New Haven Independent

posted by: Morris Cove Mom on February 3, 2012  1:53pm

“One of Agnew’s opponents, incumbent Tanya Smith, countered that the newcomer is too young to attend party fundraisers, which often take place in bars—and therefore too young to effectively do the job. “

Maybe they should move the fundraisers to bar and grills, or regular restaurants with a bar available.  That cannot be the argument to keep a smart young person out of the race.

If she’s old enough to vote, she’s old enough to be voted for.

posted by: Ward 2 Activist on February 3, 2012  1:57pm

In ward 2 I support Greg Smith - long time activist and existing co-chair, proponent of responsible policing, champion for the residents suffering through the debacle at 99 Edgewood and more. I also support Chris Arnott   - Chris is also a New Haven activist, former Advocate writer and long time community member and homeowner. Both committed family men and good neighbors.

There are two other good candidates, but I know them less and I THINK they are less veteran in Democratic Party affairs. Anita Morales is a community outreach worker and a staple member of the community. I don’t think I’ve met Jane Kinity, but I judge her well by the company she keeps and the good that people speak of her. I’m sure both of them will do well also if elected. If not elected, any of the people not selected can help to organize the ward committees so that they are more real, involved bodies of people. Now is the time for that work. Chris Arnott said so and I respect that and plan to support that sort of cohesiveness. Its the kind of cohesiveness that is going to let us start getting things done around here.

This is a great place to be - all too often you have “foreign powers” putting people up against each other in ward races and it is exciting to see really substantial people putting themselves out there for these positions.

I like all of the candidates a lot and I want to let them all know how much their involvement is appreciated and respected. It’s a nice problem to have to have to choose between several people you think are good.

REMEMBER VOTERS! YOU CAN VOTE FOR ANYONE YOU WANT..YOU DON’T HAVE TO VOTE FOR A SLATE. SUPPORT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE INDIVIDUALS YOU WANT TO! SPLIT YOUR VOTE IF YOU WANT TO! AND AFTER THE ELECTION, COME OUT AND WORK IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD TO MAKE THE CHANGES YOU WANT TO SEE!

posted by: anon on February 3, 2012  2:41pm

Half of the city’s population, and about 1/5th of the city’s labor force, is under the age of 29. The unemployment rate for people age 16 to 29 is far higher than the city average, especially if you consider Blacks and Latinos.

Does anyone know what proportion of city employees are under age 29?

It would be great if NHI would write an article about that. The city doesn’t pay attention to youth even though this is the key issue in New Haven.

Simple facts like these are what explains the rift.

posted by: Threefifths on February 3, 2012  2:42pm

This is why we must get rid of Town Committees and use Instant-runoff voting which let all people vote.

posted by: Tracey Meares on February 3, 2012  3:07pm

Unless New Haven’s charter prevents it, I should think being old enough to vote (and be a soldier among other things) is old enough to represent this City. Why not let the voters decide?

posted by: streever on February 3, 2012  3:12pm

3/5ths
What would that actually accomplish?

I already explained to you—every nation on earth has party committees.

They only have power in the party itself—not in general elections.

I’m sorry that you still haven’t taken the time to research this system.

While the Ward Committee system absolutely should be reformed, it is incapable of the charges you levy at it. It literally does not have the ability to do the things you think it does.

posted by: A New Look In Ward 26 on February 3, 2012  4:02pm

Theresa Jones in Ward 26 is a newcomer to Ward politics, but a refreshing face with a lot of new ideas. It is rare that we get the opportunity to take advantage of a human service professional, with a business accounting background. An added plus—she has worked as a campaign volunteer for the state legislative races. She took the time to knock on my door and visit. I am convinced!

posted by: SteveOnAvon on February 3, 2012  4:57pm

Ward 2 Activist, well put!

It is really exciting to have so many people getting involved and taking stakes in their neighborhoods & the city! The attitudes of division, cynicism, selfishness, and convenience appear to be giving way to something much bigger.

New Vision, New Haven.

posted by: Your Neighbor on February 3, 2012  5:05pm

I’m excited to see young people involved in the process. This is what we need to change this city. Don’t let anyone make you feel small, Latoya!

posted by: Threefifths on February 3, 2012  5:08pm

@streever.Sir Under the system of Proportional Representation,The people not a Town Committee picks the person or person to run.

Approval voting
A voting system used in single-member district systems and single-office elections in which voters can vote for, or approve of, as many candidates as they wish. Each candidate approved of receives one vote and the candidate with the most votes wins. The winner need not garner a majority of the votes.

Notice sir voters can vote for, or approve of, as many candidates as they wish.The voters sir pick the candidates,Not a Town Committee.

Closed List
A type of ballot found in list proportional representation in which votes are cast for a party and it’s list of candidates. The order of the candidates on the list is fixed and it is determined by the party, usually in a convention, caucus or primary. Voters cannot express a preference for any particular candidate within that list

This is what you are talking about what some coutries do.

I’m sorry that you still haven’t taken the time to research this system.

I did.Read this book.Spencer Overton Stealing Democracy.

http://www.stealingdemocracy.com/facts.cfm

From the book.

Most nations of the world avoid extreme partisan gerrymandering by using proportional representation instead of single-member districts. In the January 2005 Iraq elections, for example, the Kurdish parties received about 26% of the nationwide vote, which entitled them to about the same percentage of seats in the national assembly.

-Almost all democracies in the world that use single-member districts to elect legislators assign responsibility for drawing districts to independent commissions, including Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom.

Notice Most nations of the world avoid extreme partisan gerrymandering by using proportional representation instead of single-member districts.You see no crooked town Committees.

posted by: Zebra on February 3, 2012  7:45pm

I like what you have to say on this three fifths. [...]

posted by: ohan karagozian on February 3, 2012  10:31pm

There are 123 democracies in the world according to Freedom House.  Threefifths only mentioned 5 nations following his/her favorite model.  I’m not saying what we have is perfect, but it works.  I’m not averse to change, but why fix something that has worked for so long.  This isn’t like changing the drapes because you are bored or something - it’s significant.

posted by: streever on February 4, 2012  2:19am

3/5th
Ward committee does not define who can run.

Kerekes was not selected by the ward committee,
yet he ran for mayor

This is what I keep saying to you
You keep saying, “Sir, under proportional representation, the people get to choose”

Guess what happens in your dream system? Kerekes is not ALLOWED to join the party to begin with. He runs under his own party from the get-go.

The only thing different—in terms of candidate selection—is the automatic vote based on self-identified parties, however, you can hardly blame the ward committee for this.

posted by: just some thoughts on February 4, 2012  10:09am

First as far as her being to young that is a bunch of ...  Show some leadership and have fundraisers at places other than a bar.  Why do you have to drink.  Isn’t that a big problem in the community.  These are suppose to be our leaders.  Next people should really look at the Republician Party in New Haven.  I know its not the cool thing to do because of what people say about them.  If you think about it though would you rather be empowered and move up or be at the same place as your parents and grandparents.  Everybody needs to be responsible for themselves and there community and stop looking for handouts all the time.  This is the big misconception of the Republician Party.  They are saying you don’t have to settle for food stamps work to get off of them.  Remember when food stamp and welfare program started it was suppose to be a temp. thing.  It really seems like the democrats want to keep the poor down.  I say bring the poor up.  Thats the problem with this city.  If you are a Republician you are preceived as Racist and that is far far from the case.  just my thoughts.  But give this young lady a chance.

posted by: Threefifths on February 4, 2012  2:42pm

posted by: ohan karagozian on February 3, 2012 9:31pm

There are 123 democracies in the world according to Freedom House.  Threefifths only mentioned 5 nations following his/her favorite model.  I’m not saying what we have is perfect, but it works

Works for who.It works only for those who follow the Jackass and the Elephant.What about those of us who don’t like either one.Far too long in this country, politics has been run by the two major parties, Democrats and Republicans. While both of these parties are close to the center of the political spectrum and represent a lot of people, there are others out there with other ideas.People in this country have grown up knowing Republicans and Democrats.And if you’re not one of those two, you don’t really matter. If you want to vote, you pretty much have to choose the lesser of two evils.The US did not originally have a two party system. There were several parties in the beginning, and even George Washington warned against the two party.Also those 123 democracies you talk about most are not run by a two party system.They have some system of proportional representation.

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/polit/damy/BeginnningReading/howprwor.htm

In the end, the issue comes down to equality. We say we’re ALL equal, but then we turn around and say if you’re not a Democrat or Republican, you’re screwed. Open up the process and make it easier for more parties to participate.Demand he system of proportional representation now.In fact Port Chester New York use a proportional representation system now.

Port Chester will use Cumulative Voting.

http://www.fairvote.org/port-chester-will-use-cumulative-voting

P.S. Are you for Term Limits?

posted by: Threefifths on February 4, 2012  4:40pm

@streever.Again under the system of proportional representation the people get to pick who runs.Case and point.Under the town commitee system,the twon commitee members get to vote on who will run for there party.Now If others of that party are not picked,buy the town commitee,they they must go out and get signatures to get on the ballot.This is what happen to Kerekes.Now if Instant Runoff Voting was used which is part of the system of proportional representation he would have had a better chance of winning. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqblOq8BmgM

Guess what happens in your dream system? Kerekes is not ALLOWED to join the party to begin with. He runs under his own party from the get-go.

And that is my point.Far too long in this country, politics has been run by the two major parties, Democrats and Republicans. Remember the US did not originally have a two party system. There were several parties in the beginning and not town comittees.

P.S. What year did town commitees come into play and how come none of the people you help get elected have put a bill forward for Term Limts.

posted by: ohan karagozian on February 4, 2012  4:49pm

There is no problem in starting other parties like the Libertarian Party.  You can have as many Parties as you want.  But every Party has it’s own rules.  Like I said before, if it ain’t broke don’t fix it.  If you think something is broke, and you and a handful of others feel that way, then is it broke?  Is it broke just because you say so?  Who are you? Are you, by yourself and your compatriots, the majority?  Do you decide what is right and wrong?  What about everybody else who isn’t complaining and thinks that everything is OK?

posted by: streever on February 4, 2012  5:41pm

3/5th
How do those candidates join the party?

This is my point—it may be less transparent and obvious when the party selects their candidate, but do you think they allow people to join who they don’t want to win?

At least in the American system, it is an open election where you can criticize the party leaders later. In a system where the party quietly excludes candidates and pretends it is open, you can’t point fingers at the responsible as effectively.

As I usually point out, there is a far more effective solution than the convoluted and misguided one you offer.

The political party committee exists in every political system on earth—here is my point to you—it isn’t the party committee that is the issue, but the rules governing general elections, ballots, and display of candidates.

So, when we stop letting ourselves be led by the nose and stop fruitlessly trying to eliminate the town committee, we ask ourselves, why the heck does a party endorsement carry so much weight?

I think we all have a few thoughts on this, and I think you and I share the same point of view—there are dozens of laws and conventions which support 2 party candidates and disenfranchise others.

If we eliminated these laws/conventions and evened the playing field, we wouldn’t have the problem you describe—because it wouldn’t matter what party you belong to, voters would have an even field to choose from.

Targeting the real system that causes voter disenfranchisement and perpetuates the two party system seems like a better use of my internet rant time, but what do I know? I’m part of the crooked 2 party system.

posted by: Threefifths on February 4, 2012  10:37pm

posted by: streever on February 4, 2012 4:41pm
3/5th
How do those candidates join the party?

Again under proportional representation you have a system were the voters pick the candidates.

The single transferable vote (STV) is a voting system designed to achieve proportional representation through preferential voting. Under STV, an elector’s vote is initially allocated to his or her most preferred candidate, and then, after candidates have been either elected or eliminated, any surplus or unused votes are transferred according to the voter’s stated preferences. The system minimizes “wasted” votes, provides approximately proportional representation, and enables votes to be explicitly cast for individual candidates rather than for closed party lists. You see with this system again not a town committee,But the voters themselves pick the candidates.

Switzerland’s Refined Proportional Representation System.

The Swiss system allows voters who take the time to choose individual candidates while those wishing to simply vote for a party can do so. Also they have a system call called cancelling in which Voters may cancel any candidates they don’t like on the list of there preferred party. While this does not change the weight of the vote for the party as such, it will be used to determine which candidate(s) of this party will actually get the seat. This feature helps to eliminate extreme candidates that may be good at influencing decision makers in their party, while having problems to convince even a majority of the party’s followers.

I like this one.
Voting for candidates from different parties
Voters have even more possibilities to vote for individual candidates they prefer: candidates from another party may be written onto the chosen list of the preferred party. Of course, there must be a free line on the list to do so - or one of the names printed on the list must be cancelled first to create a free line. Candidates from other parties may be cumulated, too, as long as there are free lines to place them.

Notice candidates from another party may be written onto the chosen list of the preferred party. And the voters get to write them in.

Targeting the real system that causes voter disenfranchisement and perpetuates the two party system seems like a better use of my internet rant time, but what do I know? I’m part of the crooked 2 party system.

You are right abot that.politics has been run by the two major parties, Democrats and Republicans.

But answer this question The US did not originally have a two party system. There were several parties in the beginning,and no town commitees.So when did town committees start and are you for Term Limits.

posted by: ohan karagozian on February 4, 2012 3:49pm
There is no problem in starting other parties like the Libertarian Party.  You can have as many Parties as you want.  But every Party has it’s own rules.  Like I said before, if it ain’t broke don’t fix it.  If you think something is broke, and you and a handful of others feel that way, then is it broke?  Is it broke just because you say so?  Who are you? Are you, by yourself and your compatriots, the majority?  Do you decide what is right and wrong?  What about everybody else who isn’t complaining and thinks that everything is OK?

True every Party has it’s own rules. but under the system of Proportional Representation every party will have a voice at the table.Same question to you.There were several parties in the beginning,and no town commitees.So when did town committees start and are you for Term Limits.

posted by: ohan karagozian on February 5, 2012  12:56pm

I’m not against term limits.  I’m not sure when and why Town Committees were originated as I’m not a historian.  The fact that there were no Town Committees previously and now there are Town Committees is indica that Town Committees are viable if not favored by some voters.

In essence, from what I can deduce form the absence of and formation thereafter of Town Committees is that previously there was chaos and now there is order.  Is it possible that the “order” we have now is malfunctioning - possibly - but the “order” we have now is certainly not a perceived “problem” that can’t be rectified.

Voter’s voices can be heard and influence existing political parties.  Case in point being the the Tea Party for instance.  There is no appreciable disenfranchisement of voters ability to affect political thought or elections and this is a personal view which may or may not be borne by statistical analysis.

posted by: Threefifths on February 5, 2012  1:36pm

posted by: ohan karagozian on February 5, 2012 11:56am
I’m not against term limits.  I’m not sure when and why Town Committees were originated as I’m not a historian.  The fact that there were no Town Committees previously and now there are Town Committees is indica that Town Committees are viable if not favored by some voters.

Town Commitees started when you went to a two party system.Also you say Town Committees are viable if not favored by some voters.Not true.The major of voters across this country want to get rid of Town Committees and the crooked two party system.look it up.

In essence, from what I can deduce form the absence of and formation thereafter of Town Committees is that previously there was chaos and now there is order.  Is it possible that the “order” we have now is malfunctioning - possibly - but the “order” we have now is certainly not a perceived “problem” that can’t be In essence, from what I can deduce form the absence of and formation thereafter of Town Committees is that previously there was chaos and now there is order.  Is it possible that the “order” we have now is malfunctioning - possibly - but the “order” we have now is certainly not a perceived “problem” that can’t be rectified.

It can be rectified.It is call referendum.Let the voters do it.

Voter’s voices can be heard and influence existing political parties.  Case in point being the the Tea Party for instance.  There is no appreciable disenfranchisement of voters ability to affect political thought or elections and this is a personal view which may or may not be borne by statistical analysis.

First the tea party is not a party.It is a populist political movement that is generally conservative.You have democratics and republicans who are memembers.Question.Would you fight for a referendum for the people to who want to go to the system of proportional representation.

posted by: ohan karagozian on February 5, 2012  7:05pm

I’m not averse to change, but I don’t want to do it just because I have nothing to do.  Is it your position that whole swaths of society and voters are without political voice because of the 2 party system and town committees?

If your that keen on having this type of system moving forward, then you should garner support for your position - a referendum as you suggested.  But what if the referendum doesn’t pass?  Then what?  Who’s going to be the “boogeyman then?  Finding “boogeymen” in politics is like finding water in the ocean - they’re everywhere.

There are people who think that if all guns disappear there would be no murders and I think that the expectations for proportional representation is just about on par with that type of reasoning.

P.S. Prior to guns, people were killing each other using a variety of other instruments.

posted by: Threefifths on February 6, 2012  12:11am

ohan karagozian on February 5, 2012 6:05pm

If your that keen on having this type of system moving forward, then you should garner support for your position - a referendum as you suggested.  But what if the referendum doesn’t pass?  Then what? 

But what if it does.Would you support it.

It doesn’t take a majority to make a rebellion; it takes only a few determined leaders and a sound cause.
H. L. Mencken

posted by: Lynda Faye Wilson on February 6, 2012  2:05pm

Kudos to Miss Agnew for her desires and energy for her peers and self. They may not be able to hang-out in bars, but so the hell what? They are old enough to vote, they see serious problems that need immediate attendance and have the willingness to try and tackle what’s at hand. No on in their right mind, can deny, that it is our youth who are being lost in the shuffle or eliminate all together. PLUS, THEY OUR OUR FUTURE. OURS AS WELL AS THEIR OWN. Those who are able to hang-out in the bars, parade around with their rock and wine glasses has proved a couple of things that are profound. Either they have been ineffective, especially when it come to dealing with our youth and young adults OR THEY ARE IN GRAVE NEED OF HELP TO PROMOTE THE GOAL THAT IS TO BE ACHIEVED.

The only dilemma I see and feel very sad about, is that this initiative has not taken wings along with Newhallville in every area of the city and fly off i one formation.  THAT WOULD BE NONE LESS THAN AWESOME AND PRODUCTIVE.  POWER TO THE PEOPLE - POWER TO OUR YOUNG PEOPLE. Those that know GOD and his POWERS, don’t hoard it, share it. And those that don’t know him and his POWERS, IT’S A MUST TO GET TO KNOW HIM AND HIS POWERS. WITH THIS COMBINATION YOU WILL FIND YOURSELVES NOT SHORT OF VICTORIOUS. And HAVE NO DOUBT, there are many of us that have the age to hang-out in the bars, whether we choose to or not, DO HAVE YOUR BACK FOR ALL THAT IS GOOD FOR ALL.  GOD BLESS EACH AND EVERYONE OF YOU. INDIVIDUALLY AND COLLECTIVELY.  I know off the rip, I have haters in what I say, but so be it.  THERE’S GONNA BE A BRIGHTER DAY, I MAY NOT LIVE TO SEE IT, BUT I ASSURE YOU.  KEEP -UP THE GREAT WORKS YUNGONS (Smile).

posted by: ohan karagozian on February 6, 2012  5:25pm

I’m a Co-Chair of Ward 3 of The Democratic Town Committee for The City of New Haven.  It would be disingenuous of me to adopt a system that is not congruent with my own beliefs.  I do respect all points of view, even if I don’t agree with them, and feel that if the will for change is there then it’s mettle will be tested in time.

Regarding the quote:

” It doesn’t take a majority to make a rebellion; it takes only a few determined leaders and a sound cause.
H. L. Mencken”

This quote is reminiscent of some parallel thought’s that Lenin had.  And with regards to the term “sound cause”, that is a matter of perception.  Abraham Lincoln didn’t think the Confederate States were pursuing a “sound cause” when they wanted to secede from the Union.

Here’s a quote: “One man’s trash is another man’s treasure.”

posted by: Threefifths on February 6, 2012  7:21pm

posted by: ohan karagozian on February 6, 2012 4:25pm

Here’s a quote: “One man’s trash is another man’s treasure.”

And are better quotes.

I don’t believe in the Republican party or the Democratic party. I just believe in parties.

The only difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is that the Democrats allow the poor to be corrupt, too.

As a rule, large capitalists are Republicans and small capitalists are Democrats, but workingmen must remember that they are all capitalists, and that the many small ones, like the fewer large ones, are all politically supporting their class interests, and this is always and everywhere the capitalist class.

posted by: Ward 2 Activist on February 7, 2012  1:35am

On the subject of the young candidate’s age - I think Joe Rodriguez was only 19 when he first ran for office and, excepting his one incident that came and went without much fanfare, he has in my opinion been effective and his community was lucky to have him decide to get active. I don’t know the area or Agnew, but the kind of energy and optimism people of that age bring to the table is a good thing, not to mention the fact that she represents a population that is an important part of the public debate - New Haven’s youth are one of the most important substance matters we can deal with in New Haven politics and are the key to many of our problems and opportunities. I support youth candidacies, although I suggest that they do work extra to educate themselves as to the functions of government. The City has run a ‘democracy school’ for the past several years which is a good way for interested activists to get engaged and get educated. I’m sure there are plenty of other resources. These days I’d expect candidates to talk about what they CAN and WILL do, not whether their opponent can’t get into a bar. Silly.

posted by: ohan karagozian on February 7, 2012  8:46am

Unfortunately, corruption can not be legislated away by laws.  The strong moral fabric of society is the best bulwark to keep corruption at bay.

Regarding Republican ideals, the statements by candidate Romney are telling.  Such as, “I don’t mind firing people who help me.”, “I don’t care about the poor, they have a social net to help them.” and “Corporations are people too!”

I’m not saying that the Democrats haven’t made any gaffes, but that there is no comparison to unmitigated greed that is in the DNA of the Republican Party.  Republicans, as whole, are disinclined to help and care for people who can’t afford medical care.  A lot of Talk Radio bemoans the possibility that under Obama healthcare plan people who are well to do financially may be burdened to help out to pay for it.

I believe that in order for a country to survive, it has duty to care for the needs of its people.  Republicans, it seems, are inclined to think that it’s everybody for themselves like in the jungle during stone-age days; if you’re hurt you get sick and you die, so what?

There is fundamental difference here; do governments have social responsibility or not?  Do governments just pick up garbage, pave roads, arrest people, put out fires and have armed forces?

posted by: Threefifths on February 7, 2012  10:33am

I’m not saying that the Democrats haven’t made any gaffes, but that there is no comparison to unmitigated greed that is in the DNA of the Republican Party.  Republicans, as whole, are disinclined to help and care for people who can’t afford medical care.  A lot of Talk Radio bemoans the possibility that under Obama healthcare plan people who are well to do financially may be burdened to help out to pay for it.

And this is why under proportional representation.You could bring back Progressive Party of 1912 which was call
the Bull Moose Party.

Official Name:

Progressive Party of 1912
Nicknamed the Bull Moose Party from a quote by Theodore Roosevelt. When asked whether he was fit to be president, he responded that he was as fit as a “bull moose.”

Origin of the Bull Moose Party:

Theodore Roosevelt was president of the United States until 1909. When he left office, William Howard Taft was chosen to run and won the presidency for the Republican Party. In 1912, Roosevelt was unhappy with Taft’s time in office and put his name forward to become the Republican Party’s nominee again. The Party chose to stick with Taft. This angered Roosevelt who walked out of the convention and then formed his own party, the Progressive Party in protest. Hiram Johnson was chosen as his running mate.

Platform of the Bull Moose Party:

True to Roosevelt’s progressive beliefs, the platform of the party called for major reforms including women’s suffrage, social welfare assistance for women and children, farm relief, revisions in banking, health insurance in industries, and worker’s compensation. The party also wanted an easier method to amend the constitution.

posted by: ohan karagozian on February 7, 2012  3:33pm

Well there you have it.  Back to my original idea: Make your own party and have all the fun you want instead of going around saying there should be no Parties at all.