Major areas of concern:
Instant Runoff Voting should be stopped:
IRV is undemocratic because it counts the secondary choices of some voters while counting only the first choice votes of others!
It eliminates the primaries which play a vital role in the electoral process; It creates false majorities, suppresses minority viewpoints and its structure makes it susceptible to strategic manipulation.
It is highly impractical because it easily leads to unreasonably large fields of candidates making it nearly impossible for voters to identify them.
In any event, the IRV election format is clearly unconstitutional as said the Minnesota Supreme Court in 1915:
“Preferential voting... was (is) contrary to the intent of The Constitution.”
To insure the integrity of elections, photo I.D. should be required.
Concern over vote fraud has revealed a need for voter I.D. Whenever an illegal or illegitimate vote is cast, it diminishes the effectiveness of all the legitimate votes cast by legal voters.
Photo I.D. is required for nearly every important transaction in life, including renting a rug doctor. It should also be required for voting. Who could oppose protecting the integrity of the vote?
It should be noted here that the U. S. Supreme Court recently upheld an Indiana law requiring photo I.D. (see Opinion)
Congressman Keith Ellison wrote a Star Tribune Op Ed commenting on the Court's decision. (see Ellison ) (Our response)
We conducted a random, in person, survey of 250 St. Paul voters in September 2008. A staggering 237 out of 250 strongly favored the photo ID requirement! A Rasmussen poll, October 2008, showed that 76% favor voter photo I.D.
More to come...
Nonpartisan Elections should be abolished in favor of partisan 'basis' elections:
Nonpartisan elections conceal the party affiliations of the candidates, restrict choices, limit accountability and weaken the voice of the people.
The law allows the candidates to seek and receive political party support, but deprives voters from such knowledge on the ballot.
Nonpartisan elections also fail to guarantee that each party (and each qualified Independent) can be represented in the general election by limiting it to just the top two overall vote-getters.
Judicial offices should remain elective:
There is an effort underway, by a group of (so-called nonpartisan) political insiders known as the Quie Commission, who are attempting to remove our constitutional right to elect judges.
They want to create a panel of bureaucrats to choose them for us. We strongly oppose this effort! We believe that an election system, not a retention system, places voters in the strongest position to influence the judicial process.
This issue was fully debated in the 1857 Constitutional Convention, with the delegates ultimately deciding on an election system. Once we give up our right to vote, we will never get it back.
We should fix our election system, not scrap it.
Please visit our donations page and consider supporting us.