No, I Am Exactly Correct

| | Comments (0)
Red Warrior is angry with the political parties in Washington. He says, "The government (meaning the taxpayers) should not have to pay for the internal functions of political parties."

While this is true -- and in fact, no one ever said that they HAVE to, including the political parties -- what he apparenrly means is that they SHOULD NOT pay for those internal functions (in this case, a nominating primary). I stated the obvious:

The nominating primary was *always* a "private political party function", even when it was a blanket primary.

He responded, incorrectly:

Simply put, you lie. It was NOT a "private political party function". That was specifically why it was overturned in the courts a few years back, leading to I-872. Honest, look up the court case and the arguements made.

He is, simply put, wrong. The reason it was overturned was precisely because it was a private political party function, which the government was exercising undue control over. Because it was a private political party function, the party gets to say how it is done, and the state therefore lost the case.

Every public nominating primary, that exists in (IIRC) 49 states, is *by definition* a private political party function, that the public pays for. That's what it is. They are all, every one of them, by definition, private political party functions that the public pays for, that the state and the parties compromise on in order for both to get some sort of public participation in the nominating process.

And it is therefore unreasonable to say you don't like one type of public nominating primary because the public pays for it, but that other kinds of public nominating primaries are OK.

Leave a comment

<pudge/*> (pronounced "PudgeGlob") is thousands of posts over many years by Pudge.

"It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by pudge published on July 21, 2005 10:27 AM.

Re: Leading was the previous entry in this site.

New England Pessimism is the next entry in this site.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.