Tag Archives: election

Libertarian ticket eyes post-convention opening and debate …

Posted: August 10, 2016 at 9:22 pm

The Libertarian Party ticket, facing what polls show are two of the most unpopular presidential candidates in modern American history, is seeing a bump in support as the general election race moves into full swing and a surge in interest that could carry nominee Gary Johnson onto the prized debate stage this fall.

Despite Donald Trump and Hillary Clintons popularity issues and trust gap with voters, few expect the Libertarian ticket to pose a Ross Perot-style threat this year.

But the party is far more than a political curiosity in 2016. Rumors are swirling in the wake of the major-party conventions that high-profile Republicans are now considering backing the ticket; a recent video from Johnson and running mate William Weld generated considerable buzz; and the polls show Johnson getting close to 15 percent the threshold he needs to reach to land him on the debate stage with Trump and Clinton this fall.

The RealClearPolitics average has Johnson at 8.4 percent in a four-way race with Trump, Clinton and Green Party candidate Jill Stein, up from 4.5 percent in June. The latest Fox News poll released Wednesday, after the conventions, put Johnson at 12 percent.

An NBC poll taken toward the end of the Democratic convention put Johnson at 9 percent, roughly where he was in prior polling.

Party officials said the unpopularity of the Republican and Democratic candidates gives the party an unprecedented opportunity.

It goes from week to week and day to day watching for what new thing [Clinton and Trump are] going to do to become more unpopular with the American people, and frighten people, Nicholas Sarwark, chairman of the Libertarian National Committee, told FoxNews.com. Those candidates are the gift that keeps on giving. Were running as the qualified adult in the room.

Sarwark pointed to Johnsons record as a two-term New Mexico governor, re-elected as a Republican in a Democratic state, in touting his credentials and appeal.

Unclear is whether the support in the polls will translate into support at the ballot box. In 2012, Johnson won just 0.99 percent of all votes cast — making him the most successful White House candidate in Libertarian history, but not making much of a dent in the race as a whole.

But this year, there are plenty of signs more voters are seeking an alternative candidate. At the Democratic convention last week, many Bernie Sanders supporters were getting on board with the Green Partys Stein. But so far, Johnson is polling the best among third-party candidates.

He and his running mate, former Massachusetts Gov. Weld, generated some buzz before the conventions with a slick video ad listing their accomplishments.

Weve been there … And done that! the candidates say.

Johnson said in an interview Monday with the Los Angeles Times that he believes in addition to appealing to disenfranchised Republicans on issues like free trade, low taxes and smaller government, the Libertarian stance on social issues and foreign policy could bring Sanders voters on board.

Sarwark said the party is banking that while Trump and Clinton are about as well-known as they are going to be, Johnson still can introduce himself to voters not familiar with his story especially if he is able to get on the debate stage.

This is far from a foregone conclusion.

So far, while Johnsons support is higher than in past years, an 8.4 percent average is still a distance from the 15 percent hed need to make the debates.

And he would need to get there by Aug. 15 to qualify, hitting 15 percent in not just one poll but an average of five recent polls chosen by the Commission on Presidential Debates.

Politically, where we stand, is we have to get into those presidential debates to really stand a chance, Weld told The Wall Street Journal last week. If we catch a break or two, we may get there.

Even then, the record for third-party or independent candidates is not strong.

In recent political history, the one who came closest to the presidency was businessman Perot in 1992 who was an independent, not technically a third-party candidate. At one point, Perot was leading in some polls against then-President George H. W. Bush and Democratic challenger Bill Clinton. However, after dropping out of the race before re-entering, he lost support. He eventually garnered 19 percent of the vote, with some Republicans arguing he split the GOP vote and handed the election to Clinton.

Republicans, meanwhile, were arguably given a boost by Green Party candidate Ralph Nader in 2000, when Nader picked up 2.7 percent of the vote against Democrat Al Gore and Republican George W. Bush.

Johnsons potential impact is hard to gauge. The latest Fox News poll found Johnson siphoning support about equally from the Democratic and GOP candidates.

But he could get a boost in the coming weeks as some Republicans reportedly consider backing him.

Most notably, 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush reportedly are mulling endorsements for Johnson. Marvin Bush, youngest brother of Jeb and George W., also endorsed Johnson last week.

From what Ive heard from the Bush and Romney camps, theyre still considering it, Sarwark claimed.

Asked if the party is looking just to make a strong showing, or go all the way, Sarward was bullish: Theres a path to the presidency. The ground is there.

Adam Shaw is a Politics Reporter and occasional Opinion writer for FoxNews.com. He can be reached here or on Twitter: @AdamShawNY.

View original post here:

Libertarian ticket eyes post-convention opening and debate …

Posted in Libertarian | Comments Off on Libertarian ticket eyes post-convention opening and debate …

Home – Libertarian Party of Ohio

Posted: July 18, 2016 at 3:39 pm

COLUMBUSThe Libertarian Party of Ohios newly elected central committee elected new officers and a new state executive committee at its biennial reorganizational meeting on April 23.

Bob Frey was elected as chair of the state central committee, the partys governing body that chooses an executive committee to run the partys day-to-day operations. Bob Bridges was elected to begin a full term as executive committee chair, after having served for several months in that position as a replacement for a previous chair who resigned.

“I am excited to be elected Chair of the Central Committee, said Frey. We have a strong group of volunteers, who are dedicated no matter the obstacles the state puts in our way. I look forward to helping be a part of this team, who WILL get the presidential nominee on the ballot, and continue to fight for freedom and liberty.”

This terms central committee elections were conducted at special election meetings of LPO members in participating congressional districts, rather than by Libertarian voters in Ohios primary election, because the Libertarian Party is currently prohibited from participating in Ohio elections by Senate Bill 193, which was signed by failed presidential candidate Gov. John Kasich in 2013 after being passed with only Republican votes in the Ohio House and Senate.

Other newly elected central committee members are Vice Chair Don Kissick, Secretary David Macko, and Treasurer Ann Leech.

The executive committee includes Vice Chair Scott Pettigrew, Secretary Bob Coogan, Treasurer Linda Comstock, and members at large Christopher Gill, Ann Leech, and Harold Thomas. According to LPO bylaws, executive committee members at large must also be members of the central committee.

After the meeting, Bridges made the following appointments and re-appointments to his management team:

Tricia SpranklePolitical Director

Gregory PizarroFinance Director

Joe BowersoxDeputy Political Director

Kevin KnedlerDeputy Secretary

Aaron Keith HarrisParty Spokesman, K-12 Liaison

LPO Central Committee (two seats available for each US Congressionial district)

District 1 – Seat A Bob Frey

District 1 – Seat B Scott Pettigrew

District 2 – Seat A Rick Kanis

District 2 – Seat B Ann Leech

District 3 – Seat A Harold Thomas

District 3 – Seat B Bob Bridges

District 4 – Seat A

District 4 – Seat B

District 5 – Seat A Don Kissick

District 5 – Seat B Sarah Kissick

District 6 – Seat A Lowell Lufkin

District 6 – Seat B Aarica Burwell

District 7 – Seat A

District 7 – Seat B

District 8 – Seat A Bob Coogan

District 8 – Seat B

District 9 – Seat A

District 9 – Seat B

District 10 – Seat A Aaron Harris

District 10 – Seat B Dan Zink

District 11 – Seat A

District 11 – Seat B

District 12 – Seat A Linda Comstock

District 12 – Seat B Kevin Knedler

District 13 – Seat A

District 13 – Seat B

District 14 – Seat A Justin Gleason

District 14 – Seat B David Macko

District 15 – Seat A Christopher Gill

District 15 – Seat B Franklin DeMint

District 16 – Seat A

District 16 – Seat B

For more information:

Aaron Keith Harris

LPO Party Spokesman

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.


Follow this link for more information about the 2016 Independent Presidential Ticket

Recognizing that the time before the upcoming November General Election is becoming short, the Libertarian Party of Ohio is charting a new direction in the fight to give real choice to Ohio voters. With the deadline for the November election now being just four months away, the LPO will focus on gaining ballot access for the Libertarian Partys presidential ticket without a party label.

Since the passage of SB193, the infamous John Kasich Reelection Protection Act, and the success of efforts by Republican Party operatives to remove Libertarian Gubernatorial candidate Charlie Earl from the 2014 ballot, the LPOs focus has been two-pronged: pursuing various court remedies and beginning a long and expensive petitioning effort to restore the party as a whole to ballot access. That petitioning effort requires approximately 35,000 valid signatures, with SB193 also requiring certain geographic distribution requirements. In contrast, placing the national ticket on the ballot without party label requires only 5000 valid signatures.

While the partys national ticket will not be chosen until the Libertarian National Convention over Memorial Day weekend in Orlando, Florida, petitioning is beginning now with placeholder candidates. John Fockler, whose term as Chair of the LPOs Central Committee ended recently, explained, We couldnt wait until the ticket is chosen. Ohio law allows us to begin petitioning with a temporary ticket now, and substitute the names of the actual ticket afterwards. The placeholder candidates are Earl, for President, and Kentucky LP activist Ken Moellman as Vice-President. Having Charlies name on the ticket as our temporary candidate is a big help, Fockler said. Charlie is extremely well-known in pro-liberty circles throughout the state and gives this effort extra credibility with people outside the Libertarian Party.

This does not represent a surrender in the efforts to achieve full ballot access for the Libertarian Party of Ohio, said Bob Bridges, recently reelected as Chair of the LPOs Executive Committee. We are as determined as ever that the voters of Ohio will again have the full range of choices they deserve, and not be limited to only those that the two big government parties think they should have.

Tuesday, February 16, 2016

Dear fellow Libertarians,

As the presidential election season has begun to heat up, we have seen a greatly increased amount of traffic on LPO.org and on social media. Many new people are telling us they’re fed up with Republicans and Democrats and they’re asking how to become new members of the Libertarian Party of Ohio.

Here are my answers to the three most commonly asked questions:

1) Who is the 2016 Libertarian presidential candidate?

The Libertarian Party will nominate its candidates for president and vice president at our 2016 Libertarian Party National Presidential Nominating Conventionin Orlando over Memorial Day weekend.

Along with our 2012 nominee, Gov. Gary Johnson, and Ohios own LPO Central Committee Vice Chair Marc Allan Feldman, there are several other candidates. Visit this link for a current list of those who have announced their candidacy.

LPO Communications Director Aaron Keith Harris interviews Tom Zawistowski of the Portage County Tea Party.

Topics include the corruption of the Kasich administration, the 2016 Republican presidential candidates, and possible alliances among the Tea Party, constitutional conservatives, and Libertarians.

Listen here.

Read more here:

Home – Libertarian Party of Ohio

Posted in Libertarian | Comments Off on Home – Libertarian Party of Ohio

Is this the dawn of bake-me-a-cake libertarianism …

Posted: June 29, 2016 at 6:17 pm

The Libertarian Party just nominated two former governors, New Mexico’s Gary Johnson for president and Massachusetts’ Bill Weld for vice president, in a year when more voters than ever may look for a third choice.

But Johnson and Weld at times seem to be working hard to push away one particularly homeless voting bloc that could ally with Libertarians this year: social conservatives. From their rhetoric to their policy proposals, the Libertarian nominees seem to be running against conservatives more than for liberty.

Weld and Johnson held their first post-nomination joint interview on Tuesday, on liberal network MSNBC. “We’ve never bought into this anti-choice, anti-gaysense of the Republican Party,” Weld said, as his first comment to the national television audience.

The message was clear: We don’t need those backward Christian Right bozos as much we need as you MSNBCers.

Johnson has sent similar signals, suggesting that his love of liberty is second to his revulsion to religion. In January, for instance, Johnson said he would make it a federal crime for women to wear the Burqa, the full-body covering worn by women in certain strains of Islam. Johnson recanted a day later, while continuing his warnings about the threat of Sharia Islamic law in the U.S.

This spring, Johnson pushed aside freedom of conscience. When asked in an Oregon debate about laws and lawsuits requiring caterers to participate in gay weddings, Johnson took the big-government side for coerced baking in the name of gay rights. When later asked about this anti-liberty view, Johnson made the standard liberal conflation between selling off-the-shelf cupcakes to a gay customer (which is straight-up discrimination against a person) and refusal to participate in a ceremony (which is a freedom of conscience issue, a freedom of association issue, and often a free speech issue).

The dress-code libertarianism and bake-me-a-cake libertarianism Johnson has embraced isn’t libertarianism at all it’s left-wing social engineering enforced at gunpoint. Coming from Johnson and Weld, it reeks of raw identity politics. The only consistent theme is that religious people are bad.

Johnson’s quick reversal on his Burqa ban, and his logical fallacies and weird arguments on coerced baking suggest that he doesn’t hold libertarianism as a principle he is really just a social liberal and economic conservative, as he says. This is the heart of Weld’s campaigning, too.

Maybe Weld and Johnson haven’t been paying attention since they left office, and that’s why they conflate “socially liberal” with libertarian. These days, it’s not the conservatives trying to use government to enforce their morality. The Obama administration is trying to compel nuns to provide contraception for their staff. The ACLU is suing to force Catholic hospitals to abort babies. Gary Johnson’s own state fined a Christian wedding photographer for refusing to participate in a gay wedding.

Also from the Washington Examiner

Hillary Clinton is back to her April level lead over Donald Trump.

06/29/16 6:07 PM

The “anti-choice” side in America today is usually the cultural Left.

At the very moment when social conservatives would be most open to libertarianism, though, the libertarian nominees are running against conservatives.

This puts Johnson and Weld at odds with the rest of libertarianism. The Cato Institute and the Reason Foundation both filed amicus briefs on behalf of Hobby Lobby, the Christian-owned store that objected to Obama’s contraception mandate.

Even on abortion, Johnson and Weld could find common ground with social conservatives. The most libertarian GOP candidates in recent cycles Rand Paul and Ron Paul were both pro-lifers who pointed out that libertarianism doesn’t preclude protecting babies from homicide. In fact, all the most free-market lawmakers are staunch pro-lifers. For instance, the three senators with the highest 2015 Club for Growth scores are Mike Lee, Ben Sasse and Marco Rubio. You have to go down to No. 48 on the Club’s ranking to find a senator who’s a legitimate moderate pro-lifer all the top 47 are strong pro-lifers.

Social conservatives are homeless this election. They are also increasingly the victim of big-government culture wars. It won’t come naturally to Johnson and Weld, but they could reach out to social conservatives this election. Such outreach would expand the coalition, and maybe help persuade some social conservatives that the fight today is mostly about limiting government’s role in our lives.

Also from the Washington Examiner

House lawmakers said that the payments are illegal and the admin. has stonewalled attempts to get docs.

06/29/16 5:57 PM

Johnson and Weld just need to decide whether they are more dedicated to liberty or to identity politics.

Timothy P. Carney, the Washington Examiner’s senior political columnist, can be contacted at tcarney@washingtonexaminer.com. His column appears Tuesday and Thursday nights on washingtonexaminer.com.

Top Story

Abedin testified that only she, Clinton and Chelsea used accounts hosted by the “clintonemail.com” server.

06/29/16 2:58 PM

Read the original here:
Is this the dawn of bake-me-a-cake libertarianism …

Posted in Libertarianism | Comments Off on Is this the dawn of bake-me-a-cake libertarianism …

2016 Libertarian Party National Convention

Posted: June 21, 2016 at 11:18 pm

The 2016 Libertarian National Convention is gearing up and online registration is now closed. Don’t be discouraged! You can still register at the door (as long as room remains available). To help expedite the process to do so, please click on the thumbnail to be directed to a printable registration form. Please print and complete the form and turn into the registration desk when you arrive to help us expedite the registration process for you. Thank you for attending, participating in and being a part of #LegalizeFreedom, we most sincerely welcome you here.

The Libertarian National Committee (LNC) and the LP headquarters staff invite you to join us for the 2016 Libertarian Party National Presidential Nominating Convention, to help us #LegalizeFreedom.

The Libertarian Party National Convention will be held from Friday, May 27, through Monday, May 30, 2016 (Memorial Day), with special committee meetings, candidate and activist training seminars, and a Welcome Reception on Thursday, May 26. Visit our Schedule page for more information.

The convention will be held at the Rosen Centre Hotel & Resort in Orlando, Florida. See our Location page for special LP rates on hotel rooms, or visit our LP Suite Packages page.

This biennial convention offersseminars, forums, debates, discussion groups, and Exhibits.The Party’s delegateswill elect its nominees for U.S. President and Vice President, consider proposed amendments to the Party’s Platformand Bylaws, and elect our national leadership for the next term.

All LP members in good standing are encouraged to attend and help shape the future of the LP and the liberty movement. Contact your state party to learn how to be appointed as an official voting delegate from your state.

Family, friends, and observers who aren’t ticketed convention attendees are most welcome to watch the non-ticketed events in the main hall, including the election of the Presidential and Vice Presidentialcandidates, take in the exhibits, and enjoy family-friendly attractions, shopping and recreationalopportunities.

Read more:

2016 Libertarian Party National Convention

Posted in Libertarian | Comments Off on 2016 Libertarian Party National Convention

Liberal, Kansas – City-Data.com

Posted: at 6:46 am

Submit your own pictures of this city and show them to the World

Please wait while loading the map…

Current weather forecast for Liberal, KS

Zip codes: 67901.

Liberal city income, earnings, and wages data

Estimated median house or condo value in 2013: $89,800 (it was $65,400 in 2000)

Median gross rent in 2013: $651.

Liberal, KS residents, houses, and apartments details

Business Search – 14 Million verified businesses


Latest news from Liberal, KS collected exclusively by city-data.com from local newspapers, TV, and radio stations

Ancestries: German (11.5%), Irish (4.2%), English (3.9%), United States (3.2%), French (1.8%), Scotch-Irish (1.0%).

Current Local Time: CST time zone

Elevation: 2836 feet

Land area: 11.1 square miles.

Population density: 1,900 people per square mile (low).

5,514 residents are foreign born (25.6% Latin America).

According to our research of Kansas and other state lists there were 42 registered sex offenders living in Liberal, Kansas as of June 21, 2016. The ratio of number of residents in Liberal to the number of sex offenders is 502 to 1.

Median real estate property taxes paid for housing units with mortgages in 2013: $1,495 (1.5%) Median real estate property taxes paid for housing units with no mortgage in 2013: $809 (1.4%)

Nearest city with pop. 50,000+: Amarillo, TX (137.5 miles , pop. 173,627).

Nearest city with pop. 200,000+: Wichita, KS (202.4 miles , pop. 344,284).

Nearest city with pop. 1,000,000+: Dallas, TX (375.8 miles , pop. 1,188,580).

Nearest cities: Tyrone, OK (3.1 miles ), Turpin, OK (3.5 miles ), Kismet, KS (4.1 miles ), Hooker, OK (4.5 miles ), Forgan, OK (4.8 miles ), Plains, KS (4.9 miles ), Moscow, KS (5.0 miles ), Hugoton, KS (5.0 miles ).

Number of permits per 10,000 residents

Latitude: 37.04 N, Longitude: 100.93 W

Daytime population change due to commuting: +843 (+4.1%) Workers who live and work in this city: 7,957 (82.2%)

Area code: 620

(click on a table row to update graph)

Crime rate in Liberal detailed stats: murders, rapes, robberies, assaults, burglaries, thefts, arson Full-time law enforcement employees in 2014, including police officers: 50 (36 officers).

This city’s Wikipedia profile

Liberal, Kansas accommodation, waste management, arts – Economy and Business Data

Work and jobs in Liberal: detailed stats about occupations, industries, unemployment, workers, commute

Based on data reported by over 4,000 weather stations

Liberal-area historical tornado activity is slightly below Kansas state average. It is 39% greater than the overall U.S. average.

On 5/5/1993, a category F4 (max. wind speeds 207-260 mph) tornado 19.6 miles away from the Liberal city center caused between $500,000 and $5,000,000 in damages.

On 6/6/1951, a category F3 (max. wind speeds 158-206 mph) tornado 0.9 miles away from the city center injured 3 people and caused between $5000 and $50,000 in damages.

On 2/15/1974 at 13:33:49, a magnitude 4.6 (4.5 MB, 4.6 LG, Class: Light, Intensity: IV – V) earthquake occurred 39.8 miles away from the city center On 8/10/2005 at 22:08:22, a magnitude 5.0 (5.0 MB, 4.7 MS, 5.0 MW, Depth: 3.1 mi, Class: Moderate, Intensity: VI – VII) earthquake occurred 212.3 miles away from Liberal center On 6/16/1978 at 11:46:54, a magnitude 5.3 (4.4 MB, 4.6 UK, 5.3 ML) earthquake occurred 277.7 miles away from the city center On 1/3/2007 at 14:34:38, a magnitude 4.6 (4.6 MB, 4.4 MW, 4.4 LG, Depth: 3.1 mi) earthquake occurred 219.0 miles away from the city center On 9/15/1995 at 00:31:33, a magnitude 4.1 (3.8 LG, 4.1 LG, Depth: 3.1 mi) earthquake occurred 124.3 miles away from Liberal center On 9/5/2001 at 10:52:07, a magnitude 4.5 (4.5 LG, Depth: 3.1 mi) earthquake occurred 203.7 miles away from the city center Magnitude types: regional Lg-wave magnitude (LG), body-wave magnitude (MB), local magnitude (ML), surface-wave magnitude (MS), moment magnitude (MW)

Causes of natural disasters: Floods: 4, Storms: 4, Tornadoes: 3, Winter Storms: 2, Hurricane: 1 (Note: Some incidents may be assigned to more than one category).

Birthplace of: Jerame Tuman – 2005 NFL player (Pittsburgh Steelers, born: Mar 24, 1976), Melvin Sanders – Basketball player, Antonio Hanson – College basketball player (Tulsa Golden Hurricane), Martin Lewis (basketball) – Basketball player, Wayne Angell – Economist.

Political contributions by individuals in Liberal, KS

Click to draw/clear city borders

Notable locations in Liberal: Liberal Country Club (A), Liberal Wastewater Treatment Plant (B), Liberal Water Plant (C), Seward County Fairgrounds (D), Fairgrounds Speedway (E), Union Pacific Railroad Yard (F), Lowry Industrial Park (G), Sage Industrial Park (H), Village Plaza (I), Mid America Industrial Park (J), Willow Tree Golf Course (K), Liberal Municipal Court (L), KZQD – FM (Liberal) (M), Seward County Sheriff’s Department (N), Liberal Police Department (O), Seward County Courthouse (P), Seward County Fire Department (Q), Liberal Fire Department Station 3 (R), Liberal Fire Department Station 1 (S), Seward County Sheriff’s Department Jail (T). Display/hide their locations on the map

Shopping Centers: Southgate Mall (1), Western Shopping Center (2), Southgate Shopping Center (3), South Ideal Shopping Center (4), Randall Park Mall (5). Display/hide their locations on the map

Churches in Liberal include: Central Christian Church (A), Deliverance Power House Church of God in Christ (B), Iglesia de Cristo Maranatha Elim (C), Latter House Church (D), Risen Glory Church (E), Templo Puerta del Cielo Asambleas de Dios (F), Faith Tabernacle Church (G), Grant Street Church of Christ (H), Church For All Nations – Liberal (I). Display/hide their locations on the map

Cemetery: Liberal Cemetery (1). Display/hide its location on the map

Parks in Liberal include: Redskin Field (1), Bellaire Park (2), Mahuron Park (3), Country Club Acres Park (4), Tower Park (5), Southlawn Park (6), Cooper Park (7), Blue Bonnet Park (8), Harrison Circle Park (9). Display/hide their locations on the map

Tourist attractions: Baker Arts Center (Museums; 624 North Pershing Avenue), Coronado Museum-Dorothy’S House (567 East Cedar Street), Mid-America Air Museum (Cultural Attractions- Events- & Facilities; 2000 West Second Street), Chamber of Commerce (4 Rock Island Road), Tourist Information Center (220 East Pancake Boulevard), Liberal City – Convention & Tourism Information Center- Visitors Information Ce (Tours & Charters; 1 Yellow Brick Road).

Hotels: Kansan Motel (310 East Pancake Boulevard), Super 8 Liberal KS (747 East Pancake Boulevard), Best Western La Fonda Motel (229 West Pancake Boulevard), Motel 9 (230 West Pancake Boulevard), Tumbleweed Motel (488 East Pancake Boulevard), Liberal Inn Restaurant (603 East Pancake Boulevard), SLEEP INN (405 E Pancake Blvd), Branding Iron Club (603 East Pancake Boulevard), Holiday Inn Express Hotel & Suites (1550 North Lincoln Avenue).

Court: Seward County – District Court Clerk (415 North Washington Avenue).

Detailed information about poverty and poor residents in Liberal, KS

Educational Attainment (%) in 2013

School Enrollment by Level of School (%) in 2013

Presidential Elections Results

1996 Presidential Elections Results

2000 Presidential Elections Results

2004 Presidential Elections Results

2008 Presidential Elections Results

2012 Presidential Elections Results

Graphs represent county-level data. Detailed 2008 Election Results

7.93% of this county’s 2011 resident taxpayers lived in other counties in 2010 ($28,619 average adjusted gross income)

8.28% of this county’s 2010 resident taxpayers moved to other counties in 2011 ($34,275 average adjusted gross income)

Fatal accident count (per 100,000 population)

Most commonly used house heating fuel:

Top Patent Applicants

Total of 4 patent applications in 2008-2016.

Read more:

Liberal, Kansas – City-Data.com

Posted in Liberal | Comments Off on Liberal, Kansas – City-Data.com

Liberal Conspiracy

Posted: June 16, 2016 at 5:56 pm

by Sunny Hundal

Whether Britain acts against ISIL in Syria isnt about provoking them or if they pose a threat, but whether our actions will be effective and justified. Whatever we decide, we will get attacked by ISIS; its their aim and in their interests. The bigger question is whether we should join our international allies against a terror group that has already declared war on us.

If we have to engage with ISIS sooner or later, then we have to evaluate whether this is the right time and we have the right plan. I said earlier that Cameron hadnt properly made the case, and want to continue evaluating that.

The people who made up their mind ages ago whether for or against are the ones I tend to ignore. Its clear they arent interested in the details and are driven more by ideological than operational reasons.

Yesterday, Cameron set out his case for air-strikes against ISIL (over 36 pages) and then Jeremy Corbyn responded with seven questions. Some of those questions are quite important and I find it odd that some in the shadow cabinet have already made up their mind without see Camerons response.

When Islamic State came to notoriety last year, many commentators including myself made assumptions about its plans.

I wrote for Al-Jazeera that it poses a far greater threat to Muslims than it does to the west and this has remained true. I also said its impact on community relations in Europe and the US could be devastating an obvious prediction that is also turning out to be true, sadly.

But I said something else which now doesnt apply: Its leaders believe fighting apostates is more important than fighting non-Muslims for now. They want to unite the Middle East under their banner before truly turning their sights on the US and Europe. I wasnt alone in this assumption: Obama and his team have not engaged ISIS more forcefully also because of the belief that ISIS did not pose an immediate threat to US interests (see this and this).

But following the attack in Paris its clear that despite Islamic States initial focus on local sectarian wars, its priorities have now changed. The execution of journalist James Foley and aid worker Alan Henning showed it that it gained a lot (attention, supporters and perhaps donations) for going after western targets.

This goes to the heart of why Ive been arguing with Al-Jazeeras Mehdi Hasan over this issue. Mehdi wrote that Russian bombs provoked the ISIS attack, and so do western bombs. The implication is that if we stop bombing ISIS, maybe theyll stop retaliating. Thats two separate arguments there, one about provocation and other about our response.

Keep this in mind: I agree with Mehdi on foreign policy issues far more than I disagree with him. This isnt a debate about whether western foreign policy is counter-productive or not (it can be, frequently). I should also add that I dont think he is excusing or justifying ISIS, as some claim.

My problem is that just as the Right try and divert debate about ISIS to immigration and refugees, many on the Left try and divert it to foreign policy. I think Mehdi et al only see world events through the lens of western foreign policy. All this obscures more important issues that we need to debate about tackling ISIS. (I spend 90% of my time criticising the right for their diversion, so Im allowed to criticise fellow lefties too). And it assumes the world revolves around what we think / do.

As is common these days, I get abused on Twitter by some lefties outraged that Ive not fallen in line with popular opinion on the left.

In my latest column for LabourList I show why the assumption that Jeremy Corbyn will appeal to non-voters or UKIPers with his clear principles or economic populism seem wildly optimistic. Britons who dont vote or opt for UKIP are largely culturally conservative Britons who prefer the Daily Mail and Express over the Mirror, and value policies that the left would not want to sign up to (patriotism, low immigration, cutting welfare). Their biggest gripes are about immigration and welfare benefits, and in favour of reducing them not increasing them.

When you know Corbyn is a bit radical, why the shock when someone points out he may only appeal to other radicals?

Anyway, my point is this: yes, Ive changed my opinions views the election.

I havent changed what I believe in. I still believe in economic and social equality, I believe in an economy that doesnt unfairly reward the already rich and privileged, I believe in the free provision of education and other public goods like health. I believe the railways should be nationalised and that large parts of the banking sector have become a parasite on our economy. I still believe that climate change, sustainability, clean energy and ending waste are among the biggest challenges of our time.

But the British left is broken.

A few weeks before the General Election in May, I found that the National Council of Hindu Temples a registered charity posted a message calling on British Hindus to vote Conservative. It was clearly in violation of the Charity Commission rules, which state that charities cannot be politically aligned, and I complained. The []

The revolution doesnt start a thousand miles away, it starts with you.

It could be a statement put out by ISIS, the group that has encouraged its sympathisers all over the world to take action in defense of the Caliphate. But actually thats the strapline on the front page of National Action, a neo-Nazi group in the UK that is committed to fighting to recapture our country in an increasingly hostile and foreign environment.

Yesterday, Zack Davies was sentenced for the attempted murder of Dr Sarandar Bhambra, a man who was assaulted because he looked Asian according to Davies. His family said after the sentencing:

We are in no doubt, given the racial and political motivations, that this should have been rightly defined as an act of terrorism. By his own admission, the defendant Zack Davies had extreme neo-Nazi views and is a member of a white supremacist organisation.

So why werent the actions of Zack Davies seen as an act of terrorism, when a similar attack by a Muslim man would have been?

Seamus Milne says:

Opposition to all this [austerity] has barely begun. But theres no democratic reason for people to accept it. The Tories were elected by fewer than 37% of voters. Only 24% of those eligible backed the Conservatives and thats not counting the unregistered.

I know some people will not want to hear this but this is a ridiculous argument.

This came to my inbox last night, and I think the findings are worth sharing in full. Important to note, this was commissioned by a centre-right group, not a leftwing group.

Survation, on behalf of Bright Blue the independent think tank & pressure group for liberal conservatism, conducted an in-depth study of ethnic minority voters attitudes to immigration to inform their new report: A balanced centre-right agenda on immigration: Understanding how ethnic minorities think about immigration.

The report has six main findings:

This week I was kindly invited by the Cambridge Universities Labour Club for a talk on where Labour goes from here.

A lot of people made mistakes in predicting outcomes in the 2015 General Election, mostly because the polling was so out of sync with the eventual result. I made predictions based on polling too, and it was embarrassing enough when they turned out to be very wrong.

But I made other assumptions in the last election cycle and its only right to own up to them. Partly, I feel its important for my readers, but partly I think its worth articulating them so I can learn from my mistakes.

Despite losing his seat in Westminster, Jim Murphy is trying to hang on as leader of Scottish Labour. I find this astonishing. Late last year, when he became leader, he said they could hang on to most seats in Scotland. He said he was astonished at how easy its been to outwit the SNP. Yup, []

Read more here:

Liberal Conspiracy

Posted in Liberal | Comments Off on Liberal Conspiracy

The origin and nature of political correctness (26/11/2015)

Posted: at 5:47 pm

What Is Political Correctness? Political Correctness (PC) is the communal tyranny that erupted in the 1980s. It was a spontaneous declaration that particular ideas, expressions and behaviour, which were then legal, should be forbidden by law, and people who transgressed should be punished. (see Newspeak) It started with a few voices but grew in popularity until it became unwritten and written law within the community. With those who were publicly declared as being not politically correct becoming the object of persecution by the mob, if not prosecution by the state.

The Odious Nature Of Political Correctness To attempt to point out the odious nature of Political Correctness is to restate the crucial importance of plain speaking, freedom of choice and freedom of speech; these are the community’s safe-guards against the imposition of tyranny, indeed their absence is tyranny (see “On Liberty”, Chapter II, by J.S. Mill). Which is why any such restrictions on expression such as those invoked by the laws of libel, slander and public decency, are grave matters to be decided by common law methodology; not by the dictates of the mob.

Clear Inspiration For Political Correctness The declared rational of this tyranny is to prevent people being offended; to compel everyone to avoid using words or behaviour that may upset homosexuals, women, non-whites, the crippled, the stupid, the fat or the ugly. This reveals not only its absurdity but its inspiration. The set of values that are detested are those held by the previous generation (those who fought the Second World War), which is why the terms niggers, coons, dagos, wogs, poofs, spastics and sheilas, have become heresy, for, in an act of infantile rebellion, their subject have become revered by the new generation. Political Correctness is merely the resentment of spoilt children directed against their parent’s values.

The Origins Of Political Correctness A community declines when the majority of its citizens become selfish, and under this influence it slowly dismantles all the restraints upon self-indulgence established by manners, customs, beliefs and law: tradition. (See the law of reverse civilization) As each subsequent generation of selfish citizens inherits control of the community, it takes its opportunity to abandon more of the irksome restraints that wisdom had installed. The proponents of this social demolition achieve their irrational purpose by publicly embracing absurdity through slogans while vilifying any who do not support their stance. The purpose of the slogan is to enshrine irrational fears, or fancies, as truth through the use of presumptuous words, so public pronouncement:

For example the slogan Australia is Multicultural is a claim that:

All of which is an attack upon truth, clear thinking and plain speaking.

Outright Assault Upon Tradition Naturally as the restraints shrink the rebellion grows ever more extreme in nature. When the author of Animal Farm wrote an article in 1946 about the pleasures of a rose garden, he was criticised for being bourgeois. George Orwell mentions this in his essay A Good Word For The Vicar Of Bray, published in the Tribune, 1946. The term bourgeois was then a popular slogan meaning having humdrum middle class ideas (The Oxford English Dictionary 3rd Edition, 1938), which is just a blatant attack upon tradition the sanity of the community.

From Bourgeois To Racist Now, in the late 1990s, the results of being bourgeois (retaining traditional notions), is being labelled racist, sexist etc. and risk losing your job, your reputation, being jostled in the street, being subject to judicial penalty and death threats. And it is this very extremity of reaction that has won media attention and the name Political Correctness, though the reaction will become even more unpleasant with the next generation.

Parental Values Always Attacked The inevitable scapegoat for people impatient of restraint must always be parents, because these are society’s agents for teaching private restraint. So the cherished notions of the parents are always subject to attack by their maturing offspring. This resentment of tradition was observed in his own civilization by Polybius (c. 200-118 BC), the Greek historian, who said:

Tyranny Grows Once a community embraces tyranny the penalties can only grow in severity. This gradual increase is easily seen by the example of Toastmasters. As the members of the club became more concerned about the delights of socializing and less concerned about the disciplines of public speaking, they became more intolerant of citizens who were earnest about learning the art of rhetoric. Once those members who did their duty by truthfully pointing out the shortcomings in another member’s performance were just labeled as negative or discouraging; later this became a risk of being socially ostracized. Now (since 1998) unpopularity can result in being permanently ejected from the club by a majority vote.

Australian Experience Of PC Tyranny In my country the tyranny erupted with the persecution of public figures such as Arthur Tunstall for uttering truths that had become unpopular, either directly in a speech, or indirectly by telling jokes. The maiden speech of the Federal Member of Parliament for Ipswich contained so many disliked truths that the rabble escalated the ferocity of their attack and extended them to her supporters, introducing terror into Australian politics. Anyone who watched the TV coverage (1997/8) of Pauline Hanson’s political campaign will have seen the nature of her opponents; a throng who looked and behaved more like barbarians than citizens of a civilized community. And any mob that chants “Burn the witch” (when she spoke outside an Ipswich hall after she had been refused entry) leaves no doubt as to their intent or character.

Widespread Throughout The Community Revealing the extent of the mob’s support, their sentiments (suitably refined) were enthusiastically echoed by the media and the administration. And in an unprecedented act of cooperation, all the political parties conspired to eject Ms Hanson from the federal parliament in the election of October 3rd 1998. This was revealed by the how-to-vote cards of the parties contesting the seat of Blaire, which all placed Ms Hanson last. This was a public admission by both the major parties that they would rather risk losing the election than allow this forthright woman to keep her seat in parliament.

International Experience Of PC Tyranny And it is not just in Australia but in every western democratic country popular demands have been made for restrictions on expression. Bowing to the clamour of the electorate, politicians in these countries have enacted absurd laws. The Australian community wide declaration of irrational hatred displayed by the persecution of Pauline Hanson, paralleled the Canadian experience of Paul Fromm, director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression Inc., and the examples of the national soccer coach of England and a prominent public servant in Washington, USA confirm that the hysteria is everywhere.

The Inevitable Result Of Political Correctness By using the excuse of not upsetting anyone, the politically correct are demanding that people behave like the fool who would please everyone; that everyone must become such a fool! All must accept the notions of the Politically Correct as truth, or else! This is the same mentality that inspired the Inquisition and forced Galileo to recant; the same mentality that inspired the Nazis and obtained the Holocaust. Once expression gets placed in a straitjacket of official truth, then the madness that occurs in all totalitarian states is obtained. Life, in private and public, becomes a meaningless charade where delusion thrives and terror rules.

Examples Of Denying Freedom Of Speech Evidence of this effect is amply demonstrated by the Soviets, who embraced Political Correctness with the Communist Revolution. The lumbering, pompous, impoverished, humourless monster this Nation became is now History. And it should be remembered that in 1914 Tsarist Russia was considered by Edmund Cars, a French economist who then published a book about the subject, to be an economic giant set to overshadow Europe. The SBS television program “What Ever Happened To Russia”, which was broadcast at 8.30 pm on 25th August 1994, detailed the terrible effect the Bolshevik’s oppression had on their empire. And SBS further detailed the terrible crimes inflicted upon the Russians by their leader Stalin, in the series “Blood On The Snow” broadcast in March 1999. (Also see “Stalin’s Secret War” by Nikolai Tolstoy)

An Old Witness Helen, a member of Parramatta writers club in 1992, was a citizen of Kiev during the Red Terror, and described living with official truth and the constant threat of arrest. Knowing the content of the latest party newspaper was critical to avoiding internment, as public contradiction, either directly or indirectly, meant denouncement to the KGB. If you complained about being hungry when food shortages were not officially recognized, then you became an enemy of the state. If you failed to praise a Soviet hero, or praised an ex-hero, then again your fate was sealed. The need to be politically correct dominated all conversation and behaviour, as failure meant drastic penalty. Uncertainty and fear pervaded everything, nobody could be sure that an official request to visit Party headquarters meant imprisonment, torture, death, public reward or nothing important.

Living with such a terrible handicap naturally destroyed all spontaneity of thought or action, rendering the whole community mad. The awful effect this had upon Helen’s sanity was made clear when she escaped to Australia. Here she encountered the free press, which had an unpleasant impact upon her. One day she read The Australian newspaper which happened to carry two separate articles about Patrick White, one praising, the other denigrating, this well known writer. Poor Helen found herself turning from one to the other, which was she to repeat as correct? She nearly had a nervous breakdown.

Political Correctness Is Social Dementia Unless plain speaking is allowed, clear thinking is denied. There can be no good reason for denying freedom of expression, there is no case to rebut, only the empty slogans of people inspired by selfishness and unrestrained by morality. The proponents of this nonsense neither understand the implications of what they say, nor why they are saying it: they are insane; which must mean that any community that embraces Political Correctness has discarded sanity.

Social Decline Grows Worse With Each Generation Political Correctness is part of the social decline that generation by generation makes public behaviour less restrained and less rational.

See the original post here:

The origin and nature of political correctness (26/11/2015)

Posted in Political Correctness | Comments Off on The origin and nature of political correctness (26/11/2015)

Mount Holly, New Jersey – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Posted: March 2, 2016 at 3:44 pm

Mount Holly, New Jersey Township Township of Mount Holly Mount Holly Township highlighted in Burlington County. Inset map: Burlington County highlighted in the State of New Jersey. Census Bureau map of Mount Holly Township, New Jersey Coordinates: 395943N 744711W / 39.995351N 74.786452W / 39.995351; -74.786452Coordinates: 395943N 744711W / 39.995351N 74.786452W / 39.995351; -74.786452[1][2] Country United States State New Jersey County Burlington Formed November 6, 1688 as Northampton Incorporated February 21, 1798 Renamed November 6, 1931 as Mount Holly Named for Hill covered with holly trees Government[7] Type Faulkner Act (Council-Manager) Body Township Council Mayor Jason Jones (term ends December 31, 2016)[3][4] Township Manager Joshua Brown (Acting)[5] Clerk Nikima S. Muller [6] Area[1] Total 2.852sqmi (7.389km2) Land 2.806sqmi (7.269km2) Water 0.046sqmi (0.120km2) 1.63% Area rank 348th of 566 in state 31st of 40 in county[1] Elevation[8] 36ft (11m) Population (2010 Census)[9][10][11] Total 9,536 Estimate(2014)[12] 9,490 Rank 251st of 566 in state 16th of 40 in county[13] Density 3,397.9/sqmi (1,311.9/km2) Densityrank 191st of 566 in state 9th of 40 in county[13] Time zone Eastern (EST) (UTC-5) Summer (DST) Eastern (EDT) (UTC-4) ZIP code 08060[14][15] Area code(s) 609[16] FIPS code 3400548900[1][17][18] GNIS feature ID 0882104[1][19] Website twp.mountholly.nj.us

Mount Holly is a township in Burlington County, New Jersey, United States. It is the county seat of Burlington County[20][21] as well as an eastern suburb of Philadelphia. As of the 2010 United States Census, the township’s population was 9,536,[9][10][11] reflecting a decline of 1,192 (-11.1%) from the 10,728 counted in the 2000 Census, which had in turn increased by 89 (+0.8%) from the 10,639 counted in the 1990 Census.[22] Mount Holly also gives its name to the National Weather Service’s Weather Forecast Office for the Philadelphia metropolitan area, though the office is actually located in adjacent Westampton.[23][24]

What is now Mount Holly was originally formed as Northampton on November 6, 1688. Northampton was incorporated as one of New Jersey’s first 104 townships by an act of the New Jersey Legislature on February 21, 1798. Portions of the township were taken to form Little Egg Harbor Township (February 13, 1740, now part of Ocean County), Washington Township (November 19, 1802), Pemberton borough (December 15, 1826), Coaxen Township (March 10, 1845, now known as Southampton Township), Pemberton Township (March 10, 1846), Westampton Township (March 6, 1850) and Lumberton Township (March 14, 1860). The township was renamed Mount Holly as of November 6, 1931, based on the results of a referendum held three days earlier.[25] The township was named for hills covered with holly trees.[26][27]

The first European settlement in what is now Mount Holly began in 1677, when Walter Reeves acquired land from the Lenape (Delaware) Native Americans living in the area. He constructed a dam on Rancocas Creek to channel water through a raceway to power a grist mill and saw mill.[28] Edward Gaskill and his sons hand dug the mill race on their property between 1720 and 1723.[29] After the mills were established, more settlers were attracted to the area and built houses and commercial buildings on High, Church, White, Mill, and Pine streets, including the Shinn Curtis Log House (1712). By 1800, over 250 dwellings had been built.[30]

Today no mills remain on the raceway, which still flows in its original course from the Rancocas just above the dam. The raceway proved a way for herring to make their way above the dam and was the scene of an annual fish run in the spring which provided fresh herring for slating and eating. The former mill land has been preserved as the Mill Dam Park. It marks the importance of mills to the early settlements.

On December 17, 1776, Colonel Samuel Griffin of the Continental Army crossed the Delaware River with 600 men mostly untrained men and boys, and with little equipment and marched to Mount Holly, where he set up a few “3-pounder” artillery pieces on Iron Works Hill. Hessian commanders von Block and Carl von Donop, were told that there were 3,000 American troops at Mount Holly.

By December 23, 1776, 2,000 Hessians were moved from Bordentown and positioned at The Mount in Mount Holly, where they engaged in a three-day-long artillery exchange, known as the Battle of Iron Works Hill or Battle of Mount Holly, with the Americans on Iron Works Hill. The Americans slipped away that night.[31]

After George Washington crossed the Delaware River on December 25, 1776, the fact that thousands of Hessian troops had been drawn to Mount Holly aided in the Continental Army’s success in the Battle of Trenton the next day, a surprising American victory that helped turn the Army’s fading morale after the disastrous defeat at the Battle of Fort Washington just weeks before and the ignominious retreat through New Jersey.[32]

The 1793 state legislature approved the relocation of the Burlington County seat from Burlington City to Mount Holly, which was approved by voters in a 1796 referendum.[33][34][pageneeded] Several important municipal buildings were constructed, including the courthouse in 1796 and the county prison built circa 1819. The Burlington County Prison was designed by Robert Mills, a nationally known architect who designed the Washington Monument. The town has numerous 18th and 19th-century buildings, most of which are included in the Mount Holly Historic District; it is listed in the New Jersey and National Register of Historic Places.[35] Commercial buildings were constructed primarily along High Street.

In 1849, the Burlington and Mount Holly Railroad was established, connecting communities along the Delaware River to Philadelphia, the major city of the area. The railroad supported industrialization along its route. The Camden and Mount Holly Railroad constructed a station 20 years later near the intersection of Washington and King streets.

A trolley station was built in 1904 for the passengers making connections to Burlington City and Moorestown. New municipal buildings were constructed during the 20th century, including the Town Hall on Washington Street (1930) and the U.S. Post Office (1935) located across the street (1935), both federally funded and constructed as Works Progress Administration projects under President Franklin D. Roosevelt during the Great Depression.

In the late 1950s, Mount Holly began to have economic difficulties due to industrial restructuring and the loss of working-class jobs. In the post-World War II period, numerous blue collar, family wage jobs disappeared as the community’s traditional employers, the mills and dye factories, were shut down. At first these job losses were offset in part by gains at the nearby military bases, Fort Dix and McGuire Air Force Base, especially during the Vietnam War. In 1970, the residential vacancy rate in Mount Holly was 4.3%.

By 1980, however, the vacancy rate had climbed to 8.7% as a result of the nearby military installations’ downsizing after the end of the Vietnam War. During this same period, 19701980, shopping malls proliferated in the suburban Philadelphia area, and retail business in Mount Holly suffered.[36] Mount Holly received Urban Enterprise Zone (UEZ) status in 1995; it has provided tax incentives and other assistance programs to local businesses, including lowering the sales tax rate to 3, half of the prevailing rate charges statewide.[37] This has helped to revive the local small business base.[37]

Mount Holly had a total area of 2.852 square miles (7.389km2), including 2.806 square miles (7.269km2) of land and 0.046 square miles (0.120km2) of water (1.63%).[1][2]

The township borders Eastampton Township, Hainesport Township, Lumberton Township, and Westampton Township.[38]

Clermont is an unincorporated community located within Mount Holly Township.[citation needed]

At the 2010 United States Census, there were 9,536 people, 3,456 households, and 2,264 families residing in the township. The population density was 3,397.9 per square mile (1,311.9/km2). There were 3,861 housing units at an average density of 1,375.8 per square mile (531.2/km2). The racial makeup of the township was 65.57% (6,253) White, 23.10% (2,203) Black or African American, 0.37% (35) Native American, 1.47% (140) Asian, 0.07% (7) Pacific Islander, 4.29% (409) from other races, and 5.13% (489) from two or more races. Hispanics or Latinos of any race were 12.69% (1,210) of the population.[9]

There were 3,456 households, of which 28.7% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 42.6% were married couples living together, 16.9% had a female householder with no husband present, and 34.5% were non-families. 27.4% of all households were made up of individuals, and 8.6% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.61 and the average family size was 3.19.[9]

In the township, 23.5% of the population were under the age of 18, 9.6% from 18 to 24, 28.7% from 25 to 44, 27.1% from 45 to 64, and 11.1% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 36.3 years. For every 100 females there were 102.8 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 100.1 males.[9]

The Census Bureau’s 2006-2010 American Community Survey showed that (in 2010 inflation-adjusted dollars) median household income was $53,841 (with a margin of error of +/- $4,427) and the median family income was $68,500 (+/- $4,684). Males had a median income of $51,945 (+/- $5,141) versus $37,079 (+/- $5,759) for females. The per capita income for the borough was $24,551 (+/- $1,785). About 7.1% of families and 12.2% of the population were below the poverty line, including 21.4% of those under age 18 and 8.8% of those age 65 or over.[52]

As of the 2000 United States Census[17] there were 10,728 people, 3,903 households, and 2,583 families residing in the township. The population density was 3,750.8 people per square mile (1,448.3/km). There were 4,248 housing units at an average density of 1,485.2 per square mile (573.5/km). The racial makeup of the township was 68.68% White, 21.57% African American, 0.42% Native American, 1.37% Asian, 0.07% Pacific Islander, 4.77% from other races, and 3.12% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 8.78% of the population.[50][51]

There were 3,903 households out of which 32.0% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 44.0% were married couples living together, 17.3% had a female householder with no husband present, and 33.8% were non-families. 27.2% of all households were made up of individuals and 10.0% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.64 and the average family size was 3.20.[50][51]

In the township the age distribution of the population shows 26.3% under the age of 18, 9.4% from 18 to 24, 32.2% from 25 to 44, 19.6% from 45 to 64, and 12.4% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 35 years. For every 100 females there were 99.7 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 96.6 males.[50][51]

The median income for a household in the township was $43,284, and the median income for a family was $52,000. Males had a median income of $38,186 versus $27,425 for females. The per capita income for the township was $19,672. About 6.8% of families and 9.9% of the population were below the poverty line, including 11.4% of those under age 18 and 10.4% of those age 65 or over.[50][51]

Mount Holly Township operates within the Faulkner Act (formally known as the Optional Municipal Charter Law) under the Council-Manager (plan 12) form of municipal government, enacted by council-initiated action as of July 1, 1990.[53] Members of the township council are elected at-large in a partisan vote to serve four-year terms of office on a staggered basis, with either two or three seats up for election in even-numbered years as part of the November general election.[7][54] At a reorganization meeting after each election, the council selects a mayor and a deputy mayor from among its members. In November 2011, voters passed a referendum shifting from non-partisan municipal elections in May to partisan elections in November.[55]

As of 2015[update], members of the Mount Holly Township Council are Mayor Jason Jones (term on council ends December 31, 2016; term as Mayor ends 2016), Deputy mayor Richard DiFolco (term on council ends 2016; term as Deputy Mayor ends 2016), Lew Brown (2016), Betty Sykes (R, 2018) and Jules Thiessen (D, 2018).[3][56][57][58][59]

On May 11, 2010, voters of the Township elected Richard Dow, III and Dywnne Belton to Township Council, replacing incumbents Jules Thiessen and Brooke Tidswell, III, who served on the Council for 16 and 12 years, respectively. Dow received 557 votes, Belton 475, Christopher Sorhaindo, Dow’s running mate, 470, Theissen, 377, and Tidswell, 353 votes.[60]

In July 2011, Township Council member Kimberly Kersey resigned.[61] In the November 2011 general election, Richard DiFolco was selected to fill Kersey’s vacancy.[62]

In the November 2011 general election, voters approved a public question moving the municipal election from May to November in subsequent elections.[63]

On November 6, 2012, voters of the Township elected Lew Brown, Rich DiFolco and Jason Jones to 4-year terms on Town Council by a large margin, their terms will begin January 1, 2013.[64]

In January 2014, former mayor Richard Dow submitted his resignation as council member with one year remaining on his term of office.[65]

On March 31, 2014, five people filed petitions to appear on the primary ballot for two four-year terms for Township Council. Former mayor and current Mount Holly Municipal Utilities Authority Commissioner Jules Thiessen, BOE member Tim Young, and current Mount Holly Board of Education member and Planning Board Chairman Brian Grant filed to run for the democratic nominations. Wife of Mayor Rich DiFolco, Janet DiFolco, and Patricia Cauley filed for the republican nomination.[66]

In the November 2014 general election, Republican Elizabeth Sykes and Democrat Jules Thiessen were elected to four-year terms on the Township Council. Thiessen’s running mate Brian Grant withdrew from the election in September as did both Republican candidates. Sykes replaced one of the republican candidates and no replacement was named for Grant making it an unopposed election. At the council’s January 2015 reorganization, Jules Thiessen and Betty Sykes were sworn into office; Richard DiFolco was named Mayor and Jason Jones Deputy Mayor, both holding the same positions the previous year.[67]

Mount Holly Township is located in the 3rd Congressional District[68] and is part of New Jersey’s 8th state legislative district.[10][69][70] Prior to the 2011 reapportionment following the 2010 Census, Mount Holly Township had been in the 7th state legislative district.[71]

New Jersey’s 3rd Congressional District is represented by Tom MacArthur (R, Toms River).[72] New Jersey is represented in the United States Senate by Cory Booker (D, Newark, term ends 2021)[73] and Bob Menendez (D, Paramus, 2019).[74][75]

For the 20162017 session (Senate, General Assembly), the 8th Legislative District of the New Jersey Legislature is represented in the State Senate by Dawn Marie Addiego (R, Evesham Township) and in the General Assembly by Maria Rodriguez-Gregg (R, Evesham Township) and Joe Howarth (R, Evesham Township).[76] The Governor of New Jersey is Chris Christie (R, Mendham Township).[77] The Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey is Kim Guadagno (R, Monmouth Beach).[78]

Burlington County is governed by a Board of chosen freeholders, whose five members are elected at-large in partisan elections to three-year terms of office on a staggered basis, with either one or two seats coming up for election each year.[79] The board chooses a director and deputy director from among its members at an annual reorganization meeting held in January.[79] As of 2015[update], Burlington County’s Freeholders are Director Mary Ann O’Brien (R, Medford Township, 2017; Director of Administration and Human Services),[80] Deputy Director Bruce Garganio (R, Florence Township, 2017; Director of Public Works and Health),[81]Aimee Belgard (D, Edgewater Park Township, 2015; Director of Hospital, Medical Services and Education)[82] Joseph Donnelly (R, Cinnaminson Township, 2016; Director of Public Safety, Natural Resources, and Education)[83] and Joanne Schwartz (D, Southampton Township, 2015; Director of Health and Corrections).[84][79] Constitutional officers are County Clerk Tim Tyler,[85] Sheriff Jean E. Stanfield[86] and Surrogate George T. Kotch.[87]

As of March 23, 2011, there were a total of 5,251 registered voters in Mount Holly Township, of which 1,718 (32.7% vs. 33.3% countywide) were registered as Democrats, 1,034 (19.7% vs. 23.9%) were registered as Republicans and 2,496 (47.5% vs. 42.8%) were registered as Unaffiliated. There were 3 voters registered to other parties.[88] Among the township’s 2010 Census population, 55.1% (vs. 61.7% in Burlington County) were registered to vote, including 72.0% of those ages 18 and over (vs. 80.3% countywide).[88][89]

In the 2012 presidential election, Democrat Barack Obama received 2,636 votes here (68.1% vs. 58.1% countywide), ahead of Republican Mitt Romney with 1,127 votes (29.1% vs. 40.2%) and other candidates with 53 votes (1.4% vs. 1.0%), among the 3,870 ballots cast by the township’s 5,578 registered voters, for a turnout of 69.4% (vs. 74.5% in Burlington County).[90][91] In the 2008 presidential election, Democrat Barack Obama received 2,771 votes here (67.2% vs. 58.4% countywide), ahead of Republican John McCain with 1,272 votes (30.8% vs. 39.9%) and other candidates with 58 votes (1.4% vs. 1.0%), among the 4,125 ballots cast by the township’s 5,473 registered voters, for a turnout of 75.4% (vs. 80.0% in Burlington County).[92] In the 2004 presidential election, Democrat John Kerry received 2,223 votes here (57.2% vs. 52.9% countywide), ahead of Republican George W. Bush with 1,612 votes (41.5% vs. 46.0%) and other candidates with 37 votes (1.0% vs. 0.8%), among the 3,887 ballots cast by the township’s 5,301 registered voters, for a turnout of 73.3% (vs. 78.8% in the whole county).[93]

In the 2013 gubernatorial election, Republican Chris Christie received 1,251 votes here (56.9% vs. 61.4% countywide), ahead of Democrat Barbara Buono with 891 votes (40.5% vs. 35.8%) and other candidates with 21 votes (1.0% vs. 1.2%), among the 2,200 ballots cast by the township’s 5,429 registered voters, yielding a 40.5% turnout (vs. 44.5% in the county).[94][95] In the 2009 gubernatorial election, Democrat Jon Corzine received 1,126 ballots cast (49.6% vs. 44.5% countywide), ahead of Republican Chris Christie with 977 votes (43.1% vs. 47.7%), Independent Chris Daggett with 118 votes (5.2% vs. 4.8%) and other candidates with 38 votes (1.7% vs. 1.2%), among the 2,269 ballots cast by the township’s 5,524 registered voters, yielding a 41.1% turnout (vs. 44.9% in the county).[96]

For pre-Kindergarten through eighth grade, students attend the Mount Holly Township Public Schools. As of the 2011-12 school year, the district’s three schools had an enrollment of 905 students and 87.8 classroom teachers (on an FTE basis), for a studentteacher ratio of 10.31:1.[97] Schools in the district (with 2011-12 enrollment data from the National Center for Education Statistics[98]) are John Brainerd School[99] (356 students in grades PreK-2), Gertrude C. Folwell School[100] (247 students in grades 3-5) and F. W. Holbein Middle School[101] (302 students in grades 6-8).[102][103]

For ninth through twelfth grades, public school students attend the Rancocas Valley Regional High School, a comprehensive regional public high school based in Mount Holly that serves students from five communities encompassing an area of 40 square miles (100km2) that also includes the communities of Eastampton Township, Hainesport Township, Lumberton Township and Westampton Township.[104][105][106]

Students from Mount Holly Township, and from all of Burlington County, are eligible to attend the Burlington County Institute of Technology, a countywide public school district that serves the vocational and technical education needs of students at the high school and post-secondary level at its campuses in Medford and Westampton Township.[107]

As of May 2010[update], the township had a total of 38.43 miles (61.85km) of roadways, of which 29.11 miles (46.85km) were maintained by the municipality, 8.45 miles (13.60km) by Burlington County and 0.87 miles (1.40km) by the New Jersey Department of Transportation.[108]

Mount Holly is accessible at exit 5 of the New Jersey Turnpike via County Route 541.[109]

New Jersey Transit provides bus service to Philadelphia on routes 317 (from Asbury Park) and 409/417/418 (from Trenton), with local service available on the 413 route between Camden and Burlington.[110][111]

People who were born in, residents of, or otherwise closely associated with Mount Holly include:

Visit link:
Mount Holly, New Jersey – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Posted in Ron Paul | Comments Off on Mount Holly, New Jersey – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Twenty-fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution …

Posted: January 19, 2016 at 3:33 pm

The Twenty-fourth Amendment (Amendment XXIV) of the United States Constitution prohibits both Congress and the states from conditioning the right to vote in federal elections on payment of a poll tax or other types of tax. The amendment was proposed by Congress to the states on August 27, 1962, and was ratified by the states on January 23, 1964.

Southern states of the former Confederacy adopted poll taxes in laws of the late 19th century and new constitutions from 1890 to 1908, after the Democratic Party had generally regained control of state legislatures decades after the end of Reconstruction, as a measure to prevent African Americans and often poor whites from voting. Use of the poll taxes by states was held to be constitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States in the 1937 decision Breedlove v. Suttles.

When the 24th Amendment was ratified in 1964, five states still retained a poll tax: Virginia, Alabama, Texas, Arkansas, and Mississippi. The amendment prohibited requiring a poll tax for voters in federal elections. But it was not until 1966 that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 63 in Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections that poll taxes for any level of elections were unconstitutional. It said these violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Subsequent litigation related to potential discriminatory effects of voter registration requirements has generally been based on application of this clause.

Poll tax

Cumulative poll tax (missed poll taxes from prior years must also be paid to vote)

No poll tax

Southern states adopted the poll tax as a requirement for voting as part of a series of laws intended to marginalize black Americans from politics so far as practicable without violating the Fifteenth Amendment. This required that voting not be limited by “race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” All voters were required to pay the poll tax, but in practice it most affected the poor. Notably this impacted both African Americans and poor white voters, some of whom had voted with Populist and Fusionist candidates in the late 19th century, temporarily disturbing Democratic rule. Proponents of the poll tax downplayed this aspect and assured white voters they would not be affected. Passage of poll taxes began in earnest in the 1890s, as Democrats wanted to prevent another Populist-Republican coalition. Despite election violence and fraud, African Americans were still winning numerous local seats. By 1902, all eleven states of the former Confederacy had enacted a poll tax, many within new constitutions that contained other provisions to reduce voter lists, such as literacy or comprehension tests. The poll tax was used together with grandfather clauses and the “white primary”, and threats of violence. For example, potential voters had to be “assessed” in Arkansas, and blacks were utterly ignored in the assessment.[2]

From 19001937, such use of the poll tax was nearly ignored by the federal government. Some state-level initiatives repealed it. The poll tax survived a legal challenge in the 1937 Supreme Court case Breedlove v. Suttles, which ruled that “[The] privilege of voting is not derived from the United States, but is conferred by the state and, save as restrained by the Fifteenth and Nineteenth Amendments and other provisions of the Federal Constitution, the state may condition suffrage as it deems appropriate.”[3]

The issue remained prominent, as most African Americans in the South were disenfranchised. President Franklin D. Roosevelt spoke out against the tax. He publicly called it “a remnant of the Revolutionary period” that the country had moved past. However, Roosevelt’s favored liberal Democrats lost in the 1938 primaries to the reigning conservative Southern Democrats, and he backed off the issue. He felt that he needed Southern Democratic votes to pass New Deal programs and did not want to further antagonize them.[4] Still, efforts at the Congressional level to abolish the poll tax continued. A 1939 bill to abolish the poll tax in federal elections was tied up by the Southern Block, lawmakers whose long tenure in office from a one-party region gave them seniority and command of numerous important committee chairmanships. A discharge petition was able to force the bill to be considered, and the House passed the bill 25484.[5] However, the bill was unable to defeat a filibuster in the Senate by Southern senators and a few Northern allies who valued the support of the powerful and senior Southern seats. This bill would be re-proposed in the next several Congresses. It came closest to passage during World War II, when opponents framed abolition as a means to help overseas soldiers vote. However, after learning that the US Supreme Court decision Smith v. Allwright (1944) banned use of the “white primary,” the Southern block refused to approve abolition of the poll tax.[6]

In 1946, the Senate came close to passing the bill. 24 Democrats and 15 Republicans approved an end to debate, while 7 non-southern Democrats and 7 Republicans joined with the 19 Southern Democrats in opposition. The result was a 39-33 vote in favor of the bill, but the filibuster required a two-thirds supermajority to break at the time; a 48-24 vote was required to pass the bill.[clarification needed] Those in favor of abolition of the poll tax considered a constitutional amendment after the 1946 defeat, but that idea did not advance either.[7]

The tenor of the debate changed in the 1940s. Southern politicians tried to shift the debate to Constitutional issue, but private correspondence indicates that black disenfranchisement was still the true concern. For instance, Mississippi Senator Theodore Bilbo declared, “If the poll tax bill passes, the next step will be an effort to remove the registration qualification, the educational qualification of Negroes. If that is done we will have no way of preventing the Negroes from voting.”[8] This fear explains why even Southern Senators from states that had abolished the poll tax still opposed the bill; they did not want to set a precedent that the federal government could interfere in state elections.

President Harry S. Truman established the President’s Committee on Civil Rights, which among other issues investigated the poll tax. Considering that opposition to federal poll tax regulation in 1948 was claimed as based on the Constitution, the Committee noted that a constitutional amendment might be the best way to proceed. Still, little occurred during the 1950s. Members of the anti-poll tax movement laid low during the anti-Communist frenzy of the period; some of the main proponents of poll tax abolition, such as Joseph Gelders and Vito Marcantonio, had been committed Marxists.[9]

President John F. Kennedy returned to this issue. His administration urged Congress to adopt and send such an amendment to the states for ratification. He considered the constitutional amendment the best way to avoid a filibuster, as the claim that federal abolition of the poll tax was unconstitutional would be moot. Still, some liberals opposed Kennedy’s action, feeling that an amendment would be too slow compared to legislation.[10]Spessard Holland, a conservative Democrat from Florida, introduced the amendment to the Senate. Holland opposed most civil rights legislation during his career,[11] and Kennedy’s gaining of his support helped splinter monolithic Southern opposition to the Amendment. Ratification of the amendment was relatively quick, taking slightly more than a year; it was rapidly ratified by state l
egislatures across the country from August 1962 to January 1964.

President Lyndon B. Johnson called the amendment a “triumph of liberty over restriction” and “a verification of people’s rights.”[12] States that maintained the poll tax were more reserved. Mississippi’s Attorney General, Joe Patterson, complained about the complexity of two sets of voters – those who paid their poll tax and could vote in all elections, and those who had not and could only vote in federal elections.[12] Additionally, non-payers of the poll tax could still be deterred by requirements that they register far in advance of the election and retain records of such registration.[13] States such as Alabama also exercised discrimination in the application of literacy tests.

Ratified amendment, 196264

Ratified amendment post-enactment, 1977, 1989, 2002, 2009

Rejected amendment

Didn’t ratify amendment

Congress proposed the Twenty-fourth Amendment on August 27, 1962.[14][15] The amendment was submitted to the states on September 24, 1962, after it passed with the requisite two-thirds majorities in the House and Senate.[12] The following states ratified the amendment:

Ratification was completed on January 23, 1964. The Georgia legislature did make a last-second attempt to be the 38th state to ratify. This was a surprise as “no Southern help could be expected”[13] for the amendment. The Georgia Senate quickly and unanimously passed it, but the House did not act in time.[12] Georgia’s ratification was apparently dropped after South Dakota’s ratification.

The amendment was subsequently ratified by the following states:

The amendment was specifically rejected by the following state:

The following states have not ratified the amendment:

Arkansas effectively repealed its poll tax for all elections with Amendment 51 to the Arkansas Constitution at the November 1964 general election, several months after this amendment was ratified. The poll-tax language was not completely stricken from its Constitution until Amendment 85 in 2008.[16] Of the five states originally affected by this amendment, Arkansas was the only one to repeal its poll tax; the other four retained their taxes until they were struck down in 1966 by the US Supreme Court decision in Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections (1966), which ruled poll taxes unconstitutional even for state elections. Federal district courts in Alabama and Texas, respectively, struck down their poll taxes less than two months before the Harper ruling was issued.

The state of Virginia accommodated the amendment by providing an “escape clause” to the poll tax. In lieu of paying the poll tax, a prospective voter could file paperwork to gain a certificate establishing a place of residence in Virginia. The papers would have to be filed six months in advance of voting and the voter had to provide a copy of certificate at the time of voting. This measure was expected to decrease the number of legal voters.[17] In the 1965 Supreme Court decision Harman v. Forssenius, the Court unanimously found such measures unconstitutional. It declared that for federal elections, “the poll tax is abolished absolutely as a prerequisite to voting, and no equivalent or milder substitute may be imposed.”[18]

While not directly related to the Twenty-fourth Amendment, the Supreme Court case Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections (1966) ruled that the poll tax was unconstitutional at every level, not just for federal elections. The Harper decision relied upon the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, rather than the Twenty-Fourth Amendment. As such, issues related to whether burdens on voting are equivalent to poll taxes in discriminatory effect have usually been litigated on Equal Protection grounds since.

More here:
Twenty-fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution …

Posted in Fourth Amendment | Comments Off on Twenty-fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution …

Ron Paul | The Texas Tribune

Posted: September 22, 2015 at 3:42 am

President, 2012-05-29 Lost with 11.94% U.S. House District 14, 2010 General Election Won with 75.99% U.S. House District 14, 2010 Republican Party Primary Election Won with 80.77% U.S. House District 14, 2008 General Election Won with 100.00% U.S. House District 14, 2008 Republican Party Primary Election Won with 70.43% U.S. House District 14, 2006 General Election Won with 60.19% U.S. House District 14, 2006 Republican Party Primary Election Won with 77.64% U.S. House District 14, 2004 General Election Won with 100.00% U.S. House District 14, 2004 Republican Primary Election Won with 100.00% U.S. House District 14, 2002 General Election Won with 68.09% U.S. House District 14, 2002 Republican Primary Election Won with 100.00% U.S. House District 14, 2000 General Election Won with 59.71% U.S. House District 14, 2000 Republican Party Primary Election Won with 100.00% U.S. House District 14, 1998 General Election Won with 55.25% U.S. House District 14, 1998 Republican Primary Won with 100.00% U.S. House District 14, 1996 General Election Won with 51.08% U.S. House District 26, 1996 November Special Election Lost with 0.00% U.S. House District 14, 1996 Republican Party Primary Runoff Election Won with 54.06% U.S. House District 14, 1996 Republican Party Primary Election Went to runoff with 31.97%

Read the rest here:
Ron Paul | The Texas Tribune

Posted in Ron Paul | Comments Off on Ron Paul | The Texas Tribune