#WeCanDoBetterWednesday and #NoMichaelMondays are meant to be complementary but do have different purposes. Check out Twitter or Facebook on Mondays and Wednesdays, or check in here!
The current Secretary helps politicians obscure their votes through a difficult-to-navigate website. We're going to fix that.
ND only has three votes in the Electoral College. If we were willing to split those, we become a battleground state, which is good politically and economically.
I am the candidate with the most experience supervising people and will bring that experience to the office functions, both in the office suite and during deliberate visits to county officers and leaders. The other guys aren't making this promise.
Encourage campaigns to focus on ideas, not party affiliation; reduce number of districts sending 'two of the same' to Bismarck; more civil discourse; wider range of ideas legislators consider is possible under RCV
Our Red State Culture war effects our ability to keep young people here after college, and we're losing their tax dollars. We can do better. Let's trust people to live their lives rather the submit to people who want to restrict personal freedoms.
Members who live on our reservations access tribal government more often than a county auditor, and that tribal government structure can enact the early vote program. Let's trust those leaders to put plan in place.
Public financing our legislative race campaigns is one way to promote a better democracy. When the money in politics is equalized, you have a better focus on this issues, you have people with skills in policy more willing to step up, and you have more assurance 'the other side' isn't simply acquiescing to the monied funders of their campaigns on issues of conscience.
I was on stage and was asked about the value of debates and I said, "debates are how the public finds out whether the person has the sand to do the job they are being asked to do. And I do."
The decline-to-attend and no-show problem by Republicans in this cycle is problematic to the continuation of the democracy. It's unacceptable behavior on their part.
Critics of the current system of campaign financing argue the amount of money involved in politics not only distract elected officials from their primary task of lawmaking, but leave the door open to the influence of special interests. When a politician is influenced by either the need to solicit contributions from special interests to finance a costly election campaign, or by a sense of obligation to benefactors, the politician may no longer represent the interests of his or her entire constituency.
The ability to influence electoral outcomes with infusions of cash poses a significant challenge to the idea of equality expressed in the principle of "one man, one vote" upon which democratic government is based. If the outcome of elections can be determined by the amount of money spent on the political campaign, then special interest donors have greater power to influence elections than the average voter. Such a situation unjustly violates the principle of equality that is fundamental to democratic government.
The independent state legislature doctrine teaches that, because a legislature derives its power over federal elections directly from the Constitution in this manner, that authority differs in certain important respects from the legislature’s general police powers that it exercises under the state constitution. During the 2020 presidential election cycle, several Justices issued opinions demonstrating an interest in recognizing and enforcing the doctrine.
North Carolina lawmakers have advanced a case to the US Supreme Court the theory, ISLD, state legislatures have unconditional power to legislate on election issues and cannot be reviewed by any established checks and balances, like a governor’s veto or a state court’s ruling. If this doctrine — which has been rejected repeatedly by the US Supreme Court — is accepted by the current US Supreme Court, state legislatures could have unchecked power to control elections in the state.
In this, the last of #WeCanDoBetterWednesdays, I reiterate what I've said before we have to address voting barriers on the reservations in North Dakota. My pledge: I will enact the plans ND Native Vote lobbies me to do. I will be a willing and eager partner and I will be an advocate. Period.
My love for democracy and for social justice intersect on this issue.
Tuesday is election day, and in this last episode of #noMichaelMonday, we review some of the problems with Michael and his candidacy. He isn't acting like the really wants the job and he doesn't have the skills to do well, regardless. He clearly cares about money, but his performance as a legislator shows he won't care about you. He's a bad choice, North Dakota. Let's put me in this role so we can move forward.
In our first #NoMichaelMonday, we discuss the lack of content he provides related to his expectations or initiatives in the office of Secretary of State. #NoContentMichael
Public servants who dedicate their lives to their communities deserve applause. Those who take their seats but only work for themselves should be voted out.
Labor Day, the holiday celebrating workers, reminds us that the economic policies of the Republican Party - and of Michael - are designed to hurt, not help, the American and North Dakotan family.
Super rich governor appoints lesser qualified person into key office to ensure control over the state. (Hardly a new story.)
Michael has been invited to a debate, and won't attend, won't answer the invitation of the organizers.
Why won't he just say "yes" or "no"?
Instead, he just ignores North Dakotans.
But, know what we already know Michael is good at? Ignoring North Dakotans.
Michael has harmed his community. He's unprepared to make things better for North Dakotan and we know that by exploring his record as a legislator.
Conservative politicians believe in policies that hurt ordinary Americans and policies that help them monetize their elected power. Michael is, using this definition, a conservative. A million dollar one, at that.
I learnt that Michael was being interviewed on
10-24-2022, so we'll call this a #noMichaelMonday.
As I listened to the interview, I heard my questions (real or imagined, or just good journalists). He gave some good answers, but he also glossed over detail or gave some answers that reaffirm for me I am the better, more prepared candidate who is more committed to helping the people of North Dakota.
He made it a point to assert he is consistently scored by business leaders as being business-friendly when he votes. There are times being business-friendly can also mean family- friendly, but I didn't have the sense he was making such a nuanced point.
From "The Prairie Blog,"
[The pandemic] "has been a hard run for" business, but several "North Dakota elected official [seem okay taking] ... money from federal PPP program.
Michael among them.
Document at right, screen shot from:
Let's be clear: I'm comfortable with government spending to help family farmers. But I don't identify as as conservative, I do believe government help for those in need is valuable, and I don't shame people for needing help. I'm not a conservative.
When it comes to hurting your family, yes, Michael is one.
When it comes to helping his family, he's not. There is a word for when people behave in ways
Copyright © 2022 Jeffrey Powell for Secretary of State - All Rights Reserved.