Country

Fraudster

2011-11-30T02:06:00.000-08:00

If suddenly someone, today, had awakened from a Rip Van Winkel-type sleep since Election Eve, 2008, and all the news reports that they were shown since then had just said "President" with no name, they might think that somehow some election controversy had developed, and the gangster George W. Bush managed to finagle an extra-constitutional third term. Despite that the so-called peace and change candidate won the '08 election, Obama's America is just as addicted to meddling into the affairs of other countries as ever; for instance, trying to dictate which parties in Egypt can contest for Prime Minister or not. This is definitely not the early 20th century State Department of the non-imperialist former secretary of state, William Jennings Bryan. This is now Hillary's State Department, which even steals or trys to steal the credit card numbers of the Secretary General of the United Nations, and other officials from foreign countries. Then there is the robotic warfare called drones that is developing rapidly in this administration in which somebody can push a button on one continent and kill somebody on another continent, and like the atomic bombs of 1945 doesn't discriminate between civilian and combatant. Nor do they discriminate between innocent or terrorist. Now, these drones are being developed worldwide, and almost everybody, meaning countries, wants them. Did we mention that Obama started a war all on his own, the Libyan intervention, in defiance of the Constitution and the War Powers Act. Obama is grudgingly pulling the troops out of Iraq, although he has no coherent plan for getting out of the Afghanistan/Pakistan morass. Nor for getting out of Middle East machinations, not that he necessarily wants to.

Regarding civil liberties, the constitutional scholar, Obama, has no respect for the Bill of Rights, even setting a precedent by ordering the killing, reportedly, of a non-combatant U.S. citizen just on his say-so, without any due process rights accorded whatsoever. This is not about what kind of person the executed person was, this is about whether constitutional law will be respected or not. Moreover, except for torture, Obama hasn't tried one lick to roll back any of Bush's wholesale violations of civil liberties, but has in some cases even expanded the violations, not the least of all the invasions of privacy of U.S. citizens without probable cause. If it passes Congress, Obama will also probably sign the fascist Levin-McCain bill currently being considered, quasi-secretly, in Congress. This bill basically sets up a military dictatorship in America in which citizens can be hauled off to secret detention gulags without any judicial process whatsoever.

And to think that the political establishment was talking so badly about Khrushchev's & Brezhnev's Russia back in the third quarter of the 20th Century; but now the new order is apparently envious and grasping the opportunity for emulation, but to tell you the truth, Khrushchev & Brezhnev were probably more "liberal" than Bush II & Obama. Also, Bush II & Obama's new airport backscatter scanners are hazardous to the public's health and our civil liberties. These scanners, of a different essence than the previous ones, were never tested efficiently for health effects before they were put in, but there's been a lot of scientific skepticism about them, because of the probable much increased carcinogenic effects. Now, Obama's administration has hundreds or thousands of them on order to be put in airports across the land. Moreover, Obama's homeland security department is apparently involved in trying to knock out the relatively peaceful "Occupy" protests across America as a reported conference call discussing that, between mayors of America (among probable others), was admitted to by Oakland's odious mayor, Jean Quan.

Obama's domestic policies are pretty much odious. We never thought that less than 80 years after FDR's New Deal, a Democratic Party president would actually put Social Security on the table for cutbacks, and reportedly, and most astoundingly, on his own initiative. Obama set the bar by allowing Bush's tax cuts for the rich to be extended, and allowing essential Social Security funding to be slashed by one-third. Obama plays a lot of footsy with laissez faire economic policy Republicans, also called Tea Party Republicans, who would like nothing better than to decimate the New Deal and the Great Society programs if they got the chance.

Perhaps, the worst thing that may result from the hypocrisy of Barack Obama's 2008 campaign and his actual "change" regime is that the disillusionment of the politically jilted that supported him could well be the perfect set-up for some fascist like Newt Gingrich to take up residence in the White House come 2013. In other words, from the frying pan into the fire.

[Revised on 12/2/11; and on 12/9/11, a spelling error was corrected.]

Copyright 2009 - 2011, Party of Commons TM

Vote Out Both Major Parties, Now

2011-09-05T23:10:00.000-07:00

Talk about a snake oil salesman, even we, the Party of Commons, as skeptical as we were about Barack Obama in 2007 and 2008 (and never supported him until the general election), thought he would at least be marginally better than George W. Bush, but this regime could just as well be Bush's 3rd term, and know one would know the difference. About the only good thing about Obama is that he kept crazy McCain & ignoramus Palin out of office, but he did not give his true depth of his feelings regarding war and peace (to an extent that the Nobel committee, shockingly in retrospect, gave him a peace prize), misled about ending the tax breaks for the rich, is even worst than Bush regarding the environment, just as bad as Bush on civil liberties, even put social security on the trading block as even Republicans were surprised that Democrats would hint at giving up the New Deal & the Great Society, not that they haven't already to a great degree via the debt ceiling deal. The Obama administration has not, for the most part, even bothered to upset Bush's loathsome appointments; such as in the Food & Drug Administration (FDA), where insiders of the food and drug industries are "regulating" their friends, and in the Department of Justice (for instance, it took the administration a long time to oust a prosecutor, former U.S. Attorney Leura Canary, who seemingly railroaded a former Alabama governor for political reasons). The list goes on and on about the philosophy (yes, that's philosophy, not ineptness) of this administration. In 2012, the American people should not have to have only a choice between Obama and the Republican candidates for president, there should be a better and third party or fourth party, somewhere, a coalition, an independent candidate, or something, and we should not shrink from supporting them, and hopefully coalescing around one in order to defeat the major parties. We don't have four more years to gamble on one or the other calamity that may not be able to be undone before the Democrats and the Republicans undo our Constitution, or civilization itself.

[Originally published in "Commoner," on 9/5/11; revised on 9/5/11.]

Copyright 2009 - 2011, Party of Commons TM

Holder's Hold

2011-09-05T23:02:00.000-07:00

If Wikileaks uncovers evidence of war crimes, not widely known, from U.S. government files, then this means that the government has engaged in a cover-up by not investigating or prosecuting these crimes. Of course, Attorney General Eric Holder's office has never seriously gone after war crimes in general because he probably lacks the moral fiber and courage to do so, not to mention that by doing so he would have to prosecute some very high positioned people or formerly high positioned. Yet, you would think even Holder would be outraged and shocked enough about allegations of the U.S. military going into an Iraqi house, handcuffing the family, including young children, executing all of them, and then requesting an air raid on the house to extinguish the evidence. Can Holder, at least, prosecute this horrible crime?

[Originally published in "Commoner" on 9/4/11; revised on 9/5/11.]

Copyright 2009 - 2011, Party of Commons TM

Michigan's Governmental Emergency

2011-07-05T16:18:00.000-07:00

The State of Michigan is under siege by a Republican governor, Rick Snyder, and a Republican-controlled legislature that have combined together and violated constitutional norms by imposing a Gestapo-like dictatorship over the state under the guise of the so-called emergency manager law. Whatever economic emergencies in Michigan there are today have been caused by Republican/Democrat economic policies passed on by the legacy of Ronald Reagan, the free trade policies of Bill Clinton, et al., and all of those bad policies cemented by George Bush II & Barack Obama, but for the state to run roughshod over municipalities, counties and townships by extending their governmental power to effectively veto what is ordinarily and constitutionally the prerogative of the latter is nothing but rule by nondemocratic fiat. An "emergency" to them is whatever home rule policies, voted through by the will of the people, that they don't happen to like. Not to mention that these usurpers in Michigan are collaborators with the very unseemly "Blackwater" organization, not that the national government isn't also. Regarding the efforts by Michiganders to re-call Snyder by petition, they have our wholehearted support.

Copyright 2009 - 2011, Party of Commons TM

Kenyan Roots

2011-05-03T01:03:00.000-07:00

Probably, most Americans never heard of Osama bin Laden until his band of terrorists struck the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, and killed hundreds of people going about their daily lives, mostly African, and among those, many Kenyans. Then a few years later, came the horrific 9-11 attack, among other terrorist attacks before and since. So it was poetic justice that the American-born son of a Kenyan father, President Barack Obama, ordered the military operation that brought the arch terrorist to his end.

Copyright 2009 - 2011, Party of Commons TM

The New Lords

2011-01-02T09:20:00.000-08:00

Happy New Year to supporters of our party, a party representative of a real people's party and not the authoritarianism of the "Republicrats" or the "Demopubs," the two sides of the same coin. The people's paychecks might be slightly bigger this year, but it's the "Demopubs" taking from the Social Security fund instead of insisting that employers pay a decent wage, actually they are trying to destroy Social Security, which has been and still is a financially sound insurance program for working people or people with disabilities in need, or working people who have retired, but also that which the authoritarians are gradually decimating, along with the rest of the "New Deal" and "Great Society," because the corporatists and their handlers in Congress cannot stand to see working people other than as feudal serfs, and if they had their way, slaves. Incredibly, as well off as they are, living like practical kings and queens, they actually want to risk another revolution in America, so they can have billions of dollars instead of millions, or trillions instead of billions. They will spare no havoc upon the nation so that their greed can be satisfied. Christians, as many profess to be; they are certainly not. Nationalists or patriots; they aren't. Good will ambassadors of the world; not hardly. Practitioners of democracy; only if a warped democracy where they control virtually all the cards can be called democracy. As for the United States Congress that they control, it is the most corrupt institution in the nation as most of the members puff themselves up as masters of the world, of course exactly contrary to democracy and Christianity.

Copyright 2009 - 2011, Party of Commons TM

Spy Squad: Big & Unwieldy

2010-08-10T01:01:00.000-07:00

With the almost million man spy squad, according to a recent article in the Washington Post, that the governments of George W. Bush and Barack Obama have composed, we can't help but wonder if there are any moles among this gargantuan police state apparatus, similar to the former FBI agent and convicted mole/spy, Robert Hanssen. The whole national spy squad is probably way too big for it to be efficient, and that only increases the chances for another mole (like Hanssen) to be in their ranks, which could severely hurt our nation's security.

It's time to downsize and re-evaluate the entire national security apparatus so that it is focused on real threats to our nation, not law-abiding dissidents and loyal oppositionists. Right now, the security apparatus is too unwieldy and large.

Mark is committed to running for the position of Director of Elections in King Co., Washington, but he also has a consultant business called North Pacific Consultant. Rates are $20 per hour.

[First posted on "Commoner," August, 2010; revised on 5/3/11.]

The Party of Commons does not sponsor or produce advertising.

Copyright 2009 - 2010, Party of Commons TM

King Co. Politics

2010-08-01T21:43:00.000-07:00

Despite that the King County Elections Department is out of control, corrupt and under the thumb of Constantine, Dunn and Company, Mark Greene is not likely to run for Elections Director in 2011 even though some reformer is desperately needed to set the ship of sail on course in that department. Hopefully, there will be a potential candidate or candidates for any of several county positions that appear to be begging for new leadership, which is just about all of them, and we certainly will do our part to find such candidates.

There are numerous problems with somebody running for Elections Director against Sherril Huff. No. 1: guess who is going to count the votes in that election? That in itself might be enough to dissuade the most ardent of civic minded reformers. No. 2: Constantine & Co. have set it up so that anybody who is elected to certain county positions have to jump through their hoops (council mandated qualifications) in order to keep their job, but "Commons" would be be more than happy to contest that kind of unconstitutional meddling in officeholders' affairs in a court of law, not that courts of law are necessarily going to set aside unconstitutional laws, which more often than not, they do not. No. 3: money; all of the county positions have huge districts (larger than legislative districts) or the positions themselves are countywide, which in a county like King is akin to running for office statewide in a small state. Of course, civic minded reformers are not going to get as much campaign money as the corporate-backed incumbents they would be challenging.

These are all daunting problems that only the most sincere and dedicated would try to overcome, and it's not that the chairman wouldn't try, but he is already committed to the present write-in campaign for state representative as well as running for Lieutenant Governor in 2012. This is why "Commons" is trying to get more members and candidates.

[First posted on "Commoner," sans update, on July 26, 2010; revised and updated on August 1, 2010.]

UPDATE (added August 1, 2010): Mark has decided to run for King Co. Director of Elections, after all, announcing his intentions to run on August 1, 2010, and he will soon be circulating a petition.

Please, contribute to Mark's King Co. Director of Elections Campaign by sending check or money order to P.O. Box 612, Bellevue, WA 98009. Thank you!

The Party of Commons does not sponsor or produce advertising.

Copyright 2009 - 2010, Party of Commons TM

Name Change

2010-07-29T14:36:00.000-07:00

This blog is now called "Country," and will continue to have articles and essays about how to improve our country.

The Party of Commons does not sponsor or produce advertising.

Copyright 2009 - 2010, Party of Commons TM

Third Parties and the Election of 2012

2010-07-11T22:31:00.000-07:00

Barack Obama's presidency has been a shameless sham. In 2008, the Obama campaign had the gall to accuse Hillary Clinton of having "Bush lite" aspirations, and then, incredulously, after winning the election, proceeded exactly in the manner of what they said Hillary's administration would have become. In fact, their famous "change" signs and slogans would have been more accurate if they had said "Bush lite." In some instances, Obama is even worst than Bush, setting additional dangerous precedents by bypassing laws, due process and the Constitution. For instance, Obama's rule is threatening first amendment rights in the Gulf of Mexico, by saying that citizens who take photographs of the environmental damage or otherwise survey the scenery can be charged with felonies. Like Bush, Obama's rule has been lax on environmental and banking/financial institution regulation (the proposed financial legislation that they support is watered-down Kool-aid), with too cozy relations with shady corporatists. The so-called peace candidate of 2008 is still continuing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the latter which we conditionally backed until it became clear through a recent Senate investigation that there was a half-hearted effort from the political brass from the get-go to catch OBL. Independents and third parties should electorally abandon Obama and the major parties. and find a coalition candidate for president in 2012.

[Originally posted on "Commoner" on 7/9/10; revised 7/11/10.]

The Party of Commons does not sponsor or produce advertising.

Copyright 2009 - 2010, Party of Commons TM

Not Courting the CMNM Anymore

2010-05-19T01:39:00.000-07:00

In past campaigns, the Party of Commons used to plead with editors and reporters of the Corporate Mainstream News Media (CMNM) to give us a little coverage since news coverage is practically synomynous with votes. The traditional thinking is that candidates who don't get coverage, don't get elected. So, generally speaking, we sent our press releases, opinion pieces and e-mails to the CMNM and were laughed at and mocked, and if the CMNM did decide to cover us, it was usually to further disparage our political efforts. While we were bringing the people of America another choice besides Democrats & Republicans, like several other third parties in America, the Corporate Mainstream News Media decided to effectively collaborate with the major parties to defeat any real change in America.

They and their cohorts have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams and as a result our economy is in shambles, the environment is getting so bad that people are actually talking about looking for another planet for humans to inhabit, and the Military Industrial Complex and the hired clowns and bozos in the Congress are dreaming up new empires so that our nation can continue to be tied down in parts of the world where we don't belong, something akin to Gulliver of "Gulliver's Travels." Observing this journalistic travesty, Commoner America is increasingly no longer being fooled by the CMNM and the sham political beneficiaries of their "reporting," which is why we have enjoyed a new freedom of not worrying about whether they ignore us anymore. We are communicating about our campaign directly to the people, and it will be the people, through their word-of-mouth and electronic communications that will win the day for the Party of Commons and, in essence, the masses who are our only hope for a true democracy.

Originally published on "Commoner" on May 17, 2010; revised on 5/19/10.

The Party of Commons does not sponsor or produce advertising.

Copyright 2009 - 2010, Party of Commons TM

New Name

2010-04-09T18:06:00.000-07:00

The Party of Commons is now changing this blog's name to "Progressive," to pay tribute to our progressive ideas, especially in regards to the economy.

The Party of Commons does not sponsor or produce advertising.

Copyright 2009 - 2010, Party of Commons TM

A Gaffe on the Radio

2009-12-24T14:48:00.000-08:00

Listening to a re-run of the Ed Schultz radio program, today, "Commons" couldn't believe that his guest that day, Stephen Smith, presumably black himself, implied that most black people don't understand much or anything about President Obama's policies, they just support him because he's black. It's a shame that someone influential enough to be a top radio host's guest would pronounce a falsehood like that over the public air waves, which in effect is saying that blacks are ignoramuses that would support almost any politician with black or brown skin. That is untrue, of course, and it has been proven to be untrue a number of times in past political history. Even Obama, the only major black Democrat running for president when he ran, was not sure of getting the majority of the black vote in the primaries and caucuses of 2008 until after the first few contests. Why "intelligent" people sometimes play into unflattering stereotypes of their own race is beyond us. Probably, just a gaffe.

Copyright 2009, Party of Commons TM

Ancestry & Politics

2009-12-22T18:36:00.000-08:00

When Jesse Jackson, the political huckster from Chicago, pronounced many years ago that black Americans shall from here on out be called African-Americans, the corporate mainstream news media followed his command as though he was the pied piper of all things to do with people who have African ancestry in America. However, most black Americans have a myriad of ancestries from not just Africa, but other continents as well, including the Americas. One self-proclaimed leader trying to prop up his own self importance through media-glorified pronouncements does not get to name an entire people just on his say so.

The president of the United States, Barack Obama, is yet another politician who made Chicago his home and unlike most black Americans, cannot or does not trace his ancestry to slaves in America. Several or many commentators have said that his apparent ancestral disconnection from slavery was the only reason that he, as a brown-skinned person, was accepted by the many non-blacks who voted for him. We don't know if that is true or not.

One thing is for sure, neither Barack Obama nor Jesse Jackson, whatever the characterizations of others or their own pronouncements, implications and pompous, grandiose expropriations of symbols, is the leader of black America.

[revised on 7/2/10]

The Party of Commons does not sponsor or produce advertising.

Copyright 2009, Party of Commons TM

The Nuclear Dilemma

2009-10-25T23:02:00.000-07:00

[The following essay was first published several years ago during the time of the Bush rule.]

In a world teeming with nuclear bombs, there is no doubt that disarmament should be a major policy of the U.S. Every student knows the history of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the destruction and agony that the atom bombs wrought. Yet, today’s nuclear bombs are many times more powerful. It only takes some of the thousands of bombs on hair-trigger alert in America and elsewhere to go off and bring the end of civilization. The destruction of the environment alone would be devastating. Yet, the Bush administration has done practically nothing for disarmament. Including, the rejection of a bi-lateral proposal to destroy thousands of nuclear warheads. Nor was the previous Clinton administration much better. They may try to fool people into thinking that disarmament should only be for other nations, even though our nation is one of the two major possessors of nuclear weapons, but the truth is that the world will not be safe from nuclear bombs unless all nuclear-holding nations decide to disarm. Amazingly, the Bush administration and the Congress want to build even more nuclear bombs. Appallingly, they say it is for our security when the truth is just the opposite. If people all over the world would reject the status quo and demanded an end to nuclear weaponry, they would be gone. However, the outcry must be heard through the ballot box, through the streets and through a determination that will make sanity the order of the day. If you have ever read the short story, “The Lottery,” by Shirley Jackson, you would understand that the dilemma that the world faces with nuclear bombs today is similar to the one faced by the townspeople in that famous story.

Today, we live in a society very close to that of George Orwell’s “1984,” a world of destructive chaos that is buttressed by laissez-faire capitalism, weapons of mass destruction, environmental degradation, quasi-police state control, and imperialistic wars. Nonetheless, citizens-in-general could change the face of politics in America and, maybe, make the world a better place to live.

Forum Remarks

[Statement by Mark Greene that he meant to make at the 2004 televised debate for the U.S. House of Representatives with Democratic congressman Adam Smith, Republican Paul Lord and a Green Party candidate; Mark was not able to either begin or finish the statement at the debate.]:

--- As a nation and a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, we must work to uphold our commitment to this important treaty, which is the most important regulatory safeguard to controlling nuclear weapons on this planet. The treaty has worked well as there are less than a dozen countries that have developed nuclear weapons since the dawning of the Atomic Age in 1945. Without this treaty, that has been in effect for well over a quarter of a century, there may well have been dozens of countries with nuclear weapons before the New Millennium in 2000. We know that there are that many that have the capability to build these powerful hydrogen bombs. It is politics that is keeping a relative peace, and it will have to be politics that maintains that peace. Strong-armed power only goes so far, as the ancient Greek writer, Aesop, tried to tell us through his fable, the “North Wind and the Sun.” Article 6 of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty says that nations must work towards disarmament of their weapons. This is very urgent. Although the U.S. and Russia signed the Moscow Treaty of 2002, which calls for the dismantling of thousands of long-range missiles, it did not go far enough. [The treaty said nothing about tactical nuclear weapons, which there are thousands of, nor did it call for the destruction of the warheads of the dismantled long-range missiles. Even with a successful adherence to the treaty, there will still be roughly two thousand long-range missiles left in silos, on hair trigger alert, on each side. This is still enough for a cataclysmic tragedy, accidental or otherwise, that could destroy civilization the world over. We must work through a multi-lateral basis with the nuclear armed holding countries, for a common sense lowering of the nuclear threshold. The world should demand that the nuclear armed countries that are not signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, or have withdrawn, should either sign or re-commit to the treaty, or get rid of their missiles. And once they sign, they are obligated just like we are, to work towards disarmament, most likely through multi-lateral agreements. We need to be more diligent in working with other countries in protecting nuclear materials. There’s a lot to do in this area that makes a lot of common sense].

The Party of Commons does not sponsor or produce advertising.

Copyright 2009, Party of Commons TM

Mark's Secretary of State Report

2009-10-24T22:23:00.000-07:00

This report was published for Mark Greene's first campaign for Washington Secretary of State in 2008. Mark has announced an exploratory campaign for the Secretary of State election scheduled for 2012.

Mark Greene is the chairman of the Party of Commons. The Party of Commons is economically progressive, culturally traditional, non-interventionist, for common sense defense and pro-Bill of Rights.

SECRETARY OF STATE CAMPAIGN: THE REPORT

DEFENSE OF TOP 2 PRIMARY

The reinstated "Top 2" Primary will be defended; this primary once again ensures our opportunity to vote for ANY candidate in primaries, a tradition in Washington. This primary, by its inherent nature, ensures that minor parties and independents are a part of the opening process of the electoral season. Voters will NOT have to sign statements or choose a slate committing themselves to a particular party's candidates. Primaries are not an offbeat stop on the way to the main event, they are a fundamental part of the election process, as they are a part of the winnowing process that determines which candidates should be in the General Election. The Democrat Secretary of State candidate (Osgood) is against "Top 2".

DEFENSE OF INITIATIVE SYSTEM

I am a strong supporter of initiatives (the Common People's Government) and I would do everything in my power as Secretary of State to rebuff attempts by some in the Legislature to weaken the Initiative system. In fact, I would try to make it somewhat EASIER to put initiatives on the ballot. Some Democrats in the Washington Legislature are trying to make it effectively harder to put initiatives on the ballot.

DEFENSE OF GENERAL POSTAL MAIL VOTING

Voting by mail should be an option for all voters. I am a supporter of general mail voting, as long as there is a recourse for voters to vote in the traditional method at regional polling stations. Also, mail voting should have plenty of checks and balances to ensure the integrity of the election system. As with any kind of voting system, there will be problems uniquely identified to a particular system, and they must be counteracted with actions to keep the same problems from reoccurring, and through robust auditing. The Democrat Secretary of State candidate (Osgood) is against so-called all-postal mail voting, according to an article in the Seattle Times.

CORPORATE REGISTRATIONS

As the registrar of Corporations; also, the Secretary of State's duty, I would see to it that no special favors are given to particular corporate entities, and that the corporate regulations of Washington are set forth in an egalitarian and professional manner.

FRAUD AND WHISTLEBLOWERS DIVISION

I would create a sub-division in the Elections Division that could be called something like the Fraud and Whistleblowers Sub-division. That office would concentrate on monitoring election systems, conducting audits, and communicating with whistleblowers.

Whistleblowers who dutifully, and sometimes courageously, report problems or abuse of the electoral system should be welcomed as an important part of ensuring the integrity of it. If I'm elected, whistleblowers will have a special place in the Secretary of State's Office.

People who have special skills in monitoring elections and knowledge of voting apparatuses would be welcome additions to my office; someone like Bev Harris, a renowned investigator of voting fraud across America, would make a good Deputy Secretary of State. These are the kind of employees that would ensure that Washington has the most integral voting system in the country.

RANDOM PROFESSIONAL CHECKS ON VOTING MACHINES

The Secretary of State's Office, as the state office in charge of elections, among other things, it should be responsible for vigilantly safeguarding our electoral rights as set forth in our federal and state laws, and there should be a sincere upholding of the federal and state constitutions. Constant, professional and random checks of the voting systems in Washington are essential. There is no democracy if the votes are not counted correctly or at all. Paper based election systems, such as optical scanning, are a must, so that the votes can be audited and verified. In close elections, within a margin of two percent of winning or qualifying, votes should be verified by a hand count. Voting machines from controversial manufacturers, or with constant problems, should not be allowed for use in Washington.

SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON AUDITING NEEDED

I would make sure that my staff is not overworked and that they understand the importance of making continuous audits and checks so that errors from our office, if any, will be caught as soon as possible. Conscientiousness, professionalism, integrity and devotion to detail would be a priority in my office. I would make sure there is an auditing position, if there is not, now, for each division of the Secretary of State's Office: Elections, Historical Archives, and Corporate Registrations. For cost saving measures, other positions may have to be combined together, in order to accommodate the new emphasis on checking, auditing, and generally making sure that work is error free.

INDIGENT CANDIDATES

Running for office should be relatively easy, but the system to assist prospective candidates who cannot pay the filing fee is not working. Filing fees are tied to the salaries of the office holders, but as the salaries rise continuously, so does the requirement for the number of signatures on petitions. Collecting signatures is hard work and time consuming. While the rigors of the work that the office holders do, and the number of hours they work, may not change if their salary increases, the opposite is true for those who have to use a petition in lieu of the filing fee. Not only that, but the petition system is not fair for those who are working, but still economically unable to pay the filing fee, and for those who are elderly or disabled. Working people often don't have time to collect signatures, especially as the requirement raises with the office holders' pay raises. The elderly and disabled may face physical obstacles to collecting signatures. It's a degenerative system and unfair on the face of it. If elected to Secretary of State, I will propose a new system for those who want to run for office and cannot afford the filing fees.

HISTORICAL ARCHIVES

As this office is the preserver of Washington's history, I would see to it that the history of all Washingtonians is revered and that special emphasis be given to this function of the Secretary of State's duties.

LOWER VOTING AGE TO 16

Getting the public interested in politics at an earlier age, by lowering the voting age to 16, would help in educating the electorate (by developing more interest in politics) and reducing cynicism in politics. Sixteen is the same age that minors are now allowed to drive automobiles. Mark Greene, if elected Secretary of State, would propose this major change in our system of governance. It's past time to broaden the participation of governance in America by lowering the voting age.

VOTING REGISTRATION SYSTEM

The incumbent Secretary of State's relatively recent programs of reducing the voter roll of invalid registrations may have been rushed and did not take into account considerations that would be more vigilant in protecting voting rights, generally.

New applications are, also, of a concern. Reed was reprimanded by the United States District Court for trying to deny new voter registration applications if they did not exactly match government agency data [Washington Association of Churches versus Sam Reed]. However, government agency data is not necessarily correct and an individual's voting rights should not be automatically denied.

Felon voting restoration should come about upon their release from imprisonment, home arrest, or release from electronic monitoring systems.

The Secretary of State should be more mindful of voters' rights and should not rush to overhaul voting registration systems, especially to deny a potential registrant or void a current registration, without careful and deliberate checking of each registrant.

[First published in 2008 and updated on 9/27/08.]

Copyright 2009, Party of Commons TM

Prologue

2009-10-03T13:45:00.000-07:00

Like the era of the Radical Republicans in the mid-nineteenth century, every so often great turns, not minor nuances, should be made in order for society to be just, humane and vibrant, and these turns or changes should be made democratically through our electoral system, as the Republicans of that era added the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments to the constitution through our legislative system of government. The Radical Republicans ended slavery. This blog will discuss great turns which should be made in our time, the early twenty-first century.

Copyright 2009, Party of Commons TM