Chuck DeVore,  John McCain,  Mitt Romney,  President 2008,  Rudy Giuliani

President 2008 Watch: California Conservatives Move to Thwart Early California Presidential Primary – The Response

devorefeb2bweb

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and GOP Assemblyman Chuck DeVore

California Republican Assemblyman responds to Flap’s post: President 2008 Watch: California Conservatives Move to Thwart Early California Presidential Primary

Dear FullosseousFlap:

The February primary is not a sure thing. It will cost $90 million to hold, as it is a stand-alone affair. Further, the real reason for it is to extend term limits. There are enough Democrats who covet a leadership position that there may not be the two-thirds vote to place the term limits extension on the ballot. No term limits extension and — poof — the rationale for the election goes away. If no election, then how does California have a voice? I suggest awarding 53 of the 165 delegates at a convention in February 2008. It will cost the taxpayers nothing and it will make the candidates pay attention to California.

Oh, and before you dismiss the use of conventions in our representative democracy, please allow me to observe that it was a convention that nominated Abraham Lincoln in 1860…

All the best,

Chuck DeVore
State Assemblyman, 70th District
www.ChuckDeVore.com

Comment by Chuck DeVore — February 2, 2007 @ 1:55 pm

******

Thank you Asesemblyman DeVore for the comment.

Now, let’s look at your argument.

The Governor and Democrat Leaders of the California Legislature all support the move of the California Primary election from June 3 to February 5, 2008. The rationale to change the election is (Flap quotes the Governor):

“I mean, right now, think about it: We are the No. 1 state in the union, we’re the No. 1 place in the world, and yet we are kind of an afterthought when it comes to presidential campaigns…”

Granted the bipartisan nature of the agreement to move the primary has an ulterior motive: to change California term limit law to allow California Democrat Speaker Nunez and California Senate Pro Tem Don Perata to serve longer in their respective offices. The governor has a horse in this race as well since he could run for re-election from which he is now barred.

Therefore, the ticket of moving the California Primary election to February may be allowing the people to vote on a change of the term limit law.

Flap thinks the price of the ticket is not too high and allowing California voters have an early say on who will be their next President is worth the price of admission.

Now, the Assemblyman mentions the cost of the election – $90 million. Why not move the entire primary election from June until February. This would entail NO additional cost to Californians.

Granted this would piss off the special interests who wish more elections (with lower voter turnouts, too) to pass initiatives. And granted the existing members of the legislature would have to campaign longer in a general election race.

But, hell, the legislative and Congressional districts are gerrymandered anyway.

Again, a small price to pay for having a say in the Presidential race early.

The idea of changing the time honored California primary election system from direct election to part-election and part-caucus disenfranchises voters. Isn’t one of the goals of the parties to increase participation of voters in the electoral process?

Voter participation is already at all time lows and when GOP voters discover their vote only selects a portion of the GOP Presidential Convention delegates, how many do you think will stay home?

Answer: MANY

Lastly, you use the example of Abraham Lincoln. In 1860 there were already differences from today’s elections:

Women couldn’t vote

United States Senators were not directly elected.

In California, there were no initiative, referendum or recall.

So, Mr. Assemblyman times have changed and I will submit voters want to vote and “smoke-filled room” choice of delegates is best left in the past.

devorefeb2dJPGweb

Previous:

President 2008 Watch: California Conservatives Move to Thwart Early California Presidential Primary

Giuliani Notes: California Dreamin’ Part 2

Giuliani Notes: California Dreaming and Fund-Raising Today

Giuliani Notes: Rudy Coming to Orange County, California

Rudy Giuliani Watch: California LIKELY To Move Presidential Primary to February 5


Technorati Tags: , , ,

One Comment

  • Chuck DeVore

    Dear FullosseousFlap:

    The following statement of yours reveals a delightful naïveté:

    “Now, the Assemblyman mentions the cost of the election – $90 million. Why not move the entire primary election from June until February. This would entail NO additional cost to Californians.”

    To “…move the entire primary election from June until February,” as you suggest would defeat the whole purpose of this exercise as the leadership in the Assembly and the Senate could NOT FILE FOR REELECTION as they are termed out! Therefore, they would never approve such a money-saving plan.

    Thus, we are back to my original suggestion as a way to have an early influence and not cost the taxpayers one penny: have a convention select 53 of the 165 delegates.

    All the best,

    Chuck DeVore
    State Assemblyman, 70th District
    http://www.ChuckDeVore.com