nonpartison elections in NYC?

[mangopaco]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/nyregion/14nonpartisan.html

I was in favor of them back in 2003.  Not so sure I feel the same way after watching Bloomberg spend so much money on his elections. 

[TRX]

I think there are arguments for and against, but I am suspicious about the intent.
If the argument is to be more inclusive or increase participation, you could have other voting systems and maintain party involvements.
Is there a reason to believe voters have changed minds to have them be nonpartisan.


As it is, I think many accept voting in a Dem primary as a key selection. Would it be possible to allow parties to have multiple candidates for a general election?
Again I am reminded of reforms suggested for runoffs.


The Charter revision discussions may play games with term limits again.

http://www.nyc.gov/html/charter/html/home/home.shtml



Tuesday, May 25 – TERM LIMITS

Place:  Brooklyn Borough Hall, 209 Joralemon Street
BROOKLYN
Time:  6 p.m.

Wednesday, June 2 – VOTER PARTICIPATION

Place:  Lehman College, 250 Bedford Park Boulevard West
Music Building, Faculty Dining Room
BRONX
Time:  6 p.m.

Thursday, June 10 – GOVERNMENT STRUCTURE

Place:  Staten Island Technical High School, 485 Clawson Street
STATEN ISLAND
Time:  6 p.m.

Wednesday, June 16 – PUBLIC INTEGRITY

Place:  City College, 160 Convent Ave
MANHATTAN
Time: 6 p.m.

Thursday, June 24 – LAND USE

Place:  Flushing Branch, Queens Borough Public Library
41-17 Main Street, Flushing
QUEENS
Time:  6 p.m.

[mangopaco]

Just realized I misspelled 'nonpartisan.' 

It's been a long day.

What do they want to do with term limits?

[kempsternyc]

I grew up in California where they have non-partisan elections. . Well, not really. The ballot contained no party lines....but you pretty much knew who was what. However, it created, at times, a very vigorous election season

But, I had thought about this over the last two days. I was confused when someone in the JFP/AS thread had challenged JFP regarding a "petition slate". Why is one limited to a slate and can't sign any other petitions to get a candidate on the ballot.

The only answer I can think of is to limit competition.

This is the first election I have seen in NYC with a open seat. And, it seems to me that the system is set up to insure that no outsider can be a spoiler.

I remember in 2000 when McCain had to go to court to get on the ballot because the state GOP had decided to support Bush and set the deck to exclude McCain.

I don't like the process here. I don't mind the endorsements. I don't like the fact that there is not a vigorous and open process that allows for many candidates and open debate. Yes, it can be messy......but isn't that what it is all about?

[mcdirk]

I strongly oppose non-partisan elections myself - I like knowing what party people are caucusing with and with whom they are aligned.  I think non-partisan elections would basically allow the wealthy to purchase their way into office with campaigns decrying the two parties.  Bloomberg is more than enough non-partisan for me.

Candidates often get on slates both in Queens and the rest of the city, it allows for coordination of resources and volunteers between campaigns and is not always an endorsement, though usually that is the case.  I don't think being on a slate keeps people out - you can always draft your own petitions and work to get on the ballot, though a slate makes it easier for candidates who are part of the slate to qualify. 

[QMC]

No thanks.  I recall that one of Barrack Obama's arguments for his competence and qualification to be president was running a campaign.  Although, I do not agree with him on much, I think he had a point, at least by the time he had won the Democrat nomination. 

How many different lines are available on the ballot in NY?  Off the top of my head, I can think of a handful: GOP, Democrat, Green, Conservative, Liberal, and whatever that SEIU front group calls itself-Working Families or something like that.

That is six freakin lines.  And, unless I miss my guess, there are a few fringe groups that get on the ballot from time to time.  In other words, if you want to get yourself on the ballot in NY, I imagine you could with relatively little difficulty.

The process, as it were, is open to outsiders, and that is one of the few things I actually like about NY politics.

[TRX]

No thanks.  I recall that one of Barrack Obama's arguments for his competence and qualification to be president was running a campaign.  Although, I do not agree with him on much, I think he had a point, at least by the time he had won the Democrat nomination. 

How many different lines are available on the ballot in NY?  Off the top of my head, I can think of a handful: GOP, Democrat, Green, Conservative, Liberal, and whatever that SEIU front group calls itself-Working Families or something like that.

That is six freakin lines.  And, unless I miss my guess, there are a few fringe groups that get on the ballot from time to time.  In other words, if you want to get yourself on the ballot in NY, I imagine you could with relatively little difficulty.

The process, as it were, is open to outsiders, and that is one of the few things I actually like about NY politics.

There are barriers to outsiders, believe me. But yes, we have a much better process here than say OK.
But for the most part, there will be 2 main lines, that of Cuomo and that of Lazio.
Maybe there will come a 3rd line, but that is after an offer of spending what might be $500k.

I dont mind so much the word fringe. More and more voters may find themselves there.
CA will be trying a new process (one that previously had been struck down by the Supreme Court.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/10/us/politics/10prop.html

What is also certain is that voters liked Proposition 14; it won in 56 of the state’s 58 counties, with the only two detractors coming from opposite ends of the political spectrum: Orange, the conservative bastion in the south, and San Francisco, the liberal paradise in the north.

Despite that mandate, Ron Nehring, the chairman of the Californian Republican Party, which opposed the proposition alongside the state’s Democrats and four smaller parties, said the measure would actually take power away from the mass of primary voters and hand it instead to a smaller group of party leaders and loyalists who would decide their candidates in conventions and caucuses. A single handpicked candidate would then get support, he said, while challengers would be shunned.

“Ninety-nine percent of the Republicans that were involved in choosing our candidates are now excluded from choosing our candidates,” Mr. Nehring said. “In the future this decision will be made by no more than a few thousand and, in most cases, a few dozen.”

I hope NY would encourage voter participation. We could have a return to debates among all the candidates on the ballot. It would be a shame to lose any interest in the ballot process.

[QMC]

I am all for debates that permit all the candidates to participate.  In fact, I would like to see debates without a moderator.  The current format used for most debates is more like a quiz show than a real give-and-take between candidates.

[QMC]

There are barriers to outsiders, believe me. But yes, we have a much better process here than say OK.
But for the most part, there will be 2 main lines, that of Cuomo and that of Lazio.
Maybe there will come a 3rd line, but that is after an offer of spending what might be $500k.

Well, that may be the case.  On the other hand, you could be the Democrat Party of South Carolina and be mystified how Alvin Greene managed to get nominated as your candidate for U.S. Senate while doing nothing except putting down the $10,000 filing fee.

[kempsternyc]

Well, that may be the case.  On the other hand, you could be the Democrat Party of South Carolina and be mystified how Alvin Greene managed to get nominated as your candidate for U.S. Senate while doing nothing except putting down the $10,000 filing fee.

Democracy can be messy can't it?

The system proposed by Prop 14 in California had been implemented Decades ago during the Progressive era at the local level.

The arguments by the main parties ring false to me. And no time can I recall a billionaire sweeping in to run for mayor in Los Angeles.....spending millions and........Wait, I think that happened here.

[TRX]

President Bloomberg will NOT be running for President. He may explain why this Sunday on

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/ns/meet_the_press-meet_the_press

I hope they might bring up his flip-flops on term limits. And perhaps billionaire charity pledges.
... and salt ...

 :lol: