Assemblyman Jerry Green's employee Owen Fletcher has a letter in today's Courier praising the conduct of the the City Committee's reorganization meeting last Monday evening (see here).
The thrust of Mr. Fletcher's letter is summed up as --
...[s]ecret ballots by elected officials are antithetical to transparency and democracy.While this IS TRUE OF ELECTED OFFICIALS, county political party committee members (of which Plainfield's Democratic City Committee is a subset) ARE NOT ELECTED OFFICIALS.
People, evidently including Mr. Fletcher, get confused about this because party committee members (both Republican an Democrat) are voted for on public voting machines which are watched over by election officials -- all paid for by the taxpayers -- on the same ballots as public officials like Assemblyman, mayor and city council member.
But political party committees are private organizations; their members are not public officials per se. (If you need more evidence, consider that a judge ruled in the case of New Brunswick's recently contested Dem committee seats that petitioners did not need to meet the statutory length-of-residency requirement for elected officials because...you guessed it, they are NOT elected officials.)
Not only this, Mr. Fletcher completely ignores the fact that a bill (full text here) is advancing in the Assembly (see reports here and here) to require just EXACTLY what he rails against: SECRET BALLOTS by county political party committees on contested matters.
I think everyone agrees there were contested matters at the PDCC reorg meeting, especially when one recalls Assemblyman Green's offering up of multiple renditions of a slate of officers when a motion concerning same was already on the floor (see my post here).
Whatever the fate of the bill in the Assembly, and I for one can certainly understand why Assemblyman Green would be opposed to this reform measure, let's not pretend the idea is not on the table, or that it is 'antithetical to transparency and democracy'.
And, when writing letters to the editor, let's not forget to tell people who signs our paycheck.
In the interest of transparency, if not democracy.
- Letter, Courier: Owen Fletcher: "Open vote preserves democracy in Plainfield"
- PolitickerNJ: "Weinberg Bill On County Committees Approved By Assembly Committee"
- Ledger: "Bill making county political parties more open advances"
- Full Text of Bill: "A-1904, concerning county political parties"
Posts
8 comments:
Dan, thank you for clarifying the difference between the committee members and elected public officials. You may need to clarify further, as Owen Fletcher also seems to be ignorant of any distinction between city council votes at the public business meeting and the votes of city committee people at their meetings. I guess to him, voting is voting is voting. Thank you also for pointing out that Fletcher is NOT a disinterested party. He works for the state assembly and is Jerry's former legislative aide. Here are his job responsibilities:
"An Associate General Counsel works closely with the General Counsel to analyze the legal implications of proposed legislation and advise members of the Assembly Democratic Caucus on legal issues."
So, with that in mind, I am confounded by his refusal to mention (or is it sheer ignorance of?) bill A1904, which is scheduled to come up for a vote on Thursday. If Fletcher is supposed to be providing analysis of this and other legislation, why didn't he mention the bill in his laudatory letter about how Assemblyman Green conducts business? Why doesn't he offer full disclosure of his employment as an assembly aide?
Also, as I mentioned recently elsewhere, the idea of secret ballots came from individuals who ran on Jerry Green's team a few weeks prior to the committee meeting. They were the ones who felt there would be negative repercussions if they had to vote by show of hands. Now, should I tell Owen Fletcher and Jerry Green the names of these individuals?
In addition, Jerry's employee ought to take a look at the bylaws of other Democratic city committees. If he did so, he would see that many city committees across the state of New Jersey allow for secret ballot voting. One would think that someone with a law degree and who supposedly advises on proposed legislation such as A1904 would at least know that.
What is antithetical to transparency and openness is Mr. Fletcher not disclosing his close ties to Assemblyman Green when writing such misleading and inaccurate drivel.
Rebecca Williams
2-9 Committee Member
2nd Ward Leader, PDCC
While I've no doubt that a secret ballot might get committee members to vote their minds without fear of retaliation from party bosses, an open vote is the best way for party members to see who is and who is not enthrall to these same bosses.
As it stands today, Article 9, Section 10 of the Democratic Party Charter and Bylaws has this to say:
"All meetings of the Democratic National Committee, the Executive Committee, and all
other official Party committees, commissions and bodies shall be open to the public, and votes shall not be taken by secret ballot."
Although a secret ballot on any contested vote sounds appealing when you're on the outside looking in, pursuing greater secrecy in representative organizations is not the way to go. Much better would be for the 'outs' to call out those representatives who are voting their own, or their bosses' interests, and not the interests of their constituents.
Make that Article 9, Section 12. Sorry.
Owen Fletcher is NOT on the Assemblyman's payroll. He works for the State directly
To 12:29 PM -- Sorry about that. Someone else mentioned it, too. I must have missed the front page story in the Courier or Ledger, or the email updates I get from the Legislature.
But now it turns out he should certainly have been aware of the bill to reform the County Committees, and that a provision of that bill is for secret ballots on contested issues.
Wonder why he didn't mention that?
The current version of the bill with amendments does not do what you say it does.
The secret ballot line in the bill applies only to meetings to fill candidate vacancies. That is current law. It adds a provision that those votes will be by machine. The bill is not related to the issue at hand. Read the text of the bill and not just the news stories.
Dan, I cannot believe how irresponsible you are. You are not even accurate in citing the proper bill and its making.
You AND your friends look very silly to those who practice, teach, and apply politics in its rawest form: the form which encourages healthy democracy and a healthy republic.
And Alan, excellent point.
TSB
Post a Comment