Opinions vary all over the map, as do state laws . .

Post #179,134 by Andrew Grygus 10/13/04 2:15:01 PM Reply	Opinions vary all over the map, as do state laws . . . . but the major parties are pretty firm on wanting closed primaries so it's not going to change any time soon. California in 1998 passed a completely open primary initiative that allowed you to vote a mix of candidates and was immediately sued by both major political parties. A U.S. Judge and the subsequent appeals court upheld the California law, but the U.S. Supreme Court (yes, the same one that appointed W President) said that violated "free association" and forced the political parties to "associate" with persons with philosophies they did not agree with. California has a [link\|http://reforminstitute.org/cgi-data/issues/files/14.shtml\|rewritten initiative] in the works now for a second try. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #179,135 by inthane-chan 10/13/04 2:18:06 PM Reply	I'm in agreement with the decision... ...but the problem is, they didn't follow it to the logical conclusion: Primaries should be held and funded by the party in question, not by the state. All I want for my birthday is a new President!
Post #179,154 by jake123 10/13/04 3:22:58 PM Reply	There's an even simpler method to deal with this. You become a member of the party by joining it, and paying a fee. In my country, the fee may not be penurious in any way; for example, to join the Liberal Party of Canada for one year costs five bucks. Once you're a member, you get to participate. And yes, things like leadership votes, riding association nominations, etc are all paid for by the party in question. For the actual voter registration for an actual general election (be it at the riding, municipal, federal/provincial level), party membership information is not collected and if inadvertently gained must be discarded immediately. In fact, the person in charge of Elections Canada is not even permitted to vote. --\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca \n [link\|http://consultron.ca\|http://consultron.ca] [link\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] \n Kingston Ontario Canada [link\|news://news.consultron.ca\|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
Post #179,155 by pwhysall 10/13/04 3:33:21 PM Reply	Nod. That's how it is here. Registering to vote is a non-partisan act. Peter [link\|http://www.debian.org\|Shill For Hire] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home]
Post #179,470 by lincoln 10/15/04 6:10:19 PM Reply	Question: to join the Liberal Party of Canada for one year costs five bucks Is that a one time only fee, or an annual fee? lincoln "Windows XP has so many holes in its security that any reasonable user will conclude it was designed by the same German officer who created the prison compound in "Hogan's Heroes." - Andy Ihnatko, Chicago Sun-Times [link\|mailto:bconnors@ev1.net\|contact me]
Post #179,474 by ben_tilly 10/15/04 6:27:26 PM Reply	That isn't clear from the sentence quoted??? The words for one year are highly suggestive... Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #179,156 by Andrew Grygus 10/13/04 3:33:47 PM Reply	And there you have it. If the taxpayers are paying for the primaries, the taxpayers should get to set the rules. If that isn't satisfactory to the parties, they should pay for their own primaries and have their own way with them. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]

Welcome to IWETHEY!