PRESS RELEASE: I am working with Lawmakers (Minority Democratic Whip, Sen. Dave Aronberg, and local lawmaker, Majority Republican Whip, Sen. Paula Dockery), to close this loophole --see below --and prevent this type abuse from occurring in the future -to prevent future victims of the system.
 
Official Websites:
* DaveAronberg.com
* FL Senate listing - Sen. Paula Dockery (Republican)
* FL Senate listing - Sen. Dave Aronberg (Democrat)

Gordon Wayne Watts, "write-in" candidate for Florida House of Representatives, Dist. 64

From: Gww1210@aol.com
To: PESICEK.KRISTEN.S27@flsenate.gov
CC: Dockery.Paula.Web@flsenate.gov, aronberg.dave.web@flsenate.gov
Sent: 8/28/2008 5:08:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time
Subj: Re: Gordon Watts-Ledger Editorial
 
Looks excellent, Kristen. Good job. The only changes that I would make might be the following:
 
(A) To include language for "one or more" write-in candidate (both in the thing placed on the ballot and, of course, in the actual constitutional amendment) -see below where I make the minor grammatical changes. (Hey, there might be "more than one" -like in this Dist. 64 race, remember?)
(B) To make sure that people know an 'elector' is a 'voter' (I make that minor change below too -using red and blue, with pastel yellow highlight)
 
What does the legal geek squad say about this? (Also, more importantly, what do the other senators and representatives say about this?)
 
Lastly, isn't there an end-run around the method you outline? That is, can't the lawmakers simply make changes to the State Constitution themselves without a voter referendum -by a super majority of both senate & house? Oops- that doesn't seem to likely if a simple majority is hard to get, but it is easier and quicker.)
 
Gordon
 
In a message dated 8/28/2008 4:36:20 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, PESICEK.KRISTEN.S27@flsenate.gov writes:

Hi – Let me know what you think about the languag below.  Some of the “weaker attempts” to close the loophole are due to procedural rules.  The method below would require a constitutional amendment, which requires more than a mere majority vote.  The “weaker attempts” can narrow the loophole via statutory changes which only need a majority vote.


Talk with you soon,

Kristen

 

 

27-222-06
 
  1                     Senate Joint Resolution
 
  2         A joint resolution proposing an amendment to
 
  3         Section 5 of Article VI of the State
 
  4         Constitution to prescribe additional
 
  5         circumstances in which electors may vote in a
 
  6         primary election regardless of party
 
  7         affiliation.
 
  8  
 
  9  Be It Resolved by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
 
10  
 
11         That the following amendment to Section 5 of Article VI
 
12  of the State Constitution is agreed to and shall be submitted
 
13  to the electors of this state for approval or rejection at the
 
14  next general election or at an earlier special election
 
15  specifically authorized by law for that purpose:
 
16                            ARTICLE VI
 
17                      SUFFRAGE AND ELECTIONS
 
18         SECTION 5.  Primary, general, and special elections.--
 
19         (a)  A general election shall be held in each county on
 
20  the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of each
 
21  even-numbered year to choose a successor to each elective
 
22  state and county officer whose term will expire before the
 
23  next general election and, except as provided herein, to fill
 
24  each vacancy in elective office for the unexpired portion of
 
25  the term. A general election may be suspended or delayed due
 
26  to a state of emergency or impending emergency pursuant to
 
27  general law.  Special elections and referenda shall be held as
 
28  provided by law.
 
29         (b)  If all candidates for an office have the same
 
30  party affiliation and the winner will have either no
 
31  opposition in the general election or opposition only from a one or more 
                                  1
 
CODING: Words stricken are deletions; words underlined are additions.
 
 
 
 
 
 
    Florida Senate - 2006                                  SJR 106
    27-222-06
 
 
 
 
write-in candidates, then all qualified electors (e.g., voters), regardless of
 
 2  party affiliation, may vote in the primary elections for that
 
 3  office.
 
 4         BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following statement be
 
 5  placed on the ballot:
 
 6                     CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
 
 7                      ARTICLE VI, SECTION 5
 
 8         OPEN PRIMARY ELECTION; ADDITIONAL
 
 9  CIRCUMSTANCES.--Proposing an amendment to the State
 
10  Constitution that will permit all electors (e.g., voters) regardless of party
 
11  affiliation to vote in any primary election for an office, in
 
12  the same manner as currently permitted when the winner of the
 
13  primary will be unopposed in the general election, if the
 
14  winner of the primary will be opposed in the general election
 
15  by a one or more write-in candidates only.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________ 
Kristen Pesicek  Legislative Aide  Senator Dave AronbergFlorida Senate Dist. 27 Pesicek.Kristen.s27@flsenate.gov
(561) 433-2627 FAX (561) 434-3995 • 6415 Lake Worth Road Suite 210 Greenacres, FL  33463


(850) 487-5356 • FAX (850) 487-5496 • 405 Senate Office Bldg. 404 S. Monroe St. Tallahassee, FL 32399


From: Gww1210@aol.com [mailto:Gww1210@aol.com]
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 6:59 PM
To: PESICEK.KRISTEN.S27
Cc: ARONBERG.DAVE.WEB
Subject: RE: Gordon Watts-Ledger Editorial

 

Thanks for the speedy reply, Kristen. The prior attempts to fix this problem usually only did things like require public disclosure of party (which wouldn't do JACK to stop the abuse: I'm a perfect example)

        :-)

-or went overboard by requiring the same fee for write-ins as with standard candidates. That was not wise -since that is effectively the same as "writing off" and eliminating the write-in method. Really! Who would be a write-in when you can get your name on the ballot for the same price. (I think Sen. Wilson was the one who proposed that, but I can't quite recall.)

    #1: Try my proposed method.

    #2: If someone is stupid enough to vote against it, have them call me.

    #3: All the good guys party afterwards when it inevitably passes -let's hope, however, this "inevitably" is in our lifetime -not in the distant future or when Jesus returns again!

    --Gordon Wayne Watts, "write-in" candidate for Dist. 64 House race

 

In a message dated 8/25/2008 2:00:18 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, PESICEK.KRISTEN.S27@flsenate.gov writes:

Hi Mr. Watts –


Sen. Aronberg is traveling this week and asked me to follow-up with you.  He agrees with you.  Unfortunately, the legislation has stalled (people who benefit from the system don’t have much incentive to change it).  He did try to get an amendment passed last year – it was an 18 to 18 vote.  Hopefully this legislative session something will get done.


I will keep you posted on his efforts.

Take care,

Kristen

 

_____________________________________________________________________ 
Kristen Pesicek  Legislative Aide  Senator Dave AronbergFlorida Senate Dist. 27 Pesicek.Kristen.s27@flsenate.gov
(561) 433-2627 FAX (561) 434-3995 • 6415 Lake Worth Road Suite 210 Greenacres, FL  33463


(850) 487-5356 • FAX (850) 487-5496 • 405 Senate Office Bldg. 404 S. Monroe St. Tallahassee, FL 32399

From: Gww1210@aol.com [mailto:Gww1210@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 10:17 AM
To: DOCKERY.PAULA.WEB
Cc: ARONBERG.DAVE.WEB
Subject: Re: FW: Gordon Watts-Ledger Editorial

 

You're welcome, Paula. Best of luck in help here -I'm sending a copy to your colleague on the Democrat side.

 

They should be looking into this -one proposed solution would be to let all candidates go into the general election instead of the primary if only one party and/or some write-in candidate(s) are present.

 

This would make a person altering the primary "rules" have to pay up a filing fee and/or get signatures -and would stop "monkey business" I think.

 

PS: On the forum associated with that letter, I made additional comments:

 

This link: http://forums.theledger.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/2631062365/m/9861094457 (the copy and paste appears between your reply and my byline signature)

 

In a message dated 8/21/2008 10:03:57 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, DOCKERY.PAULA.WEB@flsenate.gov writes:

Gordon, thank you for your phone call this morning. I co-sponsored legislation 2 years in a row in attempt to close the write-in loophole. Warm regards,

 

Paula

 

http://www.theledger.com/article/20080821/NEWS/9842/1037/edit&title=Write_In_Candidates

Write-In Candidates

Published: Thursday, August 21, 2008 at 1:34 a.m.
Last Modified: Thursday, August 21, 2008 at 1:35 a.m.

The Ledger hasn't properly clarified how numerous Polk Democrats were "legally" disenfranchised.

Florida is a "closed primary" state: For example, if you're a registered Democrat, you can't generally vote in Republican primaries.

However a 1998 amendment to the state constitution mandated primaries be open to all voters if the primary winner has no opposition and would win by default. So, in the District 64 House race, just three Republicans ran, and anyone could've voted for them. However, two write-in candidates ran, closing the primary.

Whether Florida primaries should be open or closed is up for debate, but write-ins should not be able to alter the primary, I think. Therefore, I'm running on this platform.

Why Democrats should vote for me: I'm the only candidate supporting election-law reform (and several other traditional liberal issues). See my Web site (www.gordonwaynewatts.com/Campaign.html).

Why Republicans should vote for me: I have a very conservative track record, better than all other candidates combined. See my Web site.

I understand that The Ledger is correct in its assertion that I have a slim chance of winning. However, the concept underlying the law allowing "write-in" candidates to run is that even a write-in candidate can win if enough people are dissatisfied enough with government and demand "change." (Do we?)

Tuesday is the primary, and only Republicans can vote in it, for either C.J. "Jack" English III, Kelli Stargel or Phillip Walker.

Nov. 4 is the general election. On that day, you will have three choices:

The winner of the Republican primary (above).

Myself (Republican), write-in candidate.

Dr. Alton C. Smith (Democrat), the other write-in candidate.

If you vote for one of us write-in candidates, you'll have to write in our name in the space provided.

GORDON WAYNE WATTS

Lakeland

 

Ledger Chatter
Picture of Flash

http://forums.theledger.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/2631062365/m/9861094457?r=9861094457#9861094457

Posted 21 August 2008 09:50 AM

RE: http://www.theledger.com/article/20080821/NEWS/9842

I was prevented by word-length restrictions from clarifying further, so I shall do so here:

Although the primary was "legally" closed to registered Democrats and Independents (and all other parties other than registered Republicans), that alone would not "morally" be sufficient justification for a write-in candidate (such as myself) to do like I did & slam the door shut -and disenfranchise tens of thousands of registered Polk Democrats even if this resulted in a more qualified candidate in office.

Indeed, even if the public were to vote in a less qualified person, perhaps they deserve it.

However, since it is well-known that many people (such as Florida State Senator, Dave Aronberg) have unsuccessfully tried to change this stupid loophole in the law, it was necessary for me (and others as well) to do what I did -to bring attention to this problem sufficient to correct it.

The "legal" disenfranchisement of tens of thousands of Polk County Democrats was the price we had to pay.

Although I am not trying to take a poke at the Democrats (remember: I'm a Republican), I must, in all fairness to my colleagues, point out that the Democrats chose not to run a candidate in this race.

However, that is the past -we should, presently, focus on a solution to this problem. What do others propose the law should be?

* The same as it is -where a write-in can slam the door shut in a primary?

* Have all candidates go into the general election if they are just in one party -even if write-ins join the race?

* Any other suggestions?

PS: They only listed one mirror: http://www.GordonWayneWatts.com/Campaign.html

The other one is: http://www.GordonWatts.com/Campaign.html

PS #2: I've updated my campaign website to bring it current with the other candidates' views and statement -my campaign website represents the other candidates better than even their campaign website in some instances, lol. (Get with it folks: IF you run for office, THEN PLEASE tell us where you stand on "the issues" on your own campaign websites.)



_______________________________________________________
** "Truth doesn't bend to the will of tyrants." ***GET TRUTH. ***
www.GordonWayneWatts.com / www.GordonWatts.com
Gordon W. Watts, A.S., B.S., "Write-in" Candidate for Florida House of Representatives, District 64

 

Posts: 376 | Location: LAKELAND, "Imperial" Polk County, FLORIDA, U.S.A., Earth | Registered:

Gordon Wayne Watts
www.GordonWayneWatts.com / www.GordonWatts.com


ALWAYS FAITHFUL - To God - And God bless my friends who made me this picture.
BS, The Florida State University, Biological and Chemical Sciences
AS, United Electronics Institute

821 Alicia Road
Lakeland, FL 33801-2113
www.Members.AOL.com/Gww1210 or www.GeoCities.com/Gordon_Watts32313
Home: (863) 688-9880 Work: (863) 686-3411 Voice&FAX: (863) 687-6141
See also: http://Gordon_Watts.Tripod.com/consumer.html
Gww1210@aol.com
; Gww12102002@Yahoo.com
Truth is the strongest, most stable force in the Universe.
Truth doesn't change because you disbelieve it.
TRUTH doesn't bend to the will of tyrants.
Gordon Wayne Watts

Get Truth.

"First, they [Nazis] came for the Jews. I was silent. I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists. I was silent. I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists. I was silent. I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me. There was no one left to speak for me." (Martin Niemoller, given credit for a quotation in The Harper Religious and Inspirational Quotation Companion, ed. Margaret Pepper (New York: Harper &Row, 1989), 429 -as cited on page 44, note 17, of Religious Cleansing in the American Republic, by Keith A. Fornier, Copyright 1993, by Liberty, Life, and Family Publications.

(Actually, they may not have come for the Jews first, as it's far more likely they came for the prisoners, mentally handicapped, and other so-called "inferiors" first -as historians tell us -so they could get "practiced up;" But, they did come for them -due to the silence of their neighbors -and due, in part, to their own silence. So the general idea is correct: "Speak up now, or forever hold your peace." --Gordon)

*
*

 


It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here.




It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here.





It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here.




It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here.