The Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania - Forum

If you ever wanted proof why big-government is inherently bad, look no further than the mess state Democrats created and then stepped in.  Below you’ll find the link to one of many news stories on “Bonusgate.”

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08193/896353-178.stm

What I find especially awful is using taxpayer funds to keep third party candidates like Nader and Romanelli off the ballot.  I mean they already have oppressive ballot access laws in place to do just that, but now they have to supplement that advantage with the theft of taxpayer money.  Here’s an excerpt from the article above:

The grand jury said the challenge to Mr. Nader, who sought a place on the Pennsylvania ballot in 2004 as a Green Party candidate for president, was essentially divided between Mr. Veon's Beaver Falls district office and his Capitol office in Harrisburg.

Mrs. Peretta-Rosepink, the Beaver Falls office manager, directed the Western Pennsylvania portion of the effort and Mr. Foreman and Mr. Manzo coordinated Harrisburg efforts.

More than 34,000 signatures were challenged and Mr. Nader was kept off the ballot. It was generally assumed at the time that Mr. Nader's presence on the ballot could siphon votes from Democratic nominee John Kerry.

Mr. Veon issued a congratulatory e-mail to staff on Oct. 13, 2004: "You have given John Kerry an even better opportunity to win this state," he wrote.

The grand jury identified 36 state employees who were involved in the Nader ballot challenge, 29 of whom received state bonuses for 2004.

Two years later, the same tactic was used to keep Carl Romanelli, a Green Party candidate, off the ballot for U.S. Senate.

"Brett Cott assumed the laboring oar in organizing and orchestrating the operation," the grand jury wrote.

Once again, Mr. Foreman assisted in directing the contribution of Mr. Veon's office staff "which worked day in and day out on the petitions, while being paid by the taxpayers."

Let’s now go back to nearly one year ago to see what the pro-democracy Democrat state chairman had to say about the Nader campaign.  Here’s a PG article link and two relevant excerpts:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07193/801235-366.stm

Three years ago, Mr. Nader attempted to get on the Pennsylvania ballot to run for president. Democrats still smarting from his 2000 effort -- which the party blames for Al Gore losing in Florida, ultimately costing him the presidency -- were diligent about checking his nominating petitions for 2004 and went to court when they found more than two-thirds of the signatures were inadequate or fraudulent. In addition to keeping him off of the 2004 ballot, Democrats won a judgment of $81,102 against him to cover the costs for transcription fees and hand-writing analysts.

State Democratic Chairman T.J. Rooney said he's happy attorneys will try to enforce the judgment.  "I think that's great. You're goddamned right he should pay, and he should go away, because he didn't learn his lesson in 2000."

Now, is it just me, or does this look like a widespread criminal enterprise? 

Mark

PS -- I suppose we should be thankful they didn't resort to murder.

The walls are caving in around the PA legislature. Bill Deweese's Chief of Staff Michael Manzo was found to be keeping a Greene County beauty queen on the state payroll for purposes other than the service of the public interest. There is also a lot of heat coming about the way the budget was concocted, with legislators again doing a late night deal with less than 24 hours to review and adopt the budget.

It is sadly not a joke that a bunch of monkeys could better serve to secure the rights of Pennsylvanians. At least the monkeys would be a lot less expensive. I fully expect more than one person to go to jail over the bonuses. Since we have an R attorney general I expect the majority if not all to be former D legislators and staff. It is possible that some of this heat will deter a challenge to our nomination papers come August, but we will see.

Mik Robertson

Disgusting. Unfortunately, the only answer I think that many people are going to have is "vote Republican" this year.

That judgement against Romanelli for $81,102 is for the cost of the Democrats to challenge his signatures.  If the very basis of that challenge was stolen from taxpayers, might that judgement be reduced or eliminated? 

I'm thinking that if the very means of determining non-validity of signatures was steeped in criminal activites (the stealing of taxpayer money), then how can we trust that any of the rejected signatures were rejected on a proper basis?  I mean if you catch a liar in a lie and he then says he's now telling the truth, how much credibility does he have?

In addition, if a signature were invalidated by a criminal enterprise that could just as easily have manufactured the invalidation, does that signer have any recourse to damages for having a civil right taken from him?

Mark

PS -- Mik is right.  The Media Committe certainly has a target rich environment.

Perhaps this will be an opportunity to establish a procedure to enable third parties gain easier ballot access.  The PA LP should use this scandal to point out that the environment in Harrisburg will not chance until the two party system can be fairly challenged.

Who was it, Judge Jones that insinuated collecting a signature on a nomination paper was equivalent to someone going into a polling place and casting a ballot in a primary election? I find it ironic that public funds are used to place nominees on the ballot in one case and keep them off the ballot on the other.

Mik Robertson

Democrats abusing tax dollars?  That's a stereotype, but its sad because its true.  This should get everyone a bit fired up in combination with the pay raise.  It's important, very important, that pressure be kept up beyond this election cycle and the spread of news, ideas, and discussion of topice while spotlighting the criminal activity and spoils system of the Legislature be focused upon the citizens.  This is how the LP will grow, in my opinion.  I think its great that everyone here is supporting the LP and I have a great respect for the LP.  However, it will take all this energy and more, beyond 2008 to keep exposure up and the heat on.

The two-party dictatorship is using our tax dollars to fuel their power grab and smothering of any potential competition. What are we going to do about this?

I just got back from VT with NO cell, NO email, NO internet for 6 days and i missed Bonus Gate and Barr/Root getting 6-7 in recent polling.  Life is good.  We are the future.   

John-
Keep awareness up during off years, non-election years, etc.  Utilize the internet with regards to that mean, which is why I'm setting up The George Taylor Foundation.  Word of mouth, etc.  Just have to keep the pressure up.  There are certain issues that are non-partisan.  Theft, bribery, and abuse of power is most certainly one of them.

What % of the vote do we need (or number of votes) in this election to get major / minor party status? 

2% of the votes in a statewide race gets us minor party status, for whatever that is worth. We need 15% of the registered voters to get political party status. At that point we would also be forced to use the primary election system to nominate candidates. Right now we have about 0.5% of the registered voters minus those who changed for Ron Paul and didn't change back.

Mik Robertson