Monday, May 18, 2015

PERMANENT CAMPAIGN- BUSINESS AS USUAL

X
2015- IS ANOTHER ELECTION YEAR; THEN 2017- IS REBUILD REFIT REARM.
X
this link- is unrelated to the woodburn matter; yet it also once more demonstrates the "business as usual; nothing will disrupt the  "established order"; and their "marching orders"
http://www.rejectingthepremise.com/the-andy-downs-kangaroo-court/
x
the Kangaroo court refers to the Matt Kelty ACEB board hearing.. from several years ago. scroll down for text of Danny turkette's blog post.
x
x

http://www.journalgazette.net/news/local/Local-races-keep-political-beat-pounding-4219002
X
http://www.news-sentinel.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20150516/NEWS/150519819

X
http://www.news-sentinel.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20150514/EDITORIAL/150519858/1015/OPINION
x
http://www.news-sentinel.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20150517/EDITORIAL/150519801/1015/OPINION
x

Runner-up in Woodburn mayoral primary wants a new election

Allowing Republicans to vote for Democrats skewed outcome, Reichhart insists

Saturday, May 16, 2015 - 12:01 am



The runner-up in the May 5 Democrat primary for Woodburn mayor wants the results voided, claiming poll workers skewed the outcome by allowing Republicans to vote in another party's election.
Ryan Reichhart, who received 59 votes to 71 for incumbent Democratic Mayor Richard Hoeppner, claimed in a lawsuit filed Friday in Allen Circuit Court that, because no Republican names were on the town ballot, registered Republicans were told they could not vote for their party's candidates but could vote in the Democrat primary. "(Reichhart) believes there were . . .49 declared Democrats in the poll books (and) 43 declared Republicans," the suit states, asserting that "the conduct would make it impossible to determine which candidate received the most legal votes cast . . . (and) undermined the integrity of the election and the trustworthiness of its outcome."
Reicchart seeks a hearing within 20 days and wants the court to order a special election.
Reicchart also states that Republicans were at first told they could not vote but were later told they could vote for Democrats after Hoeppner's wife, Naomi, spoke to polling officials. Naomi Hoeppner stated that the Allen County Election Board said it would be OK, the lawsuit contends.
Beth Dlug, Allen County's director of elections, said she could not comment on the lawsuit because she had not yet seen it. She did say she was unaware of any similar lawsuit in Allen County, and said Republican candidates -- all uncontested -- were not placed on the ballot because party Chairman Steve Shine did not request it in writing. In fact, the Democratic mayoral contest was the only race on Woodburn's ballot .
Shine, however, said he has "always advocated for the names of individuals running to be on the ballot, whether or not they're opposed. It makes them stakeholders. Poll workers should know that if you seek to vote Republican you shouldn't vote for the other party." Indiana has "closed" primaries, meaning voters must declare a party and select candidates from that party.
In addition to working for a construction company, Reichhart, 37, has also served as a Woodburn firefighter and police officer. Hoeppner has been involved in Woodburn's government for 16 years.
The Democratic nominee for mayor -- whoever it is -- will face Republican Joseph Kelsey in November.
x
x
x
January 04, 2015 1:03 AM

Local races keep political beat pounding

State, city gear up for 2015 primary

Dave Gong The Journal Gazette

The 2014 midterm is on the books, and the nation’s looking forward to a year off before the political machines start to gain momentum for 2016. 
But for political parties across the state, this week marks the beginning of yet another election cycle, as cities and towns prepare to vote for their local legislators.
Starting Wednesday, elected officials and candidates alike will be able to officially declare their intention to run in the 2015 primary. In Allen County, the only municipality that won’t be participating in the 2015 primary is Monroeville, which has a caucus later in the summer, said Beth Dlug, Allen County director of elections. 
In Fort Wayne, there are 11 elected city positions up for grabs this year: the mayor and city clerk, as well as all nine city council positions. 
Grabill, Leo-Cedarville, Monroeville, Woodburn and New Haven also will hold elections for their town or city clerk-treasurer and City or Town Council positions. New Haven’s judge of the city court position is also up for election this year. 
It’s a busy time for area pols. 
“In my world, every day, the next day is election day,” Steve Shine, chairman of the Allen County Republican Party, said. “Ever since the elections were over in 2014 and probably even before then, we were planning for the 2015 election.” 
In Fort Wayne, 2015 holds particular importance for the 256,496 residents of Indiana’s second-largest city. It’s the 2015 Fort Wayne municipal election. 
“We’re interviewing and meeting with potential candidates, fundraising, getting our precinct organization more tightly honed and learning from our mistakes or lessons that we may have learned from the 2014,” Shine said. 
Some of those lessons include evaluating where more manpower is needed, which voter precincts need more attention, as well as building upon 2014, which Shine said was a successful year for the Allen County GOP.
“The momentum, the groundwork was laid in the 2014 election, and we’re going to build upon that,” he said. 
Of the nine current Fort Wayne City Council members, only two will not be looking to retain their seats. Councilman Mitch Harper, R-4th, has expressed interest in running for mayor, and Councilman Marty Bender, R-at large, said he will not run again because he feels his three terms on the council are enough. 
“Let somebody else have all the fun,” Bender said. 
Additionally, a recent change to state law prohibiting city employees to run for any elected office where they would have to vote on their own department’s budget would have prohibited Bender, a city police officer, from seeking another term. 
Councilmen Tom Smith, R-1st, Russ Jehl, R-2nd, Geoff Paddock, D-5th, Glynn Hines, D-6th, and John Crawford, R-at large, have said they are planning to seek re-election. Councilman John Shoaff, D-at large, said Friday that he wasn’t ready to reveal his decision. 
Councilman Tom Didier, R-3rd, could not be reached for comment Friday. 
Republican business owner Teresa Sutton announced Friday that she plans to run for one of the three at-large council seats. Sutton is the owner of Custom Art Screen Printing. 
For the Democratic Party, it’s all about finding proper candidates and challenging Republicans, who currently hold a majority on the City Council.
“It comes down to finding the right candidates who can share the message of moving Fort Wayne forward at the administrative level and bringing that down to the City Council as well,” said John Court, chairman of the Allen County Democratic Party. 
As for the Republican Party, taking back the mayor’s office – which long has been occupied by Democrats – is an important task.
“The serious candidates have been thinking, fulfilling those obligations that are precedent to running for office,” Shine said. “They’re having fundraisers, making announcements, discussing policy, and usually you can tell who those individuals are that are serious about running (for mayor).”
Candidates will be able to file paperwork with the Allen County Election Board to declare their intention to run in the 2015 municipal primary beginning Wednesday. 
While it’s not yet clear exactly who is going to be running for any office this year, there’s been interest on both sides of the aisle from people exploring a campaign for City Council. 
“There has been a lot of activity, a lot of interest from the Republican Party,” Shine said. “A lot of candidates (for council) will be announcing right after the first of the year.”
Court said he’s also been having discussions with people who have expressed interest in running for office this time around.
“From a City Council standpoint, I don’t have a number,” he said. “I know there’s a lot of people kicking it around who have a desire to work with this mayor and continue the work he’s doing.” 
Mayor Tom Henry has said that while the possibility of his seeking another term isn’t out of the question, it’s a discussion he has to have with his family before making a decision. 
“My wife and I will be talking about that over the next few weeks,” Henry said. “I love public service, but I’ve been in public service for a while, and I want to make sure I would like to serve another four years – and make sure my wife, who sacrifices a tremendous amount for me to be in office, that she’s OK with it, too.” 
Looking forward into an election season where anything can happen, right now Court said he thinks his party looks solid entering primary season. He knows the other side is going to target the three Democratic-held seats on the council this year, but is confident his party can weather the storm. 
“I know the Republicans are looking to target those three seats, but I think if they do, it’s going to expose themselves on some other seats,” he said. “I’m confident we’ll see the same faces in those seats as well as some new faces on the City Council.”
dgong@jg.net
X
YOUR VOICE

Winning may be the goal, but the process involves never giving up

Thursday, May 14, 2015 - 12:39 pm


The May 5 primary election brought back a flood of political memories.
When I was a student at IPFW, I picked up one of my early heroes — Barry Goldwater — at the airport. He was scheduled to appear for a convocations speech at the campus. My primary recollection came from when I was carrying his bags up to his room at the relatively empty Baer Field Hilton.
His precise words are lost to my memory, but the import of them was clear. The difference between winning and losing is narrow, but the consequences are huge. Lyndon Johnson is escorted to huge events by the Secret Service and lives at the White House. I am at some forlorn hotel in Fort Wayne, driven around by some kid.
His tone was not hostile or bitter. It was more reflective and advisory: If you run for office, don’t lose.
In 1994 there were six candidates for the congressional nomination. Like the current Republican candidates for president, there was a flavor for almost everyone. Each of us brought different strengths to the table. It was a tough fight and didn’t break my direction until just a few weeks left.
Mike Loomis had been the favorite to win because of his powerful finance committee. My co-chairmen Zohrab Tazian and John Popp always kept us competitive, but fund-raising was not my skill. Dr. John Crawford was incredibly generous to me, but he made me ask $100 at a time in the beginning to make me practice asking for money. It helped.
Dick Freeland was the chief financial power-broker at the time. He assembled a group of influential business leaders, almost all of whom — including Dick — were an incredible help to me in the upset campaign against incumbent Jill Long in the fall.
But when I went to visit him during the primary, knowing he was chairing Mike’s campaign, he made another political point clear to me: loyalty. He asked if I remembered those first Dan Coats finance meetings chaired by Jim Loomis, and the guy sitting quietly over in a chair in the corner. He said: That was me. Jim introduced me to the political in-circles. I like you, but I owe him this.
I replied that I hoped to win and if I did, I would really need his help to defeat Congresswoman Long in the fall. He said he would do what he could. The lesson: Don’t burn bridges, build them. There is always tomorrow.
After winning, I went to see Freeland again. He complimented me on my solid win, said that he thought I had run an excellent campaign, would be a good congressman and was all in. But he did want to share some information with me. They had done a poll. Jill had something like a 72 percent favorable rating and almost as high of a “re-elect” number. Even after my primary win, I was incredibly far behind.
My response was basically that I know I am behind but with your help we will win.
We did thanks to so many of you. Never give up.

Mark Souder is a former 3rd District congressman.
x
YOUR VOICE

Letter to the editor: Why is income inequality a critical public policy issue?

Sunday, May 17, 2015 - 11:04 am

The libertarian view of income inequality is one of the best examples of degenerate libertarian ideology. Libertarians disdain social association, so social association is minimized as an analytical factor in socioeconometric analysis. Thus, if one denounces income inequality, it can only be a matter of a whining individual untermensch who is envious of a successful individual ubermensch.
A different picture emerges when the effect of income inequality on political systems is examined. Two metrics are available to analyze the connection between income inequality and political corruption. The metric of income inequality is the Gini coefficient, which is available from the U.S. census and other sources like Wikipedia. The metric of political corruption is provided by Transparency International, which has been researching political corruption perception since 1995.
If one regresses the TI corruption rank index versus the Gini coefficient for all nations, one finds only a weak relationship between inequality and corruption. However, when one groups the nations according to geography and political institution similarity, viz. into Asia, Africa and Latin America, and industrial countries, one sees a very strong relationship between income inequality and corruption: the more income inequality, the more political corruption. The numeric data for (income inequality, corruption) are industrial (31,320), Asia (38,101), Latin America (48,90) and Africa (45,111).
What are the fundamental mechanisms that would theoretically connect private financial power and political systems? The macro-mechanism is provided by conservative idol Lord Acton, who said, “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” There was a fad in the 1970s to apply this to the evil government; in 2015, it applies to private financial power.
The micro-mechanism is given by the supposed maxim that “every man has his price.” The following thought experiment shows that the latter, plus a recent Supreme Court decision, is the more damaging.
Suppose the House of Representatives is modeled as consisting of 435 people who can only be bribed with at least $10,000. Suppose an iron-clad, perfectly enforceable law limits contribution of any kind to $1,000. Then there would be no bribery. Suppose these laws are thrown out, and then any money can be channeled to House members by whatever devious or circumlocutive means. This is exactly what has happened as a result of the Citizens United v. FEC decision.
Citizens United was the most destructive assault on the United States of America since both 9/11/2001 and 12/7/1941. Citizens United de facto legalizes corruption of the American political system. We are seeing it already in the continuing stream of Republicans who have either taken crooked deals after leaving office, or are being put in jail: Judd Gregg, Bob McDonnell, Eric Cantor, Michael Grimm and Aaron Schock. Because of the increasing concentration of financial power, this is only the beginning and probably the tip of the iceberg.
The overwhelming majority of normal Americans are concerned about income inequality — and for good reason. With income inequality increasing in the United States, politicians become relatively cheaper to the wealthy, and with Citizens United now the law of the land, political corruption is now the greatest threat to our country. Citizens United poured gas on the fire of the monetary corruption that is destroying the integrity of the American political system and has placed American democracy in peril.

Hank Achor
x

x
ROACH said…
Indiana state law requires many boards and cmissions to have whats called "partisan balance"- that means that there is supposed to be a proportion ing of board members between party's.
One of those boards specified_I dont have the direct law citation; but its there, trust me, or look it up yourself- is county election boards.
Last time I checked, there is an active Libertarian party in allen county- ask bob enders; as well as a Libertarian State party, and should be in every county.
this means that due to the Libs having ballot access, a legitimate 3rd party, that all boards, comissions, and such should have libertarians on them ; including the allen county election board.
As such, this lack of "Partisan balance" renders the ACEB to be an illegally Constituted board, and as such, all decisions rendered by the ACEB null and void, due to illegal composition. As well as all previous decisions by all illegally constituted boards, and commissions as far back as the Libertarian Party has had legal 3rd party ballot access.
I love the thought that this will throw a monky wrench into the works, require 1000's of $$$ to correct , give all aggreived citizens the right to appeal any an all illegally derived decisions by these illegaly consituted boards, and creates a crisis for the Governor, the State house, and any involved administraqtive laws, decisions, appelas, and opens the state of Indiana up to potentially bankrupting magnitude of back judgements, court costs, settlements, and related topics… giggle!!!
This has been a ticking time-bomb, and should Mr. Downs decide to pursue this matter, after his embarassing smackdown by a backwater, nutjob, hick hoosier town lawyer; It will be fun to see.
The ACEB was hornswoggled by Bopp, a "traveling snakeoil salesman"; bambloozled, hoodwinked.
As Bugs Bunny would say- "What a maroon".
Ive read election laws- frequently- you wouldnt play monopoly, without knowing the little quirks that will bankrupt you opponent when he lands on your Park Place, packed with "Roach- Motels"; would you?
Nor should you play the election game without playing by the rules, and knowing the minutia that will keep you from being tripped up.
Brown, Wright, and Downs make a mockery of the system, by their incompetence, and being cowed by Bopp, afore mentioned 1 man traveling circus sideshwo.
Chalk another 1 up for the pro-lifer koolaid drinking nutjobs; and their charlatan lawyers…
x

The Andy Downs Kangaroo Court

harper_ad
downs monkeyTo put it in a nutshell Andy Downs was belittled, trashed, ridiculed and put in his place like a monkey on a string. He’s a disgrace to the Allen County Democrats and should be replaced as their appointed representative on the election board.
I was going to Blog this live from the hearing and I did try to connect to Indiana Data Center’s free Fort Wayne wireless access – with no luck. Jeff Pruitt had the same problem.
I arrived at 2:30 and there were a few people already present, including Matt’s Mother and Father. I’m glad I got there early as it was SRO by about 3:10 or so. Tracy Warner came in looking peeved about something and took a place in the reserved chairs up front; oh he’s such a god. By the way Tracy, those chairs were not for the press.
Downs was looking the part of a high school teenager getting ready to explain the anatomy of a mosquito. He hooked up his laptop to a projector which I suppose was to impress everyone. He then went on a show-and-tell of how *he* thought the law should be interrupted without presenting any case-law to back it up. It was a pathetic display by a partisan hack with motives I suppose we can only guess about.
Jeff Pruitt, (who I enjoy reading by the way) had this to say.
How can the Republican board members not have A SINGLE question to ask? To be fair, Wright did ask one question but it was an open ended softball question:
I’ll tell you why Jeff. They (all three of them) had plenty of time to consider the case and it’s merits. The two that voted in Matt’s favor determined prior to arriving at the hearing that Matt was not guilty based on Indiana election law. It didn’t take a lawyer to determine that, and Andy Downs proved today he’s incapable of making a non-partisan decision.
Downs actually was (and pardon me) “stupid enough” to use this argument and I paraphrase. “If the loan was unsecured then that means there is no way that Kelty could be forced to pay it back, and that makes it a contribution”. This only shows just how ignorant Andy Downs can be. Unsecured loans happen all the time and if the borrower defaults the lender has the remedy of the legal system to collect. What a twit.
Bopp eloquently put Downs in his place and the differing shades of red on Andy’s face were fun to watch. At one point Bopp stated “You are sitting here as the democratic appointee to the board and you’re acting as prosecutor. You’re not using the law, you’re using your motives for your candidate”… “we’re not in your classroom professor”. At this point the room broke out in laughter and applause. He furthered by stating I’m amazed that my client has been drug here in front of a committee and is having a partisan attack him”.
This was no “whitewash” as Jeff Pruitt points out. It was merely a case of following the law as it is written. This will undoubtedly lead to the legislators in Indianapolis looking at a rewrite of the existing Indiana election laws.
The room was filled with Kelty supporters and each time Bopp took Downs to task the room erupted in laughter and/or applause. Jeff Pruitt had an issue with that and Blogged this about Bopp:
The guy exudes arrogance and he could’ve never gotten away w/ the crap he pulled today in a courtroom.
The truth is he would have gotten away with it in a court room. Any sane judge would have seen through Downs’ ridiculous arguments and would have relished in Bopp’s taking Andy to task.
Bopp’s main argument, and he stuck with it:
Loans and/or debts to the campaign committee are *all* that are outlined in Indiana election law and his client followed the law. No where in the code does it specify that the candidate’s personal financial affairs are open for public disclosure.
Wright said it all too well and Brown concurred. “I’ve heard speculation, innuendo and supposition here today and I do not agree with it”.
So it’s over folks. It is now time to move on. We ended with about 7 of us retiring to Columbia Street West for a beer and some Blogger fellowship. Good times.
AWB
P.S. Keep an eye on this Blog, I’m about to *out* one of the “anti-Kelty” Bloggers.

0 Comments

  1. Jeff Pruitt
    AWB,
    I enjoyed reading your post. It's always interesting to see how people can see things so differently. One point of agreement we have is that Downs did a poor job presenting his case. The format was silly and presenting a 15+ minute presentation listing about 20 questions is simply not the right way to structure the hearing.
    It really wasn't a partisan issue for me. Yes I'm a Democrat and yes I'm a Henry supporter, but I enjoyed watching the Kelty campaign throughout the primary and was even pulling for him to win for anti-establishment/grassroots reasons. I've maintained for quite some time that Kelty should not be forced to drop out of the race. From my perspective it's about the rule of law. I'm sick and tired of our local leaders ignoring the law – this and the redevelopment commission are the latest examples.
    Perhaps we can chat more at tomorrow's press conference at GOP HQ…
    Reply 
  2. roach
    ROACH said…
    Indiana state law requires many boards and cmissions to have whats called "partisan balance"- that means that there is supposed to be a proportion ing of board members between party's.
    One of those boards specified_I dont have the direct law citation; but its there, trust me, or look it up yourself- is county election boards.
    Last time I checked, there is an active Libertarian party in allen county- ask bob enders; as well as a Libertarian State party, and should be in every county.
    this means that due to the Libs having ballot access, a legitimate 3rd party, that all boards, comissions, and such should have libertarians on them ; including the allen county election board.
    As such, this lack of "Partisan balance" renders the ACEB to be an illegally Constituted board, and as such, all decisions rendered by the ACEB null and void, due to illegal composition. As well as all previous decisions by all illegally constituted boards, and commissions as far back as the Libertarian Party has had legal 3rd party ballot access.
    I love the thought that this will throw a monky wrench into the works, require 1000's of $$$ to correct , give all aggreived citizens the right to appeal any an all illegally derived decisions by these illegaly consituted boards, and creates a crisis for the Governor, the State house, and any involved administraqtive laws, decisions, appelas, and opens the state of Indiana up to potentially bankrupting magnitude of back judgements, court costs, settlements, and related topics… giggle!!!
    This has been a ticking time-bomb, and should Mr. Downs decide to pursue this matter, after his embarassing smackdown by a backwater, nutjob, hick hoosier town lawyer; It will be fun to see.
    The ACEB was hornswoggled by Bopp, a "traveling snakeoil salesman"; bambloozled, hoodwinked.
    As Bugs Bunny would say- "What a maroon".
    Ive read election laws- frequently- you wouldnt play monopoly, without knowing the little quirks that will bankrupt you opponent when he lands on your Park Place, packed with "Roach- Motels"; would you?
    Nor should you play the election game without playing by the rules, and knowing the minutia that will keep you from being tripped up.
    Brown, Wright, and Downs make a mockery of the system, by their incompetence, and being cowed by Bopp, afore mentioned 1 man traveling circus sideshwo.
    Chalk another 1 up for the pro-lifer koolaid drinking nutjobs; and their charlatan lawyers…
    Reply 
  3. jimmy Olsen
    " the guy exudes arrogance " That is really large coming from J. Pruitt.
    Get real. I spit all over my computer.
    J.O.
    Reply 
  4. Squarefinger
    Jim Bopp is one of the top ten attorneys in the country on campaign finance and elections law. He has provided expert tesimony before the US Senate on McCain-Finegold. He is a frequent contributor to National Review and often contributes to national periodicals like the Washington Post and others on this and other issues such as freedom of speech. He just recently completed arguing a case before the SCOTUS that will be ruled on at the end of this month. Additionally, he is also a National GOP committeeman from the State of Indiana.
    Hardly a "maroon".
    All this info is in the public domain. Sounds like Roach is getting his info guests on the Coast-to-Coast-AM overnight radio program, between the crop circles and alien abduction stories.
    The internet can be really good, but it can also be really really bad.
    Reply 
  5. Squarefinger
    Jeff,
    I agree. If the current administration was as forthright and transparent on a proposed $160M Harrision Square project as Kelty has been on $160K of personal loans, I think everyone would have a lot more information on which to make an informed judgment on whether or not it is a good deal for taxpayers, the City, and the County.
    Right now I know more about a lousy $150K personal loan to a candidate than I know about a proposed $160M public project funded largley by taxpayer dollars. This in spite of numerous FOIA requests on this issue, apparently being stonewalled by the adminstration.
    That is the difference between Republicans and Democrats (except John Shoaff) in my view. Although, there are a number of Republicans who would rather just have us all just "shut up and color" regarding this project.
    Reply 
  6. Bob G.
    ..And they say there's no political intrigue in smaller cities…
    PSHAW!
    ;)
    B.G.
    Reply 
  7. Jeff
    Did anyone honestly expect a different result than the one that happened? C’mon, it’s politics.
    I don’t know if I support Kelty or Henry at this point, so at least now we can talk about the issues that face our city, rather than who gave/loaned what money to whom.
    Reply 
  8. Jennifer Jeffrey, Ch
    I would definitely pursue the election board being represented properly.
    Any suggestions? Anyone? Anyone?
    Reply 

X

No comments:

Post a Comment