminating all Green voters from the state of Ohio in 2014, prohibiting a primary, which is where Green voters are created, and then demanding that the candidate go out and petition nonexistent Green voters to get on the ballot.”

All existing minor parties would be thrown off the ballot under the GOP bill.  (Columbus Free Press.com)

Ohio Governor's Race election in Ohio, 2010
Party		Candidate	Votes	Percentage
	Republican	John Kasich - Mary Taylor	1,849,842	49.33%
	Democratic	Ted Strickland - Yvette McGee Brown	1,752,790	46.74%
	Libertarian	Ken Matesz - Ann Leech	89,499	2.39%
	Green	Dennis Spisak - M. Anita Rios	56,797	1.51%
	N/A	David Sargent - Andrew C. Pfeifer (write-in)	864	0.02%
Totals			3,749,792	100.0%
	Republican gain from Democratic

 

Ohio Attorney General election in Ohio, 2010
Party		Candidate	Votes	Percentage
	Republican	Mike DeWine	1,821,414	47.54%
	Democratic	Richard Cordray (Incumbent)	1,772,728	46.26%
	Constitution	Robert Owens	130,065	3.39%
	Libertarian	Marc Allan Feldman	107,521	2.81%
Totals			3,729,428	100.0%
	Republican gain from Democratic

 

Ohio Secretary of State election, 2010
Party		Candidate	Votes	Percentage
	Republican	Jon Husted	1,973,422	54.04%
	Democratic	Maryellen O'Shaughnessy	1,500,648	41.09%
	Libertarian	Charles Earl	179,495	4.87%
Totals			3,653,565	100.00%
	Republican gain from Democratic

_________________________________

California Abolished Free Elections.
For 160 years (1850 to 2010) all political parties and independents were listed on the November election ballots so the people would have a wide variety of choices.  But freedom is no more. 

In a corrupt back room deal, with no public hearings, the state's Democrats, GOP State Senator Abel Maldonado (above left) and GOP Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (and backed by other Republicans) abolished party primaries in California and only the top two vote getters were allowed on the general election ballots.
.
Four  California opposition parties from both the Left and the Right were effectively banned from all future general election ballots - The American Independent Party, the Green Party, the Peace and Freedom Party and the Libertarian Party.
.
But it gets worse.  All write-in votes are illegal and will not be counted by the all-powerful and corrupt ruling Elites.
.
Both Republican and Democrat leaders were happy to eliminate ballot opposition.
.
Now the only parties on November ballots are the ones flooded with countless millions in corrupt union and business campaign contributions.  Each group is looking to rape the treasury and line their pockets with taxpayer cash. 

"I support the GOP efforts in Ohio."
Fidel Castro
.
Dictators from Caesar to Napoleon to Lenin were ahead of the GOP in abolishing free elections.  It looks like the "Conservative" freedom loving Republican Party is in good company.

Our Founding Fathers Died for Freedom
Just what the Hell does the GOP stand for any more?

Conservatives sweep Norway's elections

The bloc of four right-wing parties won 96 of 169 seats

The anti-immigration Progress Party won 29 seats.

Norwegian center-right leader Erna Solberg is set to form a new government after Labour Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg admitted election defeat.

Solberg described her win as "a historic election victory for the right-wing parties".

Her Conservative Party is widely expected to form a government with the anti-immigration Progress Party.

The bloc of four right-wing parties had won 96 of 169 seats in parliament reports BBC News.

Solberg, 52, will become Norway's second female prime minister after Gro Harlem Brundtland, and its first Conservative prime minister since 1990.

She is nicknamed "Iron Erna" for her robust views when she served in the cabinet between 2001 and 2005.

Much attention is now focused on the Progress Party, poised to enter government for the first time.

Ms Solberg also needs a third coalition partner to ensure a majority - but it is not yet clear whether the smaller Christian Democrats or Liberals are prepared to work with the Progress Party. They may instead opt to stay out, but give parliamentary support to a minority government comprising the Conservatives and Progress.

Correspondents say the Progress Party has toned down its anti-immigration rhetoric since Anders Behring Breivik's atrocity in 2011.

The Progress Party

"The Progress Party does not fit the traditional left-right axis, nor does it fit in with what is considered typically libertarian.  On economics, the Party is pro-free markets, for tax cuts, deregulation and pro-oil.  On social matters, they are decidedly sexually tolerant and anti-nanny state, wanting less alcohol prohibition and allowing bars to offer smoking sections. On foreign policy they are vehemently anti-Islamist, and favor toughening border control and assimilation. They also value traditional Norwegian culture and patriotism," says political commentator Eric Dondero.


Progress Party Leader Siv Jensen on Norway's Myths and Realities
In a country of exceptionally high rates of personal taxation and home to one of the world's most generous welfare states, Norway's Progress Party, which describes itself as a "classical liberal" organization committed to "personal freedom," is something of an anomaly.

Left Behind: Norway swings right in election
Norway's set for a change at the helm. That's after a general election saw the country's current government lose to a coalition of parties formed by the Conservatives and their right-wing allies. Conservative leader Erna Solberg, who's eyeing the premier's seat, has hailed the triumph of the right, as historic.

___________________________________

Truly Free Elections - What a Concept.

American readers please do not be confused.

This is called a free election with many real choices on the ballot for voters to chose from.  Something that has not existed in the U.S. for about 80 years.

Norway is a from the bottom up democracy with eight parties in their Parliament representing every faction of society.  The U.S. has devolved down to a top down, two-party, authoritarian centralized system directed and funded out of D.C.

Summary of the 9 September 2013 Norwegian parliamentary election results

Parties		Votes			MPs
		#	%	±pp	#	±	%
	Labour Party (Arbeiderpartiet)	869,279	30.8	−4.5	55	−9	32.5
	Conservative Party (Høyre)	755,567	26.8	+9.6	48	+18	28.4
	Progress Party (Fremskrittspartiet)	460,869	16.4	−6.6	29	−12	17.2
	Christian Democratic Party (Kristelig Folkeparti)	157,705	5.6	0.0	10	0	5.9
	Centre Party (Senterpartiet)	154,588	5.5	−0.7	10	−1	5.9
	Liberal Party (Venstre)	146,997	5.2	+1.3	9	+7	5.3
	Socialist Left Party (Sosialistisk Venstreparti)	114,987	4.1	−2.1	7	−4	4.1
	Green Party (Miljøpartiet De Grønne)	78,274	2.8	+2.4	1	+1	0.6
	Red Party (Rødt)	30,412	1.1	−0.3	0	0
	Christian Party (De Kristne)	17,640	0.6	+0.6	0	0
	Pensioners' Party (Pensjonistpartiet)	11,823	0.4	0.0	0	0
	Pirate Party (Piratpartiet)	9,716	0.3	+0.3	0	0
	Coastal Party (Kystpartiet)	3,277	0.1	−0.1	0	0
	Democrats (Demokratene)	2,292	0.1	+0.1	0	0
	Christian Unity Party (Kristent Samlingsparti)	1,748	0.1	−0.1	0	0
	Liberal People's Party (Det Liberale Folkeparti)	901	0.0	0.0	0	0
	Communist Party of Norway (Norges Kommunistiske Parti)	609	0.0	0.0	0	0
	Hospital to Alta (Sykehus til Alta)	469	0.0	–	0	–
	Society Party (Samfunnspartiet)	293	0.0	0.0	0	0
	LoVeSe (Folkeliste mot oljeboring i Lofoten, Vesterålen og Senja)	267	0.0	–	0	–
	People's Power (Folkemakten)	174	0.0	–	0	–
Total			100.0		169	–
	Blank votes
	Invalid votes
Turnout
Electorate
Source: NRK

When the U.S. had free elections

John Quincy Adams (above) lived in an America back when the Republic actually functioned.  The people could easily create brand new parties or abandon old ones to impact policy Washington D.C.

.

Over his hugely long career Adams belonged to five different political parties.  He was a Federalist Party U.S. Senator, belonged to the Democrat-Republicans, the National Republicans and was elected to the House as a member of the Anti-Masonic and Whig Parties. 

.

The elections of the 1830s were free and saw four different parties  serving in the House at the same time.  The American system of a free multi-party Republic went on until 1948 when the last small party won election to the House.

.

Free elections no longer exist in America.  The U.S. is the only democracy on earth where the same two corrupt parties magically win 100% of all elections.  A multi-party democracy can be restored by a simple majority vote of the House of Representatives to expand the House and to vastly shrink the massive super-sized House districts.  Smaller districts allow the voters to strike fear into the corrupt Beltway Elites with competitive elections.

.

But it will be a cold day in Hell when the House votes to make their elections competitive.  The Elites of both parties like a centralized system where incumbents are protected and fully funded by Billionaire Cartels of unions and businesses out to loot the treasury.

Mark Levin - The Liberty Amendments

Mark Levin

"An Exercise in Political Masturbation"

A more honest title for Levin's new book.

Book Review

By Gary;

Mark Levin is a true patriot, an ally in the war against Statism and a defender of the Constitution.

But that being said his newest book is mostly a waste of time.  The book fails to address the one real problem in America today - the lack of free elections.

We would not be having this conversation if the politicians had any fear at all of the voters.  They don't.

Levin talks about passing new amendments to the Constitution. But that means nothing when the entrenched politicians financed by a bottomless pit of big Beltway money simply ignore the existing ones.

It is a little know fact that up until 1940 the U.S. was a multi-party Republic.  The people could easily form brand new political parties to overthrow the corrupt Elites in D.C.   Power came from the bottom up.  From the People.

We saw many parties elected to Congress:  Federalists, Democrat-Republicans, National Republicans, Democrat, Anti-Masonic, Free Soil, American, Republican, Greenback, Populist, Progressive and more.

Until free elections are restored we are doomed as a nation.

Levin has proposed a number of amendments he claims will save the county.

Term Limits

Levin proposes term limits as a cure for D.C. corruption.  Sorry.  That one is totally dead on arrival and misses the point that we no longer even have free elections.

As a resident of the People's Republic of California we have had term limits.  It has done absolutely nothing to change the corrupt nature of government.  The reason is, term limits does not change the way politicians are elected.

California resembles the US House of Representatives with monster, huge legislative districts.  900,000 people for the State Senate and 450,000 for the Assembly.  In a special election for State Senate last month both parties spent about $5,000,000 on the race.


Nathaniel P. Banks
Speaker of the House, American Party.
Banks was a Democrat, then the American Party,
then a Republican and finally Liberal Republican
Party.  With small House districts new political
parties can easily rise and fall striking FEAR
in the hearts of the D.C. Elites.
(Nathaniel P. Banks)

Because districts are so huge only millionaires or those willing to be bribed with millions in corrupt outside special interest cash get elected. 
.
Our "representatives" do not represent the People.  They really represent the big money cartels of unions and corrupt businesses wanting "payback" for their campaign money investment. 

Until the common man can again afford to run for office there will be no changes.

REFORM  -  Levin is wasting his time with amendments.  If there is any hope at all in saving the nation then we need to restore free elections. 

Here is a reform that only takes a majority vote of the US House - vastly expand the House of Representatives to help restore the Republic.

Article One, Section 2 of the Constitution says, "The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand." 

Everyone could easily meet their Congressman face to face with next to zero campaign costs.  The House has ignored that number for 200 years causing the current House seats to balloon up to 700,000 people and increasing campaign expenses to the insane level.

The lower houses districts in Canada and Britain run about 100,000 in population and they are both multi-party democracies with free elections. 

About 100,000 is a good number for the US House.  Back when House seats were that size we had free elections with new political parties rapidly being formed, getting elected to Congress and often vanishing just a fast.

With huge districts the political class has no reason to fear the people at election time.

Taxes, Debt & Spending

Levin proposes a limit on spending, taxes and debt which includes a 60% vote of Congress to override.

Once again Levin is lost in intellectual theory la-la-land.

Since 1978 California had a two-thirds (66%) requirement to pass a budget.  The minority GOP had a total veto over all spending and debt.  What happened?  The Republicans simply cut deals with the Democrats to keep the spending-debt machine running at full blast.

Levin's amendment is a joke.  The GOP has the power to freeze or cut spending now with a 50% + 1 vote, but Republicans have not voted to cut even one cent from the budget since the 1920s. 

The money machine gets them re-elected.  Levin's amendment changes nothing.  Only election reform (above) will do that.

Supreme Court Term Limits

If find it interest that Levin attacks the one part of the Constitution that still operates just as our Federalist Founding Fathers wanted  -  the Federal Courts.


Justice Clarence Thomas
Mark Levin wants judges like Thomas
to be term limited.  Sorry Mark, I want
Thomas in there until he is 90 years old
and the EMTs have to pry him out of
his seat.

Again Levin demands those somehow "magical" term limits for those horrible men in black with their "evil" lifetime appointments to the Federal Courts.  Never mind that this is what the Federalists wanted when they wrote the Constitution. 
.
Our Founders wanted a judiciary as far removed from the tug of everyday politics as possible.  The Founders wanted judges to be appointed for life by a variety of Presidents to reduce the danger of dictatorship.

Both Conservatives and Liberals take their turns in attacking the Court.

The Conservatives praise the Court when it votes their way on cases like guns or voting rights and curse them with equal fervor when they dare to vote different. 

The same goes with the libs.  This standard hot air political BS has not changed since the founding of the country.

Also the last thing you want is a judge being term limited at age 60 instead of serving for life.  The judge could easily rule on cases looking ahead to being hired by the very firms or politicians he is making rulings on.

A New Constitutional Convention

Levin is correct that a new Constitutional Convention called by the states is needed.

The Federal government has become a bully dictating everything in our lives from school lunches, to local zoning laws and health care.  A new Convention could draw up an amendment putting serious limitations on the Federal Dictatorship.

Still, we have a 10th Amendment now and neither party pays attention to it.  Would a new amendment be any different?

For political junkies like myself Levin's book is a fun read.  But as a guide for political action I suspect it will be ignored by both parties.