Federal judge rejects Morristown councilwoman’s challenge to New Jersey primary system
August 19, 2014 by Kevin Coughlin
A federal judge has upheld New Jersey’s closed primary system, rejecting a legal challenge from Morristown Council President Rebecca Feldman and others who contended the taxpayer-funded primaries unfairly exclude nearly half the state’s voters, who are unaffiliated...
Community Activist Tia Williams talking to voters in Jersey City
“The Supreme Court has drawn an important distinction between casting
a ballot in a general election, which implies the ‘fundamental’ right
to vote, and nominating a candidate for general election, which does
not,” wrote Judge Chesler, granting New Jersey Secretary of State Kim Guadagno’s motion to dismiss the case.
Harry Kresky, one of the lawyers representing Feldman and eight other plaintiffs, said they are weighing an appeal.
Harry Kresky, Councel for independentvoting.org
“We think the Court misunderstood our argument. The judge addressed
this as a case of Independents wanting to participate in party politics.
That’s not what this case is about. It’s about whether the state of New
Jersey can fund and administer a system that’s for the parties and not
for anyone else,” said Kresky, adding he was surprised that no oral
arguments were heard in the case.
Morristown NJ Council President Rebecca Feldman
Photo by Kevin Coughlin
“This is only the first round,” said Feldman, an Independent on the
town council, in a statement. “The other plaintiffs and I never thought
it would be easy to get beyond the hold the major parties have on our
election system.”
Go to independenvoting.org for more information about the national movement for a fair and open -- and nonpartisan -- primary election system.
A tip -- you can read more from Harry Kresky about our current constitutional crisis here.
...“By denying over 2.6 million New Jersey voters the right to cast a vote in primary elections, the state has disenfranchised nearly half of its electorate, thereby, giving private political parties a state subsidized advantage and partisan voters greater and unequal access to the voting franchise,” the lawsuit contended.
Harry Kresky, one of three lawyers representing the plaintiffs, said they were considering an appeal.
“Judge Chesler treated the case from a vantage point that the plaintiffs who were mainly independent voters were seeking to vote in the primaries,” he said. “That’s not what they’re seeking – it’s whether the state can fund and conduct an election system that gives favorable treatment to voters who are members of major parties.”...
Harry Kresky, one of three lawyers representing the plaintiffs, said they were considering an appeal.
“Judge Chesler treated the case from a vantage point that the
plaintiffs who were mainly independent voters were seeking to vote in
the primaries,” he said. “That’s not what they’re seeking – it’s whether
the state can fund and conduct an election system that gives favorable
treatment to voters who are members of major parties.”
- See more
at:
http://www.northjersey.com/news/federal-judge-dismisses-suit-challenging-nj-primary-election-system-1.1069358#sthash.77x0Bn8J.dpuf
Harry Kresky, one of three lawyers representing the plaintiffs, said they were considering an appeal.
“Judge Chesler treated the case from a vantage point that the
plaintiffs who were mainly independent voters were seeking to vote in
the primaries,” he said. “That’s not what they’re seeking – it’s whether
the state can fund and conduct an election system that gives favorable
treatment to voters who are members of major parties.”
- See more
at:
http://www.northjersey.com/news/federal-judge-dismisses-suit-challenging-nj-primary-election-system-1.1069358#sthash.77x0Bn8J.dpuf
Independent voters who challenged the constitutionality of New Jersey’s
primary election system by claiming they had a right to vote in
elections that nominate candidates for general runoffs received a blow
last week when a federal judge determined that the system will remain
intact.
Judge Stanley R. Chesler of U.S District Court in Newark wrote that
while the plaintiffs in the suit believe the fundamental right to vote
extends to primary elections conducted by political parties of which
they are not members, that is not the law established by the U.S.
Supreme Court.
“The Supreme Court has drawn an important distinction between casting a
ballot in a general election, which implicates the fundamental right to
vote and nominating a candidate for a general election, which does
not,” he wrote in his 12-page decision that dismissed the suit on
Thursday.
The lawsuit was filed in March by seven registered voters – four
unaffiliated, including one from Bergen County, and three registered
with a party – and two non-profit organizations that represent
independent voters. Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno, who serves as the acting
secretary of state, was named as the defendant because she administers
the state election system.
The plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality of New Jersey’s primary
election system that allows political parties the right to use taxpayer
money to pay for the elections. By appropriating public money for
private purposes, it forces unaffiliated voters to pay for an election
process that denies them full participation, according to the lawsuit.
“By denying over 2.6 million New Jersey voters the right to cast a vote
in primary elections, the state has disenfranchised nearly half of its
electorate, thereby, giving private political parties a state subsidized
advantage and partisan voters greater and unequal access to the voting
franchise,” the lawsuit contended.
Harry Kresky, one of three lawyers representing the plaintiffs, said they were considering an appeal.
“Judge Chesler treated the case from a vantage point that the
plaintiffs who were mainly independent voters were seeking to vote in
the primaries,” he said. “That’s not what they’re seeking – it’s whether
the state can fund and conduct an election system that gives favorable
treatment to voters who are members of major parties.”
Representatives of the governor’s office could not immediately be reached for comment on Monday evening.
- See more at:
http://www.northjersey.com/news/federal-judge-dismisses-suit-challenging-nj-primary-election-system-1.1069358#sthash.77x0Bn8J.dpuf
Independent voters who challenged the constitutionality of New Jersey’s
primary election system by claiming they had a right to vote in
elections that nominate candidates for general runoffs received a blow
last week when a federal judge determined that the system will remain
intact.
Judge Stanley R. Chesler of U.S District Court in Newark wrote that
while the plaintiffs in the suit believe the fundamental right to vote
extends to primary elections conducted by political parties of which
they are not members, that is not the law established by the U.S.
Supreme Court.
“The Supreme Court has drawn an important distinction between casting a
ballot in a general election, which implicates the fundamental right to
vote and nominating a candidate for a general election, which does
not,” he wrote in his 12-page decision that dismissed the suit on
Thursday.
The lawsuit was filed in March by seven registered voters – four
unaffiliated, including one from Bergen County, and three registered
with a party – and two non-profit organizations that represent
independent voters. Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno, who serves as the acting
secretary of state, was named as the defendant because she administers
the state election system.
The plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality of New Jersey’s primary
election system that allows political parties the right to use taxpayer
money to pay for the elections. By appropriating public money for
private purposes, it forces unaffiliated voters to pay for an election
process that denies them full participation, according to the lawsuit.
“By denying over 2.6 million New Jersey voters the right to cast a vote
in primary elections, the state has disenfranchised nearly half of its
electorate, thereby, giving private political parties a state subsidized
advantage and partisan voters greater and unequal access to the voting
franchise,” the lawsuit contended.
Harry Kresky, one of three lawyers representing the plaintiffs, said they were considering an appeal.
“Judge Chesler treated the case from a vantage point that the
plaintiffs who were mainly independent voters were seeking to vote in
the primaries,” he said. “That’s not what they’re seeking – it’s whether
the state can fund and conduct an election system that gives favorable
treatment to voters who are members of major parties.”
Representatives of the governor’s office could not immediately be reached for comment on Monday evening.
- See more at:
http://www.northjersey.com/news/federal-judge-dismisses-suit-challenging-nj-primary-election-system-1.1069358#sthash.77x0Bn8J.dpuf
Thank you for writing “End Partisan Primaries, Save America” in the July 21st edition of The New York Times. You are right---closed party primaries do “poison the health” of our democracy, and we need to move to Top Two Open Primaries all across the country, including here in New York. As you described, in a Top Two open primary system, all voters can vote and choose from all the candidates. The top two vote getters would then appear on the November ballot.
In your oped, you call for the formation of a national movement to bring this reform to all the states in the country. There is one, led by forces such as IndependentVoting.org, Endpartisanship.org, and many others across the country. This fall, a Top Two Open primary initiative will be on the ballot in Oregon. Plans are underway to put it back on the ballot in Arizona in 2016.
Here in NYC, the NYC Independence Party, former Mayor Bloomberg, and the Citizen’s Union have championed this reform. Right now in NYC, there are more than a million voters independent of the two major parties who are locked out of our primaries, where most elected officials are actually chosen. In New York State that number is over 4 million.
We applaud and welcome you to the movement for nonpartisan primary reform, Sen. Schumer. Yours is an important voice. We call on you to help make Top Two nonpartisan primaries a reality here in New York.
Independent voters across the country are protesting exclusion from party-run private primaries.
In Ohio check out their website at http://independentohio.org/ or email Cynthia Carpathios at ccarpathios@independentohio.org
http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2014/05/independent_voters_protest_ohi.html
No! That couldn't be! "...Don’t
miss the latest drama about the Independence Party in which Governor
Cuomo is cast as Hamlet, deciding whether “to IP or not IP.”
Independents must consider our alternatives. Here’s the backstory..."
Independence Party founder, Jacqueline Salit weighs in on
Jackie Salit just posted an opinion piece on the NYC Independence Party website calling for Lenora Fulani to challenge Gov Cuomo in 2014. In it, you'll get her take on the Governor's race and the political gamesmanship and controversy currently surrounding of the New York State Independence Party.
Jackie Salit helped establish the Independence Party in 1994
and managed all three of Mayor Bloomberg's campaigns on the Independence
Party line. She is the author of Independents Rising.
This
is all sad commentary on the Independence Party’s fate. All the
players in this drama, either directly or indirectly, propped up MacKay
as he did their bidding, stripping away the party’s independence and
vision. Now, it’s time to kill it off, they say. Just as the child who
murders his parents and throws himself on the mercy of the court
because he is an orphan, these anti-independent schemers beg for
justice.
The climax will star the embattled Cuomo, who, in Hamlet-like
fashion, must resolve whether “to IP or not to IP.” Either he does
business with MacKay or becomes a full-fledged Working Families
Party-allied Democrat, even as the WFP is going through its own public
handwringing. He is caught between the Devil and deep blue sea.
- See more at: http://www.ipnyc.org/home/opinion-somethings-rotten-in/#sthash.6tGQcfte.dpuf
This
is all sad commentary on the Independence Party’s fate. All the
players in this drama, either directly or indirectly, propped up MacKay
as he did their bidding, stripping away the party’s independence and
vision. Now, it’s time to kill it off, they say. Just as the child who
murders his parents and throws himself on the mercy of the court
because he is an orphan, these anti-independent schemers beg for
justice.
The climax will star the embattled Cuomo, who, in Hamlet-like
fashion, must resolve whether “to IP or not to IP.” Either he does
business with MacKay or becomes a full-fledged Working Families
Party-allied Democrat, even as the WFP is going through its own public
handwringing. He is caught between the Devil and deep blue sea.
- See more at: http://www.ipnyc.org/home/opinion-somethings-rotten-in/#sthash.6tGQcfte.dpuf
Must read for independents everywhere!
- NH
Don’t
miss the latest drama about the Independence Party in which Governor
Cuomo is cast as Hamlet, deciding whether “to IP or not IP.”
Independents must consider our alternatives. Here’s the backstory. -
See more at:
http://www.ipnyc.org/home/opinion-somethings-rotten-in/#sthash.6tGQcfte.dpuf
This
is all sad commentary on the Independence Party’s fate. All the
players in this drama, either directly or indirectly, propped up MacKay
as he did their bidding, stripping away the party’s independence and
vision. Now, it’s time to kill it off, they say. Just as the child who
murders his parents and throws himself on the mercy of the court
because he is an orphan, these anti-independent schemers beg for
justice.
The climax will star the embattled Cuomo, who, in Hamlet-like
fashion, must resolve whether “to IP or not to IP.” Either he does
business with MacKay or becomes a full-fledged Working Families
Party-allied Democrat, even as the WFP is going through its own public
handwringing. He is caught between the Devil and deep blue sea.
- See more at: http://www.ipnyc.org/home/opinion-somethings-rotten-in/#sthash.6tGQcfte.dpuf
So what else is new in the independent political movement?
Not exactly new, but Cathy L. Stewart is hosting the next P4P Book Club conference call with author Alex Myers. Read his book Revolutionary and call in for the book club call with the author on Sunday, April 13th at 7 pm EST.
“In 1782, during the final clashes of the Revolutionary War, one of
our young nation’s most valiant and beloved soldiers was, secretly, a
woman. When Deborah Samson disguised herself as a man and joined the
Continental Army, she wasn’t just fighting for America’s
independence—she was fighting for her own."
This is Alex Myers' first novel. Born and raised in Paris,
Maine, Alex was raised as a girl and attended
boarding school at Phillips Exeter Academy. In his senior year, Alex came out as
transgender, the first ever at Exeter. After Exeter, Alex earned his bachelor’s at Harvard
University, also the first openly transgender
student at Harvard, and worked to change the University’s
nondiscrimination clause to include gender identity.
Lots of breaking news in the independent movement lately! If you have not seen this piece by RT America, check it out now: RT America invited #EndPartisanship’s legal counsel, Chad Peace, on their ‘Breaking the Set‘
segment to discuss the hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars that
have been used to conduct closed partisan primary elections.
Host Abby Martin [Move over, Rachel Maddow, WAY over!] discussed the record low turnout rate in states like
New Jersey and New York where less than 5% of eligible voters
ultimately decide who can be their state’s next Governor or even
Senator.
Stay tuned -- more to come from America's growing independent movement!
Disculpa que me haya desaparecido. He tenido un invierno muy dificil y mucha nieve. Estoy de regreso porque creo que es importante en el 2014 educar a la gente sobre nuestra politica.
Aqui le dejo en enlace para que entiendan un poco sobre como los partidos controlan todo y una de las muchas soluciones en los que ellos no quieren ejercer.
That's what George Washington said as he was leaving office as our first and thus far only nonpartisan President. Captured here on Wall Street, Geo. W.
Imagine my delight on Saturday morning, when reading the editorial page of the New York Times,
I came across a letter by a dear friend and independent activist, Dr.
Phyllis Goldberg. She was the lead letter to the editor under the
heading“Christie’s Efforts at Damage Control.”
Here is what Phyllis had to say:
To the Editor:
Re “ ‘Very Sad’ Christie Extends Apology in Bridge Scandal” (front page, Jan. 10):
As an independent, I look at the politically engineered traffic jam
in Fort Lee, N.J., as a product of the partisan political culture. The
email exchanges between a member of Gov. Chris Christie’s staff and his
Port Authority appointee speak volumes about the norms and values of
this culture, in which political operatives’ overriding obligation is to
their own side’s interests....
It is time to start focusing on collective solutions for the greater
good. Instead of being a nation divided, we need to come together to
find answers or we risk losing a great deal more...
In a March 2011 Ted Talk, Pariser talked about how he
noticed that his conservative Facebook friends’ posts began to
“disappear” from his News Feed. Because Pariser clicked on more of the
links posted by his liberal friends than his conservative friends,
Facebook filtered the conservative posts out of his News Feed.
[Eli] Pariser, author of The Filter Bubble,
demonstrated how Google is filtering search results in his March 2011
Ted Talk by showing screen-shots of what his friends found when they
Googled “Egypt” on the same day. Both were Caucasian men located in New
York, yet Google gave them very different results.
Pariser said Facebook and Google are
using algorithms to act as gatekeepers, making information that we are
most likely to agree with the easiest to find. But as Pariser pointed
out in his March 2011 Ted Talk, these algorithmic gatekeepers do not
have the “embedded ethics” that human gatekeepers did.
The algorithms are different than
gatekeepers in that they aren’t preventing us from seeing any
information. They are, however, making it more difficult to find
different opinions. We all have access to the same information, but
sites, such as Google and Facebook, are propelling us all to information
that seems to only affirm our views.
**********
I have noticed this for a while with Google and it really really bugs me. They decide what I want to see based on what I have looked at in the past. Talk about no room for change!!!! - NH
