Mediaboss Marketing

Buy Photo

Voters across Wayne County participated in the 2020 primary election on Tuesday, June 2, 2020.(Photo: Jason Truitt/Palladium-Item)

EDITOR'S NOTE: This story has been updated to reflect there are two contested races for county-wide offices in the Nov. 3 general election. Information given to the Pal Item by the Wayne County Voter Registration Office on Monday was incorrect.

RICHMOND, Ind. Wayne County voters will have just two county-wide races to decide in the November election after Monday's deadline to fill ballot vacancies came and went with only one new candidatestepping forward to run for office.

Last month's primary electionfeatured a handful of contested races for county offices on the Republican side but none for Democrats. In fact, just one Democratic candidate had signed up at all.

That would be C. Yvonne Washington, who will take on the incumbent county clerkRepublican Debra Berryin the Nov. 3 general election.

Political parties had until noon Monday to fill any ballot vacancies left over after the primary election. It also was the deadline for anyone wishing to run as a write-in candidate to declare.

Libertarian Robert Brent Meadows was the only addition to the races for county offices. He'll face Republican Kevin Fouche for coroner. Fouche is running to return to the position after eight years away. Meadows competed for the Republican nomination back in 1996, finishing second in a five-way race.

RELATED:Libertarian Party adds candidate to race for Wayne County coroner

With no others being added to the general election ballot, several Republicans now can begin to make plans to take county office next year. That list includes:

The lack of contested races at the county level doesn't mean there won't be plenty of reasons for local residents to vote this fall.

In addition to contests for president, U.S. representative, governor and state attorney general, many seats on local school boards also will be up for grabs. Filling for those races will begin Wednesday, July 22 in the Voter Registration Office at the Wayne County Courthouse and run through noon Friday, Aug. 21.

If you haven't registered to vote yet, you still can do so through Monday, Oct. 5. If you aren't sure whether you already are registered, you can check your status atindianavoters.in.gov.

Jason Truitt is the team leader and senior reporter at the Palladium-Item. Contact him at(765) 973-4459 orjtruitt@pal-item.com.

Read or Share this story: https://www.pal-item.com/story/news/local/2020/07/06/election-2020-just-1-county-wide-office-contested-november/5382761002/

Read more here:
Wayne County will have just 2 county-wide offices up for election in November - Palladium-Item

Posted Jul 8, 2020, 11:03 am

Jeremy DudaArizona Mirror

TheSecretary of State's Office found reasonable cause that the GoldwaterInstitute, a Phoenix libertarian think tank and litigation center,violated a law requiring lobbyists to register with the state.

Sambo Dul, the state elections director for Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, referred the matter to the Attorney General's Office on Tuesday.

Dul'sfindings came in response to a complaint filed by an attorney with thelobbying and consulting firm HighGround, which clashed with GoldwaterInstitute over the issue of fees that Phoenix imposed on ride-hailingcompanies like Uber and Lyft that operate at Sky Harbor InternationalAirport.

JeffKros, an attorney at HighGround, filed a complaint with the secretaryof state in February arguing that two Goldwater Institute employees,Jonathan Riches and Christina Sandefur, should have to register asauthorized lobbyists because they testified in legislative committees infavor of a bill that would have barred cities from imposing additional fees on ride-hailing servicesthat operate at airports. HighGround represents the City of Phoenix andthe League of Arizona Cities and Towns, both of which opposed the bill.

Statelaw defines lobbying as "attempting to influence the passage or defeatof any legislation by directly communication with any legislator." Adesignated lobbyist is the person who is the "single point of contact"for an entity that engages in lobbying, while an authorized lobbyist isany other person who lobbies for that entity.

TheGoldwater Institute has long been an active player at the Capitol, andits employees testify frequently in committees. But the organizationonly has one person registered as a lobbyist with the secretary ofstate's office, and it contends that people like Riches and Sandefurdon't need to register because they fall under various exemptions.

However,Dul concluded that none of the exemptions applied, and said Riches andSandefur should have registered as authorized lobbyists for theGoldwater Institute.

TheGoldwater Institute argued that Riches and Sandefur were testifying asexperts on the issues at hand, and therefore fell under a lobbyistregistration exemption for people who testify to provide technicalinformation or answer technical questions. But Dul rejected that claim.

"Basedon the content of their testimony, Mr. Riches and Ms. Sandefur were notacting in the capacity of individuals who provide technicalinformation, but rather that of policy advocates urging legislators toadopt a desired position," Dul wrote.

Statelaw exempts "natural persons" who speak only for themselves fromregistering as lobbyists. And even though Riches and Sandefur registeredas supporters of the bill representing themselves, they identifiedthemselves in their testimony with their titles at the GoldwaterInstitute and repeatedly referenced "we" or "our" position on thelegislation.

Whilethere is an exemption for lawyers who are representing clients, Dulfound that Riches and Sandefur, both of whom are attorneys, were notactually representing clients when they testified. And though there's anexemption for members of an association, she concluded that theexemption wasn't applicable in this case.

AndDul rejected the Goldwater Institute's argument that requiring it toregister employees who testify in legislative committees as lobbyistswould infringe on its First Amendment freedom of expression or its rightto participate in government.

"Inthis case, requiring the Goldwater Institute to list employees aslobbyists before those employees appear before committees is minimallyintrusive, and would do nothing to limit their access to the committeesor the ability to communicate their desired message," Dul wrote.

Dulnoted that, in order to register additional employees as lobbyists, anorganization such as the Goldwater Institute that is already registeredwith the secretary of state need only fill out an online form and submitit within five days of the lobbying activity.

Kros was pleased with the secretary of state's findings.

"Allwe think is everybody should follow the same rules," he said, echoing acomplaint that some lobbyists at the Capitol have voiced about theGoldwater Institute for years.

The Goldwater Institute disagreed with Dul's findings and is still reviewing them, spokeswoman Jennifer Tiedemann told Arizona Mirror.Tiedemann said the nonprofit organization engages in policy analysis,education and litigation, and its employees spend the bulk of their timedeveloping and analyzing policy and litigating cases.

"Wehave one employee who lobbies for Goldwater, and she is registered. Onrare occasions, other staffers come to the Capitol at her request toprovide expert testimony, but they are not lobbyists. And, of course,none of these employees are making lobbying expenditures, which is theprimary purpose of the lobbying registration statutes," Tiedemann said.

TheAttorney General's Office confirmed that it received Dul's referral,which will be handled by its governmental accountability unit. AttorneyGeneral Mark Brnovich worked for the Goldwater Institute from 2003-2005.Spokesman Ryan Anderson said Brnovich won't be involved in theinvestigation, and noted that the attorney general has clashed severaltimes with the Goldwater Institute in recent years.

Ifthe attorney general finds that the Goldwater Institute must registerits employees and it fails to do so, it could face a fine of up to$1,000. Knowingly violating the lobbyist registration requirement is aclass one misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail and a fineof up to $2,500.

TheGoldwater Institute has long resisted calls to register its employeesas lobbyists. It registered one person for the first time in 2011, but declined a request by then-Secretary of State Ken Bennett to register more of its employees.Over the past decade, there have been times when the institute hadmultiple employees registered as lobbyists at the same time. Currently,only Jenna Bentley, the organization's director of government affairs,is registered as a lobbyist.

This report was first published by the Arizona Mirror.

- 30 -

Read the original here:
Secretary of state: Goldwater Institute attorneys should have registered as lobbyists - TucsonSentinel.com

To first-term state Rep. Jeff Shipley, the threat of the coronavirus is overblown.

As he faces a reelection, the sauerkraut salesman, comedian and Republican lawmaker from Birmingham is unapologetic for views that at their best fall outside the political mainstream and at worst undermine public health recommendations to prevent the spread of a deadly virus.

He wrapped up his first term earlier this month in the Statehouse by drawing sharp criticism and statewide headlines for downplaying the seriousness of COVID-19, the respiratory disease caused by the coronavirus. In a speech on the Capitol steps to a group advocating that parents, and not governments, should decide on vaccinations. Shipley claimed the virus isnt even killing anybody. As of Wednesday morning, 732 Iowans have died from the novel coronavirus.

He later walked back his false claim on Twitter. In an interview, Shipley chalked up his statement to putting my foot in my mouth.

I was at a rally, and I spoke quickly, unprepared and threw out some red meat for a crowd that was, you know, really wanting to hear controversial stuff, he said.

Shipley still thinks the state should take a more libertarian approach to the virus avoiding government-mandated shutdowns, mask-wearing and vaccinations once they are is available. Iowa is one of a handful of states where face coverings are not required in at least parts of the state. The mayor of Muscatine issued an order this week requiring masks be worn in public there, but there is growing agreement her proclamation is not legal.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends face coverings as an effective and simple method to stop the spread of respiratory droplets that carry the deadly virus in places where social distancing is difficult.

Shipley says hes OK wearing a mask in stores that ask him to but thinks voluntary health measures are sufficient for people to follow.

ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW ADVERTISEMENT

Mother Nature created this virus, I feel the best solution is for human beings to be healthy enough to withstand it, Shipley said, adding that for him personally, catching the virus and developing an antibody would be a more permanent strategy.

According to the CDC, its still unclear whether those who recover from COVID-19 can be infected with the virus again.

People are a little bit disgruntled and upset and stressed out and impatient with some of the public health measures. So what I was really hoping to voice is we need a critical examination of the pandemic response in the emergency proclamations, Shipley said of his speech at the Capitol.

Headlines from the controversial rally prompted Jefferson County Public Health Department Administrator Christine Estle, who said she normally doesnt wade into politics, to share the post with the caption No words ... on Facebook and reach out to her representative.

I felt that it was my responsibility as a public health administrator to reach out to him. And voice my concerns and frustrations on a local level, she said.

She said they set up a half-hour Zoom call, the focus of which she said was on her concerns that the local department wasnt receiving enough public health guidance from state-level departments. She said she largely receives the same guidance thats issued publicly, adding the local department doesnt have a magic playbook nobody else has access to.

When you are in a medical crisis or a pandemic, you want to hear from medical professionals. You dont want to hear from elected officials thats not their area of expertise, she said, but added that she appreciated how quickly Shipley returned her request for a meeting.

The legislative district covers Van Buren and Davis counties and most of Jefferson County.

Follow this link:
Iowa lawmaker tries to walk back claim that no one has died from coronavirus - The Gazette

Opponents of a property tax increase designed to provide additional education funding for Jefferson County Public Schools said they have the signatures to force a referendum on the issue.The group, "No JCPS Tax Hike," announced Wednesday they have 43,000 signatures, well above the 35,000 signatures needed by Friday. State law allows referendums on any property tax increase above 4.5 cents.The Jefferson County Board of Education approved a 7-cent increase in May, which would raise the annual tax bill on a $100,000 home by $70. JCPS had originally sought a 9.5-cent increase."We're in a recession right now and people are really struggling," said Theresa Camoriano, a longtime Libertarian activist who organized the group. "This is no time for a tax hike."Camoriano and others accuse JCPS of mismanaging the money it already has.A state audit of JCPS criticized the school district for not raising property taxes over a long period of years, saying the failure to do so has resulted in backlog of needs.JCPS Superintendent Marty Pollio has said the money could be used for renovations and new school construction, investments in technology and pay incentives to lure the best teachers to the city's highest-need schools.The plan has drawn the support of groups like the Urban League, who say it will help address the achievement gap."If we say that we really care about our kids, we care about what our city is going to look like in 10 to 12 years, and even in the short interim, we need to invest in our children," said Dr. Kish Cumi Price, director of education policy and programming for the Louisville Urban League.Opponents of the tax increase must turn in their petition and signatures to the Jefferson County Clerk by Friday. The referendum will appear on the ballot on Nov. 3.

Opponents of a property tax increase designed to provide additional education funding for Jefferson County Public Schools said they have the signatures to force a referendum on the issue.

The group, "No JCPS Tax Hike," announced Wednesday they have 43,000 signatures, well above the 35,000 signatures needed by Friday. State law allows referendums on any property tax increase above 4.5 cents.

The Jefferson County Board of Education approved a 7-cent increase in May, which would raise the annual tax bill on a $100,000 home by $70. JCPS had originally sought a 9.5-cent increase.

"We're in a recession right now and people are really struggling," said Theresa Camoriano, a longtime Libertarian activist who organized the group. "This is no time for a tax hike."

Camoriano and others accuse JCPS of mismanaging the money it already has.

A state audit of JCPS criticized the school district for not raising property taxes over a long period of years, saying the failure to do so has resulted in backlog of needs.

JCPS Superintendent Marty Pollio has said the money could be used for renovations and new school construction, investments in technology and pay incentives to lure the best teachers to the city's highest-need schools.

The plan has drawn the support of groups like the Urban League, who say it will help address the achievement gap.

"If we say that we really care about our kids, we care about what our city is going to look like in 10 to 12 years, and even in the short interim, we need to invest in our children," said Dr. Kish Cumi Price, director of education policy and programming for the Louisville Urban League.

Opponents of the tax increase must turn in their petition and signatures to the Jefferson County Clerk by Friday. The referendum will appear on the ballot on Nov. 3.

Follow this link:
Group says it has signatures to force referendum on Jefferson Co. tax increase for education - WLKY Louisville

Guest Opinion By Donna Gundle-Krieg | July 4, 2020

Americans are finally seeing the need to reform the way our society enforces laws, as the issue of police force has been placed front and center before us.

The Libertarian Party has been ahead of the game for decades on the issues of reforming our criminal justice system.

Since the 1960s, we have advocated for getting rid of laws that create victimless crimes. We have long believed in holding police accountable. Last but not least, Libertarians believe that the job descriptions, policies, and procedures of the police departments need to be reformed.

In fact, back in 1969, Lanny Friedlander, founder of the leading Libertarian magazine, Reason, said, "The police of a free society, engaging in retaliatory force only, enforcing laws of a defensive nature only, would be bound by the same laws they enforced and would stand fully accountable for their actions.

Achieving this free society starts with getting rid of victimless crimes. In other words, we need to minimize the opportunity for the police to act against the public. This means fewer laws and less intrusive enforcement of the laws that we do have.

In 1971, the fledgling Libertarian Party called for the repeal of all 'crimes without victims,' such as the prohibitions on drug use that have driven so much of the escalation in aggressive police tactics.

Fifty years later, the Libertarian Party platform states: Government force must be limited to the protection of the rights of individuals to life, liberty, and property, and governments must never be permitted to violate these rights.

We favor the repeal of all laws creating crimes without victims, such as gambling, the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes, and consensual transactions involving sexual services.

Voters in Michigan took a huge step toward repealing drug laws when they voted for recreational marijuana to be legal. According to Pew Research, in 2018, 40 percent of all arrests in the United States were for marijuana offenses. Making this drug legal certainly helps reduce the opportunity for the police to act against the public.

In addition to repealing victimless crimes, Libertarians favor holding government agencies and their employees accountable for their actions.

"We support full restitution for all loss suffered by persons arrested, indicted, tried, imprisoned, or otherwise injured in the course of criminal proceedings against them which do not result in their conviction," the Libertarian Party declared in 1979.

"Law enforcement agencies should be liable for this restitution unless malfeasance of the officials involved is proven, in which case they should be personally liable."

More recently, Grand Rapids Justin Amash, the only Libertarian in the U.S. Congress, introduced the first-ever tri-partisan bill, which would eliminate qualified immunity.

The Ending Qualified Immunity Act will restore Americans ability to obtain relief when police officers violate their constitutionally secured rights, stated Amash.

The brutal killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police is merely the latest in a long line of incidents of egregious police misconduct. This pattern continues because police are legally, politically, and culturally insulated from consequences for violating the rights of the people whom they have sworn to serve.

In addition to holding police officers accountable and eliminating victimless crimes, Libertarians believe that we must take back some of the tremendous power that society has given to police.

"Over the last 25 years, America has seen a disturbing militarization of its civilian law enforcement, along with a dramatic and unsettling rise in the use of paramilitary police units for routine police work," warned the Cato Institutes Radley Balko in his 2013 book,Rise of the Warrior Cop.

He explained that he was referring to Special Weapons and Tactics, or SWAT, teams. These types of teams perform no-knock raids, which so often end in tragedy when police kick in the wrong door, or when a suddenly awakened resident tries to defend against intruders.

This month, libertarian-leaning Senator Rand Paul introduced legislation to stop the use of no-knock warrants, an idea that Democrats are also pushing in their calls for police reform. The bill requires law enforcement officers to give notice of their authority and purpose before entering a home.

In addition to qualified immunity and ending no-knock warrants, there are many other reforms that need to happen. Nearly all Americans favor at least some level of change to the nations criminal justice system, according to a poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, which concluded that Americans overwhelmingly want clear standards on when police officers may use force and consequences for officers who do so excessively.

Thankfully, Americans are finally agreeing with Libertarians and implementing many of the reforms and policy changes that we have been fighting for decades.

The Libertarian party might have the deck stacked against it during elections. However, we have always been the first and often the only party to fight the battle against abusive government power.

Donna Gundle-Krieg is a Real Estate Broker in Mancelona. She is the Political Director of Northwest Michigan Libertarians, and will be on the ballot in November as a Libertarian candidate running for Mancelona Township Trustee. Contact her at dokrieg@gmail.com, or see http://www.nwmichiganlibertarians.org.

See more here:
Libertarian Solutions to Reforming Police State | Opinion | Northern Express - northernexpress.com