Independence Caucus of Cache Valley

Important Video on Inflation!

2010-05-14T13:25:00.001-07:00

Here is a great date night video. Please watch it instead of your action/adventure/romance movie tonight. It will be worth your time.

Go to http://inflation.us/videos.html for the full video.

Issues for 2010

2010-04-09T11:20:00.000-07:00

Disclaimer--this does not come directly from the Independence Caucus

I recommend that you not support the ethics initiative

Reform is absolutely needed, but this is not the right way to do it for these reasons:

The language in the initiative is vague and would allow too broad of interpretation. Even with good intent vague language too much license for future corruption
Instead of having people "innocent until proven guilty", the opposite is true. The legislature has to prove their innocence instead of the accuser having to prove their guilt.
The Initiative calls for an Independent "ethics commission" that is made up of self-appointed, unelected bodies. There is no judicial review of this committee, and with an opportunity to interpret the broad language of the initiative without oversight is giving too much power to too few people and could be easily abused.
The commission would also have to be paid for by taxpayer money and would be an expensive addition to government--especially if you include the cost of paying for attorneys
Here is an analysis of the initiative written by Rep. Lori Fowlke if you are interested in a more detailed analysis.

I recommend that you support this party resolution:

"Whereas, The Constitution of the United States does not grant to Congress the power to mandate citizenry to make any purchase; and

Whereas, What are commonly known as the ObamaCare Act and the Wyden-Bennett Act both impose individual mandates on the citizenry to purchase government-approved health insurance coverage and levies fines for non-compliance; now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the State Party Chairman hereby instruct Utah’s Federal Delegation that it is the desires of the 2010 Utah Republican State Delegates they not Sponsor, Support or Vote in favor of any Act that will impose individual mandates on the citizenry of the United States of America."

Election Information for Cache Valley

2010-04-09T10:38:00.000-07:00

Map of Cache County Legislative Districts and precincts--this map will show boundary lines

2010 Candidate Filings--this is a list of all candidates who have filed and all offices up for election in Cache County

2010 Elections and Precinct guide--lists the cities and precincts that vote for the positions of each elected official and when they are up for re-election including the Utah House of Representatives, Utah Senate, County Council, and others.

Precincts and Polling Places

Utah Grassroots Legislative Report Card

Republican Contenders for Key Races in Cache Valley*:

Legislative District 2 (Northwest end of the valley and parts of Brigham City):

Ben Ferry

Lee Perry

Douglas Beazer

Legislative District 3 (Northeast end of the valley):

Jack Draxler

Elaine Nelson

Legislative District 4 (East end of Logan and parts of Rich County):

David Butterfield

Teresa Theurer

Legislative District 5 (South end of the valley):

Chuck Bateman

Curt Webb

*If anyone has website information, news articles, voting records, etc on these candidates, please send them to michelle@cacheicaucus.org so that I can post the information here.

Governer:

U.S. House of Representatives, Congressional District 1:

Rob Bishop

Mike Ridgway

Endorsed Candidates for 2010

2010-04-09T08:25:00.000-07:00

For Immediate Release: Independence Caucus approves three U.S. Senate candidates

The Utah Independence Caucus has completed the preliminary endorsement process for the U.S. Senate race against Senator Bennett. The results are as follows:

Incumbent Senator Bennett and Democrat Sam Granato did not participate in the 80 question survey required to be eligible for endorsement. Merrill Cook did not enter the race in time to be considered for endorsement. Cherilyn Eagar was eliminated in the first round of voting leaving the following score for the final round of voting with the remaining candidates:

Tim Bridgewater 41.1%
Mike Lee - 58.9%

A 70% consensus is required to achieve endorsement from the Independence Caucus, therefore, the next I-caucus vote for endorsement in the Utah Senate Race will be the week after the Utah convention.

Until then, all I-caucus communications, videos, and efforts will be geared towards educating Utahn’s about why Bob Bennett needs to be defeated in 2010; and our official position is that any of the 3 vetted candidates (Tim Bridgewater, Cherilyn Eagar, and Mike Lee) would make excellent choices to replace Bob Bennett.

Conventions

2010-04-09T08:15:00.000-07:00

Republican Convention Orientation

When: Tuesday, April 20th, 2010

Time: 7-8:30pm

Location: New Dawn Technologies

Address: 843 S 100 W, Logan

Cost: Free

If you are a delegate and have never been to a convention before, here is a perfect opportunity for you to learn what happens at the convention and how the voting process works there. Even if you are not a delegate you may find this information very useful because you may become a delegate in the future. Anyone is welcome to attend this event and the conventions, even if they are not delegates (they will just not have voting power at the conventions).

Cache County Republican Convention

When: Friday, April 30th, 2010

Where: Mt. Logan Middle School

Address: 875 N 200 E, Logan

Utah Republican Convention

When: Saturday, May 8th, 2010

Time: proceedings begin at 10am, please make sure to check-in early!

Where: The Salt Palace, Salt Lake City

*If you are not a delegate, please go and assist the campaign of your candidate of choice. It is a wonderful experience!

2010 Republican Caucus Meeting Locations

2010-03-11T14:24:00.001-08:00

Cache County Republican Precinct Caucuses

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

7:00PM

All Logan Precincts--Mt. Logan Middle School, 875 N 200 E (regardless of Legislative District)

Legislative District 2

Amalga---Amalga Town Hall, 6590 N. 2400 W.

Clarkston---Clarkston Town Hall, 55 S. Main

Mendon 1---Historic Mendon Station, 95 N. Main

Mendon 2---Fire Hall Classroom, 50 E. 100 N

Newton---Newton Town Hall, 51 S. Center

Legislative District 3

Cornish---Cornish Town Hall, 14300 N. 4800 W.

Cove---Gary Allen Home, 1241 E. 13000 N.

Hyde Park 1, 2---Hyde Park Civic Center, 113 E. Center

Lewiston 1, 2---Lewiston Elementary, 107 E. 200 S.

North Logan 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6---Greenville Elementary, 2450 N. 400 E.

Richmond 1, 2---White Pine Middle School, 184 W. 100 N.

Smithfield 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7---Summit Elementary, 80 W Center

Trenton---Trenton Town Hall, 17 E. Main

Legislative District 5

Benson---Scott & Diane Falslev home, 3710 N 3800 W

College/Young---Thomas Edison School S, 1275 W 2350 S Nibley

Hyrum 1, 2, 3, 4---Mountain Crest High, 255 S 800 E

Millville 1, 2---Millville Elementary, 67 S Main

Nibley 1, 2---Thomas Edison School S, 1275 W 2350 S Nibley

Paradise---Paradise Town Hall, 100 W 9000 S

Providence 1, 2, 3, 4, 5---Spring Creek Middle School, 350 W 100 N

River Heights 1, 2---River Heights Emenentary, 780 E 600 S

Wellsville 1, 2, 3, 4---Wellsville Elementary, 90 E 100 S

What happens at the Republican Conventions?

2010-03-11T14:23:00.001-08:00

What happens at the Republican Conventions?

Information comes from David James, Cache County Chair of the Republican Party

County Conventions occur one evening, once a year. (Usually 5:30pm at Mt. Logan Middle School for Cache County)

State Conventions occur one full day, once a year. (Usually from 8am-6pm) in Salt Lake area. Concessions are available there. An area is set up with informational and campaign booths and business is conducted in a seated hall.

Objective:

· Election year (such as this one)--to narrow the slate of candidates to one (for the general election) or two (for the primary election).

· Non-election year (organizing convention)--is to elect party leadership. The county convention operates for county party nominees and officials. The state convention operates for multi-county, regional and state wide nominees and officials.

Procedure:

· Prayer, pledge, welcome and adoption of agenda.

· From there the order is determined by the agenda proposed by leadership and accepted by the convention.

· In a nominating convention, the business of nominating candidates is generally conducted first so that balloting can proceed and counting can occur during the rest of the program. It also avoids the inconvenience of asking delegates to simply wait, if multiple ballots are necessary.

· Each candidate is given a set amount of time to speak. This is not a debate, but there are occasions when a moderator will ask a limited number of questions (generally 3-5) of each candidate. Again, the response times are fixed.

· At the end of speaking, ballots are cast and taken to a counting room. A candidate must get 70% of the vote at the county level for county candidates or 60% at the state level for state candidates. If there are multiple candidates, multiple rounds of balloting occurs (either separate ballots or prioritized ballot).

· The process is similar for the organizing convention. A majority of the vote is required to elect a party official and the outcome is determined at the convention.

· Generally, the other major business consists of reports/speeches from elected officials.

· Finally, the convention considers any resolutions or changes to the by-laws/constitution proposed under the party's rules. There are generally deadlines to be met and review processes to go through for these resolutions or changes. The process at convention is that an accepted resolution is placed before the body, rules of debate established for the convention are applied (time limits and number of speeches). Voting is by voice rather than by ballot. Generally, people find the most success with resolutions and changes at the organizing convention. Nominating conventions generally go very long with the primary business of the convention and other actions are often deferred to a later meeting or fail because people leave and there isn't a quorum to conduct further business (people do vote with their feet).

Overview of the I-caucus On-line convention for Utah Senate endorsement

2010-03-10T15:54:00.000-08:00

Schedule:

The on-line convention for Utah’s senate race began today[Feb 23], and will continue until the endorsement voting process is completed.

Membership Census:

There are 1,100 members exactly who are eligible to vote for our 2010 Utah Senate endorsement.

On-line Convention Goal & Process:

The goal is for all members to have one place to go to gather all the information they need prior to casting their endorsement votes.

Beginning now, all members are encouraged to watch the debate videos; and/or ask questions directly to the candidates, and/or debate the pros and cons of the 4 candidates openly on the Utah Group page of the NING site.

Basic Courtesy Expected:

Please refrain from ad-hominem attacks: Comment on whatever issues are raised, NOT on the person who is raising the issue.

Please find and use appropriate threads for whatever comments you post.

Candidate Q & A Threads:

There will be a specific thread given to each candidate for you to post questions directly to each candidate. These threads are only for you to post a question, and to read the candidates reply…these threads are NOT for you to debate the candidate or their answers. (there are plenty of other threads for you to debate upon).

Please ask a question for a candidate only once, (i.e. if you see that someone else has asked your question please do not ask the same question.)

Please do not take it upon yourself to answer questions on behalf of the candidate, even if you feel you know the candidates response. Each candidate has been asked to either answer the questions themselves or to designate ONE person to answer the questions for them.

Where to find important threads:

On the NING site, each time someone makes a comment on a thread, that thread moves to the top of the list. There is no way for anyone to control which threads stay on top.

Also, the NING site only displays the last 3 threads commented on, but there are many more threads existing than are showing on the Utah page.

Therefore, here is a link for you to find ALL of the discussions listed, plus a link to videos of the I-caucus sponsored candidate debate held on Jan. 15th, 2010:

1) To find a list of ALL threads: http://icaucus.ning.com/group/utah/forum

2) To watch the candidate debate video: http://icaucus.ning.com/group/utah/forum/topics/view-the-utah-senatorial

Endorsement Voting Schedule:

1 - The vote will happen by electronic coin identification code so we can control that members are not simply voting from several different computers for the same person. In order to become the certified endorsed candidate for Icaucus, a candidate must receive approval from 70% of the membership, and we will have up to 3 rounds of voting.

2 - Round 1 voting will commence with 4 candidates on Friday Feb.26th, and will end 3 days later at 11:59pm on Monday March 1st. If 70% consensus is not achieved, the candidate who receives the fewest votes will not advance to the second round.

3 - Round 2 voting will commence with the 3 remaining candidates on Tuesday March 2nd, and will end 3 days later at 11:59pm on Friday March 5th. If 70% consensus is not achieved, the candidate who receives the fewest votes will not advance to the third round.

4 - Round 3 voting will commence with the 2 remaining candidates on Saturday March 6th, and will end 3 days later at 11:59pm on Tuesday March 9th. If 70% consensus is not achieved, we will not endorse a candidate until after the convention. If this is the case, all materials and communications produced by Icaucus from that point forward will state that all 4 candidates are worthy of replacing Senator Bob Bennett.

================================================================================================

CHANGES MADE AFTER JAMES WILLIAMS DROPPED OUT OF THE RACE

A possible total of 3 Rounds were originally planned before James Williams dropped out. Once James Williams dropped out, it reduced the maximum possible rounds to just 2 rounds.

This round...Round 1...ends tomorrow night, Sunday 2/28 at 11:59 pm

If a candidate gets 70% of member votes in round 1 (which is very unlikely), then the endorsement process is complete and we will have our endorsed candidate.

If no candidate gets 70%, (which is most likely), then the lowest vote getter does not advance to round 2, and we vote again in round 2 for the remaining 2 candidates.

Round 2 begins Monday 3/1 and ends at 11:59pm on Thursday 3/4

If one of the 2 remaining candidates in round 2 gets 70% of member votes, they will be the endorsed candidate.

If neither candidate gets 70% of the vote in round 2, we will not endorse anyone until after the convention.

Independence Caucus endorses Judge Lowrey, exposes money trail of Mark Kirk in Illinois

2010-01-30T16:15:00.000-08:00

The following video exposes the money trail for Mark Kirk, running for US Senate in Illinois. He has received hundreds of thousands from the few banks who benefited from TARP. And no-so-coincidentally, he voted for TARP. Please pass this video as far and wide as you can before the Illinois Republican Primary this Tuesday.

Patrick Henry Caucus Drafts Provision for Utah to Opt Out of Federal Health Care Law

2009-12-26T13:18:00.000-08:00

UTAH PATRICK HENRY CAUCUS UNANINMOUSLY SUPPORTS A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN ORDER TO STOP THE FEDERAL HEALTH CARE BILL

Leading state sovereignty caucus strongly opposes the federal health care bill and supports lawsuits based on two violations of the U.S. Constitution.

The Patrick Henry Caucus adopted a unanimous position Wednesday, December 23, 2009, to oppose the Health Care Reform Bills, and to support a lawsuit against the federal government in order to stop the national health care bill from becoming law.

Calling the law unconstitutional, The Patrick Henry Caucus, which is comprised of legislators from both the Utah House of Representatives and the Utah Senate, vows to fight the federal law on multiple fronts. The Patrick Henry Caucus has an opt-out provision drafted and ready for presentation to the Utah Legislature next month. The opt-out would make it illegal for Utah agencies to implement any portion of the new federal law. The Caucus is calling on the State of Utah to join in with other States and take the lead on filing a lawsuit to stop the bill, should it receive final approval.

The Caucus believes the law is unconstitutional in at least two respects. First, the law unfairly gives preferential treatment to residents of Nebraska as a result of efforts by Senate Democrats to court the vote of Nebraska Senator Ben Campbell. The Caucus believes that this preferential treatment violates principles of due process and equal protection and is therefore unconstitutional under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.

Second, the law amounts to an excess of Congress’s enumerated powers inasmuch as it requires every American to acquire health insurance. This legislation marks the first time in history that Congress has required every single American to purchase a particular good or service, and cannot be reconciled with the notion that Congress possesses only those limited powers granted by the Constitution.

The Patrick Henry Caucus calls on the leaders from all States to join in the effort to file a lawsuit against the federal government in order to stop this wrongheaded piece of legislation. We must not allow Congress to commandeer one sixth of our nation’s fragile economy while simultaneously undermining the authority of the States. ####

Parking Changes Necessary Part II

2009-12-11T15:11:00.000-08:00

A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD ON THIS TOPIC AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 5, 2010.

I have been looking into the issue of the proposed parking changes for Logan city mentioned in the last post.

I have done a little research into this issue and I will share what I found. I spoke with the director of public works and he was kind enough to send a copy of the proposed changes which I added to the previous post. I asked him the purpose of the proposed changes and he said that a resident had called and complained that there was very little travel space in that area during the winter. The council heard the complaint and decided to do something about it.

I decided to drive around the area to see the parking situation and safety issues for myself. I found that on 200N it was indeed difficult to travel and could be dangerous in the snow. I didn't see that as much of a problem along 300 E. I noticed garbage cans out on the street on 300 E but they did not seem to be blocking the road very much.

After writing to the city council I received two responses from council members (and I am grateful that two of them were willing to respond).

I called a resident in the area (who knew nothing of the proposed parking changes). She said that the parking areas were not usually full and so reducing parking spaces would likely not be a problem, and that it was a little difficult to travel in the winter. She didn't know how the other residents felt about it though since she was unaware of the proposed changes. She felt that it would probably be best to only change to parallel parking on one side of the road. I still need to contact apartment owners in the area and ask for their input.

I also received input from two of the five city council members and I am grateful for their willingness to communicate.

Jay Monson and Herm Olsen filled me in on the history of the area and I will quote Mr. Monson below,

"Until about 30 years ago, the LDS Hospital for Logan stood on the corner NE of the Logan Temple. Sunshine Terrace was adjacent to the hospital. With the hospital, the Terrace, and the Temple all within that two block area, parking was very difficult to find. There were no large lots for parking for any of these facilities. Thus the city allowed patrons and residents alike to park their cars straight out from and in to the curb, with the cars and trucks sticking out into the road much farther than anywhere else in the city. With this being on a hill, and due to the busy traffic on this street, it was a major bottleneck for safety and welfare of both residents and visitors.

Over the years, parking was also allowed on an angle in to the curb along 2nd North from the temple entrance down one block to accommodate all the cars which needed to be there.

For some reason, which no one seems to know why, unusual policies were never changed after the new hospital was built in it's present location and the huge parking lot was built in it's place across from the temple."

Herm Olsen stated that the streets are public property and "must not be co-opted for the private financial benefit of any person." I found that an interesting reason to defend the change. Is the purpose of the change for public safety, or to "reclaim" public property?

One of my questions was how will this affect property owners and is this the right time to make such a change? Mr. Olsen recommended that "we send notice to all property owners and tenants that they will have an entire construction season (until the Fall of next year) to make arrangements. That should give each landowner adequate opportunity to take care of their own parking requirements without depending on public property...I am anxious to impose no sudden hardship on people who have relied on city property for a long period of time. "

I think that was a step in the right direction but I still hesitate to make a change that would financially hurt anyone in this economic situation we are in.

I also asked former Mayoral candidate Mike Morrill for his input. He pointed out that "Cache Valley and Logan have doubled in density, ...all of the homes on the west side of the street from second north to third north and third east have no driveways, and all of them park on the street year round. And 80% of the homes on the North side of the temple or second east, do not have sufficient parking. Again this is the home owners who are going to be hurt with their blanket policy thinking, not the Temple patrons."

Because I can see that there is a legitimate safety concern, but I would also like to see concern for those who have relied on this parking for so long, my recommendation is to change the parking on the side of the street closest to the temple to parallel parking (notifying residents well in advance). Then observe the effects of that change on safety, parking congestion, and effect on property owners. After a given trial period those effects should be evaluated and a determination can be made as to whether or not the other side of the road should be changed as well.

Parking Changes Necessary?

2009-12-09T14:39:00.000-08:00

Dear City Council Members:

I am writing in regards to the proposed plan to change the parking stalls near the temple from angled parking to parallel parking. Although I was not in attendance at the council meeting where it was discussed, I listened to it on the internet as I have done for the past three years.

While I am not outright against the proposal, I do have a few concerns that I am hoping will be addressed at some point. They are as follows:

How does this change improve safety? Is there any data on this?
Will this cause unfunded mandates for property owners along the area? If the city is mandating changes that cost property owners money then the city should cover the cost.
Keeping that in mind, is this a good use of taxpayer money--reducing parking that taxpayers can use and paying for landlords to pave their backyards?
Why now? Is this the right time to be making such a change? (During a recession, when people are struggling financially, would making a change that requires extra money and reduces property value for nearby homes and apartments be the best option)?

Thank you for considering my concerns. I hope to be in attendance at the public hearing next month.

Sincerely,

Michelle L King

See related article here:http://www.cachevalleydaily.com/news/local/78294942.html

or listen to the city council discussion here:http://kutatv.com/page.php?5.37

A Don't-Miss Poltical Workshop and Seminar

2009-11-16T13:27:00.001-08:00

Workshop and Seminar-

Activation and Motivation to Reclaim Good Government

The current system for seeking political office against an incumbent is daunting and next to impossible. The system is rigged to favor the incumbent.
WE THE PEOPLE can trump the big money and elect good people who will defend our constitutional rights.
Don’t let the party chose who you can vote for, they haven’t been offering us very good choices if you haven’t noticed.
We can trump the influence of big money if we unite our efforts.
WE THE PEOPLE are the government—let’s learn how to govern again.

IPoliticom and the Independence Caucus have a proven plan.

All concerned citizens, potential candidates and activists that want to get involved and reclaim their voice in the process should attend the following workshop, complete with freedom loving speakers presenting the following topics:

Topics to be presented include:

Mike Lee (attorney and form law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito): Defending and protecting the US Constitution

Lori Fowlke (Utah Representative for District 59):The Utah Legislative Ethics Bill - Why it should not pass

Carl Wimmer (Utah Rep. for District 52 and founder of the Patrick Henry Caucus): Defending State's rights

Connie Smith (Former Deputy Campaign Manager for Jason Chaffetz): How to use cottage meetings and rallies to organize politically and how to put it all together

Monte Bateman (Founder of iPoliticom): A complete primer on implementing the precinct strategy for 2010 elections; Blog squad and rapid response—using online media to produce a good outcome

Frank Anderson (Founder of the Independence Caucus): how to research out incumbents and how to use the research

Morgan Philpot (State GOP Vice Chair): "You Can't Change What You Don't Understand--How To Work Within The GOP System"

Michelle and Brannon King (Cache County Coordinators for the Independence Caucus): What can and will go wrong with running a candidacy and what to do about it

Deidre Henderson (a Campaign manager for U.S. Rep. Jason Chaffetz)-how to build up your volunteer base

Ryan McCoy (Region 3 Rep for the Independence Caucus): Turbocharging our efforts using technology to the hilt. The hows and whys

Cory Jones (business and marketing expert and dedicated volunteer): Using marketing tools and techniques to further the cause of Freedom

In addition, recently the candidates who have filed for the 2010 Senate seat and answered the Independence Caucus vetting questions have also been invited to give a presentation: James Williams, Cherilyn Eagar, and Tim Bridgewater.

Let’s keep our momentum and move forward to the next level!

Copies of "Winning Elections With The Precinct Strategy: A Complete Guide For Activists" will be available at this event. See you there.

Host: iPoliticom and the Independence Caucus
Type: Education - Workshop
Date: Saturday, December 5, 2009
Time: 9:00am - 4:00pm
Location: Challenger School
Street: 1260 E 8600 S
City/Town: Sandy, UT
Fee: None

Legal Registration

2009-11-12T07:35:00.001-08:00

Some online commenters brought up some valid concerns about the legal status of the Independence Caucus and so I have chosen to address those here.

The Independence Caucus is a non-profit corporation that does not have tax exempt status. They will have to file taxes every year so that they can legally endorse candidates.

They are also in progress of registering an Independence Caucus Political Action Committee (527 tax filing). To this date, the Independence Caucus has not donated a single dollar to a single candidate and will not until this legal status goes through.

We host fundraisers for candidates but charge them to do so because otherwise it would be considered a donation.

Also, to this date nobody has donated over $200 to the Independence Caucus. If they had they would have had to file w/the Lt. Gov's office.

Voting Results, Logan City 2009

2009-11-04T16:45:00.000-08:00

We at the Cache Independence Caucus wish to offer our congratulations to Randy Watts, Dean Quayle, and Holly Daines in the 2009 Logan Municipal Election.

Although the candidates selected by our local group were not elected, we are not going away. We are a national organization and will continue to grow and be involved in many races including next years senate race. We are committed to continue to offer to the public candidates who are committed to a standard of limited government and individual responsibility. We encourage the public to learn more about both our local group at www.cacheicaucus.blogspot.org and our national group at www.icaucus.org. For those who wish to become involved in helping us please contact Michelle King atmichelle@cacheicaucus.org or 435.753.4790.

Michelle L King

2009 Coordinator

Cache Independence Caucus

See results here: http://www.loganutah.org/voting/VotingResults.cfm

Don't Forget to Vote Today!

2009-11-02T20:22:00.000-08:00

New Voter ID Requirements

Voting Precinct Polling Place

1 & 7 Logan Senior Citizens Center
240 North 100 East

2, 3 & 33 National Guard Armory
530 South 500 West

4 & 25 LDS Cache West Stake Center
825 North 200 West

5 & 6 Sunshine Terrace
225 North 200 West

8 & 10 Whittier Community Center
290 North 400 East

9 & 24 Wilson School
89 South 500 East

11, 15 & 23 Adams School
530 North 400 East

12, 13, 19, Lundstrom Student Center
20 & 21 1295 East 1000 North

14 & 22 Logan 8-25th LDS Ward Church
325 Lauralin Drive

16, 18, 26, & 28 LDS Central Stake Center
1255 North 600 East

17, 30 & 31 LDS Cache Stake Center
250 West 1200 North

27 & 32 Human Services Building
115 West Golf Course Road

29 Eastridge LDS Church
1350 Eastridge Drive

Polls are open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Election Day. To vote in this municipal election, a person must be a registered voter residing in the City of Logan.

Endorsed Logan City Candidates-2009

2009-11-02T15:02:00.000-08:00

Congratualtions to our endorsed candidates for fall of 2009!

Mayor:

Mike Morrill

Official Website

Cache Valley Daily Questions

Crosstalk

CacheValley.Com interview
Score on Icaucus Survey: 100%

City Council:

Tony Wegener

Cache Valley Daily Questions

Crosstalk

Official Website
Article
Statement by Tony
Score on Icaucus Survey: 100%

Steven Stokes

Cache Valley Daily Questions

CacheValley.Com interview

Official Website

Blog
Score on Icaucus Survey:
Did not answer question #'s 5, 14, 33
for the reason of wanting clarifications.

Please attend a Town Hall Forum featuring these candidates on Tuesday, September 8 at 7pm at Bridger Elementary(1261 N 400 W).

Calling All Conservatives: Important Meeting on November 10, 2009!

2009-10-30T20:10:00.000-07:00

We are trying something different in Cache Valley. We have many different liberty minded groups who are all working towards the common goal of restoring freedom and limiting the encroachment of the federal government. In order to better facilitate this cooperation and achieve these common goals we have created what we call the Cache Tea Party Coalition. We have created a website at http://cacheteaparty.blogspot.com/ to keep people informed about our efforts and events.

One of the things we have already worked on is the Logan mayoral and city council races. Independence Caucus endorsed three candidates and many people from various groups have stepped up to help. We now have an opportunity continue this momentum into next years races, including the senate and county races. In order to be able to make a difference we need to work together and take as many county and state delegate positions as we can in the prominent political party. It is at the county and state conventions where a lot of things happen and decisions are made. It was at the state convention where Jason Chaffetz showed how much support he had in order to beat the incumbent, Chris Cannon.

In order to better facilitate this we are holding a training session about precinct meetings which will occur early next year. We will train the members of these organizations about how to become county and state delegates, as will similar liberty organizations throughout the state. The more we can influence these conventions the more say we will have on who ends up on the ballots and ultimately who wins these races.

Our meeting will consist of two parts. The first part will be training by the Campaign for Liberty about these caucuses. After that the Independence Caucus will discuss how to best choose a candidate that we can unify behind.

This meeting will be Nov 10 from 7 - 9. Location: New Dawn Technologies, 843 S 100 W., Logan. Map

We hope that everybody will be able to attend. If you cannot please send an email to John Mulholland at mulhollandj@gmail.com so we can send you training materials.

Help Evaluate Tim Bridgewater

2009-10-28T14:45:00.001-07:00

I know we have been focusing a lot on local elections but there is still plenty of activity going on regarding the 2010 Senate race. Recently The Young Republican Federation invited Tim Bridgewater to Cache Valley for a public meeting at the Beehive Grill on September 15th, 2009. This link is a recording of that conversation and will help you understand more about what he stands for.

The Young Republican Federation will also be hosting Cherilyn Eagar, who is also running for Senate at the same location on Thursday, Nov. 19, 2009. We will record and post that conversation as well.

Currently James Williams and Mark Shurtleff have also filed as republicans to run against Bob Bennett. Sam Granato has filed as a democrat opponent. If you would like to discuss the pros and cons of each of these candidates and help the Independence Caucus select one for endorsement please sign up on www.icaucus.ning.com, join the Utah group, and post your comments there.

Upcoming Election Events

2009-10-26T15:13:00.000-07:00

Flyer Stapling "Party"
TONIGHT!!!! (Monday, Oct 26)
8pm
Steven Stokes' home
935 N 800 E #12

Cottage Meeting
Tuesday, October 27
Home of Michelle Johnnie
715 E 200 , Logan
7-8:30pm

City Council Debate
Wednesday, October 28
12:30PM
USU

Cottage Meeting
Wednesday, October 28
7-8PM
1520 Mountain Rd (Cliffside)

City Council and Mayoral Debate
Thursday, October 29, 2009
7-8/8-9 PM
Logan Municipal Council Chambers

Mayoral Debate
Friday, October 30, 2009
12:30 PM
USU

ELECTION:
Tuesday, November 3

The Open-Ended Questions for Candidates 2009

2009-10-17T15:10:00.000-07:00

The open ended questions were asked to all candidates who answered the first set of "screening" questions with at least 70% in agreement. All candidates were informed before answering any questions that the first set would focus on principles based on national issues and the second set would focus on more specific and local issues.

These interviews were fairly informal and were more of a discussion. We did not have time to ask every single questions to every candidate because we asked many follow up questions to the responses they gave and ran out of time.

What is the proper role of government?
What are the responsibilities of the position you are running for?
How does local government differ from state government? From federal?
Is it justifiable to remove liberty for safety? Examples?
What role does the Constitution of the United States play on a city level?
Should the government own entities which compete with private businesses? Why or why not?
What do you feel should be done with surplus money in the budget?
How will you ensure that city policy does not infringe upon the rights of individuals?
What will you do to address present and future transportation and parking bottlenecks?
Give an example of something that illustrates you are a dependable person.
Should the city change their ordinances to allow more advertising to fund the Transit System?
Why or why not?

We also discussed issues such as park strips, utilities,energy sources for the valley, infrastructure and spending priorities.

We were not looking for any particular answer. We were just trying to get a feel for what the views of the candidates were and what principles drives the decisions they make.

We also reviewed all newspaper articles, radio and television interviews, and website information.

Press Release: Special Interest Groups

2009-10-08T17:33:00.000-07:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
A KVNU radio ad sponsored by the incumbent Mayor has implied this week that the Cache Independence Caucus has endorsed Logan municipal candidates along with "landlord coalitions". Contrary to this misleading advertisement, the opposite is the truth. The only "landlord coalition" involved in this election is the Utah Apartment Association, who is lobbying our Logan City government to adopt their "Good Landlord" licensing program. The Logan Municipal Council has even appointed/invited a lobbyist from the Utah Apartment Association to be on the committee to evaluate the controversial licensing of private property in Logan. Mike Morrill, Steve Stokes and Tony Wegener have expressed clear disagreement with the Utah Apartment Association.

Critics have also implied that by being accountable to the Cache Independence Caucus, endorsed candidates would not be accountable to the citizens. This is totally false. The Cache Independence Caucus empowers voters by giving them a bigger voice and representation in government. We support candidates who promise to follow the Constitution of the United States, which is actually the first mentioned duty of all municipal candidates who take the oath of office.
Text of the KVNU Radio ad referred to in the above press release:
"Logan city residents deserve elected officials who answer to the citizens, not special interest groups. When groups such as landlord coalitions, and Independence Caucus support a candidate, they usually expect something in return. Or as Michelle King from the Independence Caucus put it, 'If any Independence Caucus endorsed candidate shows a record of taking their ticket in and then turning around and doing what they want, we will work twice as hard to get them out of office as we did to get them into office.' Who do you want our leaders to be accountable to?"

Actual text of the conversation the ad refers to:
Q. "What's to say that one of these candidates the Independence Caucus backs, they don't just go get a ticket to the game and then once they get there they change all the rules?"

A. First I went through and described the earmark requirements proposed by the Independence Caucus such as earmarks must be voted on by their own merits alone and then said, "If any Independence Caucus endorsed candidate goes against that and shows a record of doing what you say, turning and taking their ticket in and then turn around and doing what they want, we will work twice as hard to get them out of office as we did to get them into office."

Michelle L King
2009 Coordinator
Cache Independence Caucus
435.753.4790

Powered by Podbean.com

A Citizens' Special Interest Group

2009-10-07T13:49:00.000-07:00

Dear Citizens of Logan,

My name is Michelle King and like you, I am a citizen. I am not a professional politician. I live and raise my children in the beautiful city of Logan. My daily life consists of regular old things that many regular citizens do -- things like raising a garden, cleaning my house, shopping for groceries, sewing, etc. And like many people today, I have been frustrated by the lack of representation in our government. Our leaders on all levels often forget to listen to those who have no money to contribute to their campaigns. Instead, they listen to those who have the most power and influence to get them re-elected. I have felt like an insignificant voice crying out into the void, my voice being drowned out by special interest groups, large "associations", and corrupt politicians.

But my voice has found new volume and it has given me hope. Not too long ago I discovered a group called the Independence Caucus. This group is a CITIZENS' movement dedicated to bringing the voice of the citizens where our representatives can hear it. Their motto is “The triumph of integrity over money.” They have developed a way for WE, THE PEOPLE to have a voice once more.

This method begins with a candidate vetting, or screening, process. It is essentially a job interview. And why not? All of us have interviews before we are offered a job. Our leaders have one of the most crucial jobs there is, and it is right and just that they should be interviewed by the people they work for: THE CITIZENS.

So we, the people, first give our job applicants an initial screening to see if they will be responsible with our money and will “support, obey, and defend” the Constitution of the United States as stated in the oath of office. This is done with an 80 question survey followed by a personal interview conducted by their employers (the people). We then select a candidate and offer them our support in return for them being willing to represent us.

This is what a group of citizens has done for the current Logan city elections. We found three strong candidates willing to go through this job interview who passed with flying colors. It does not matter what issues we face now or in the future because issues come and go. After interviewing these candidates we have found that they will stand firm for the Constitution and stand up for the people come what may. These candidates are Mike Morrill (mayor), Tony Wegener (city council) and Steven Stokes (city council).

I ask you, as a citizen of Logan city and the United States of America to add your voice to mine and vote for these three charismatic men on November, 3, 2009. I also invite you to bring your voice to the county and nation and participate with us in candidate screening for the 2010 County Council and U.S. Senate races. Getting involved locally is the best and only way to change the nation -- you have to support great politicians from the ground up. YOUR VOICE CAN BE HEARD! (Candidate discussions take place on the social networking site at www.icaucus.ning.com -- sign up to participate.)

Sincerely,
Michelle L. King
2009 Coordinator
Cache Independence Caucus

Mike Morrill for Mayor, by Tony Wegener

2009-10-04T16:53:00.001-07:00

October 4, 2009

Mike Morrill for Mayor

I am a candidate for City Council. I am also a realist; I do not expect to be able to significantly change the direction of city government as a City Councilman, with Mayor Watts at the helm for another term. Therefore, I am asking all Logan citizens who want a more conservative, more representative, less divisive, less intrusive government; a government with the POLITICAL WILL to refocus Logan City on its PRIORITIES, and govern on PRINCIPLE, to support Mike Morrill for Mayor of Logan City. Mike Morrill, Tony Wegener and Steven Stokes WILL make a difference.

The Herald Journal, October 3, 2009, reports that the Logan Library now has room to expand into the space vacated by the city administrative staff. But that may only be temporary; according to Ronald Jenkins, Logan Librarian, “The fate of the building and Logan Library will likely be decided late next year. Among the possibilities is construction of a new library”.

One possibility considered by the City Council last year, was a complete remodel of the existing city building. There is actually enough space to serve the library’s needs for the next 20 years. In 2008 the price tag to completely rehabilitate the building was $5,300,000. Another possibility is Mayor Watt’s vision for a new library/city center. The price tag in 2008 was $25,000,000.

Mayor Watts must be stopped! I would like to help refocus Logan on the fundamental role of Government…and get back to basics…back to basic PRINCIPLES and carefully considered PRIORITIES

At the beginning of the current political cycle, Tyler Riggs, of KNVU, asked each candidate a series of questions, including: Please describe what you believe the role of government is? My response was as follows:

The role of city government is to serve the people…to secure the safety of the community and to provide essential services economically and efficiently. Thus one might expect Logan City to provide appropriate police and fire protection services and a well-maintained infrastructure, to support a growing community. Basic infrastructure would include roads/sidewalks, sewer and water. Other appropriate services include parks, recreation facilities and library services. (There was more)

So I support expansion of the library into the existing city building on PRINCIPLE, but I must also oppose the mayor’s apparent compulsion to spend $25,000,000 on a City Center/Library…on PRINCIPLE. There are more serious needs, safety hazards and liabilities in Logan City. There are essential services such as aging sewer and water pipes and missing curbs, gutters and sidewalks which must take PRIORITY over building unnecessary public monuments.

For example: Our city water service does not meet state code; it represents a serious safety hazard; it is a liability in the event of a major fire. Our 100 year old water and sewer lines are fragile and failing daily; we are wasting money annually on patch and repair; we are further behind today than when the current administration took office. There are Logan City employees who lose sleep over the vision of a catastrophic event on Logan City…and the loss of culinary water and fire flow.

Again…I am a realist; I do not expect to be able to significantly change the direction of city government as a City Councilman, with Mayor Watts at the helm for another term. Therefore, I am asking all Logan citizens who want a more representative, less divisive, less intrusive government; a government with the POLITICAL WILL to refocus Logan City on its PRIORITIES, and govern on PRINCIPLE, to support Mike Morrill for Mayor of Logan City.

Mike Morrill, Tony Wegener and Steven Stokes WILL make a difference.

Empowered

2009-09-30T19:47:00.000-07:00

To the Editor:

About four years ago my husband and I got in a political discussion with a friend. We basically shoved our feet in our mouths because we didn't have a clue what we were talking about. We learned our lesson and began an extensive study of economics and governments. The more we studied the more we realized our country was on the wrong track.

We looked into and joined several groups dedicated to political action. Some wonderful progress was being made but there were so many bills being passed all the time it seemed impossible to fight off the corruption in Washington by writing to our Congressmen and signing petitions.

Then we attended a lecture by one of the co-founders of the Independence Caucus, Monte Bateman. Monte told us of the Special Interest influence in our government and illustrated the reasons that all our letter-writing and petitioning were having so little affect. We were very intrigued by the information and decided to join the Independence Caucus. After joining we found videos that not only explained the corruption, but proposed a solution to curb it as well as a process to find and support good candidates for offices that could be used at all levels of government.

It was the answer we had been looking for. It would be so much better to elect officials who would make good decisions and actually listen to us than continue to write weekly letters only to get cookie-cutter form letters in response. We felt empowered.

And that is the purpose of the Independence Caucus: To empower the citizens to learn about and support principled candidates. There are many worthy political action groups in existence who are concerned about the direction of the government, but many have no power to endorse or support a candidate.

This is not about using national turmoil to push a local agenda. There is nothing sinister or hidden behind this. I am a concerned citizen of Logan who wants to help some very good candidates get elected.

The issue of the vetting questions, or "screening" questions as I prefer to call them, is only one small part of this whole thing and it is surprising that people are hanging onto this issue so tightly. The questions are meant to follow a politician throughout his/her entire career. They may not vote on such issues with their current office, but they may have that opportunity if they choose to run for a different office in the future. In the meantime their responses to these questions tell us their beliefs, priorities, and principles.

I don't see how Mike Morrill opposing the "expansion and/or the perpetuation of any and all existing federal legislation and regulations in areas that are not constitutionally enumerated" should reflect negatively on his campaign. Or Tony Wegener committing to "oppose any legislation that would allow the FCC [Federal Communications Commission] to violate the 1st amendment rights of any American individuals and/or businesses" should mean that he is not an honest man because he doesn't vote on federal legislation. Or Steven Stokes committing to "oppose and vote against any legislation and/or oppose any efforts by the executive branch to recognize or implement any taxation of American Citizens for any United Nations programs" should mean that he is not well-equipped to be on the Logan Municipal Council.

I would encourage the citizens of Logan to look at the platforms of each of these candidates and see what they really have to offer Logan City. Each of them has a great love for Logan city and the people who live here. They are honest and principled men, and because I had the opportunity not only to see their responses to 80 questions on national issues, but interview them personally and ask them about who they are, what makes them tick, and specific local issues, I am empowered to be able to say that Mike Morrill will be an excellent Mayor, and that Tony Wegener and Steven Stokes will be great assets to the Logan Municipal council.

I also invite you all to participate in the candidate vetting for the Senate race of 2010. You can join the discussion of the current candidates on our social networking site: www.icaucus.ning.com. This time you can be the one to help select a candidate. Get involved early while you have a real choice!

Sincerely,

Michelle L King
2009 Coordinator
Cache Independence Caucus

HOT SCONES AND HONEY BUTTER

2009-09-30T08:10:00.000-07:00

Host:	Mike Morrill, Steven Stokes, Tony Wegener
Type:	Party
Network:	Global

Date:	Thursday, October 1, 2009
Time:	6:00pm - 7:00pm
Location:	Design West Architects (Just North of Crumb Brothers)
Street:	255 S 300 W
City/Town:	Logan, UT

OR Friday, October 2, 2009 6:00PM Adam's Park (about 400 N 400 E)

Description

Come and eat a sweet treat and discuss issues that are important to YOU with mayoral candidate Mike Morrill and city council candidates Steven Stokes and Tony Wegener. These men are friendly and full of integrity and you will have a chance to see that for yourself.

Podcast on KVNU

2009-09-29T21:46:00.000-07:00

Here is a link to the interview with Michelle L. King, 2009 Coordinator of Cache Independence Caucus on KVNU's "For the People". This interview occurred on Monday, September 29, 2009.

http://podcast.cachevalleydaily.com/FTP-09-28-2009B.mp3

Tilley, Horning, Haws endorse Morrill, Stokes, and Wegener

2009-09-29T07:56:00.000-07:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Chad Tilley and Robert Horning, former candidates for Logan City Council and Mark Haws, former candidate for Logan City Mayor have now officially endorsed Cache Independence Caucus candidates, Mike Morrill, Steve Stokes and Tony Wegener.

Logan mayoral candidate, Mike Morrill, and municipal council candidates, Tony Wegener, and Steven Stokes were also endorsed prior to the Logan municipal primary election, by the Cache Independence Caucus. They survived our vetting (screening) process because of their knowledge of and support for the Constitution of the United States. These candidates have also been principled enough to share their political views with us and with the public, and to agree to a fidelity clause, i.e. to resign if found unfaithful to their spouses. Their opponents, on the other hand,were unwilling to share their political views with us or with the public- especially regarding constitutional principles of government.

For example, In reference to the Cache Independence Caucus vetting questions, the incumbent Logan City Mayor posted the following statement on his website:

I spent a considerable amount of time reviewing these questions and was unable to answer most of them due to the fact that they do not pertain to my position as Logan City Mayor, and do not reflect the limitations of my office. For example, the majority of the questions asked if I would commit to vote for different pieces of legislation at the federal level. Not only do I not have power over federal matters, but as an Administrative or Executive officer I do not have the ability to vote on any legislation. I felt it would be misleading and, frankly, dishonest for me to answer in the affirmative or negative to the majority of these survey questions.

Similarly, the Herald Journal reports that municipal council candidate, Holly Daines made a similar statement. Dean Quayle, also a candidate for municipal council refused to read our questionnaire.

On behalf of Cache Independence Caucus, I believe these statements indicate that these candidates do not have a true understanding of how local government affects the nation and vice versa. The Cache Independence Caucus asserts that it is essential to both understand and be actively involved in ALL levels of government in order to adequately address the problems in our country.

Monte Bateman, co-founder of the Independence Caucus responds to the mayor's statements in this way:

"All politics is local... Unless you are a lobbyist (paid or unpaid) you may not always have easy access to your state reps or state senators, but you can bet that they listen to the mayor of your town or city. Unless you live in a large city, you do have fairly easy access to your mayor and city councilmen however, and so you use that avenue to enhance your voice.

“Your state rep and state senators also have greater influence over your US Congressman and US Senators than the average citizen. Those vetting questions are common sense affirmations of one's belief in being fiscally responsible and following the US Constitution (at any and all levels of government), and they are based on the information found in the videos. [http://www.ourcaucus.com/Article1.html] While your local politician does not have the opportunity to vote on many of the things contained in several of the vetting questions, we do still want to make sure they agree with the same principles and want the same thing at a state and national level. The specific questions that have to do solely with local and state politics have to come from you all who engage in the second phase of vetting the candidates in a panel interview."

I would also add that often those who run for local offices move on to higher offices. If we want to change the fact that we often have to choose between unacceptable choice A and unacceptable choice B, then we need to get involved early. Weed out the bad apples before they get too far and too numerous.

Local considerations are not left out of the vetting process and to illustrate this we have included a sample of some of the questions used in the second phase of vetting mentioned above:

· How does local government differ from state government? From federal?

· What role does the Constitution of the United States play on a city level?

· What do you feel should be done with surplus money in the budget?

· How will you ensure that city policy does not infringe upon the rights of individuals?

· What will you do to address present and future transportation and parking bottlenecks?

Give an example of something that illustrates you are a dependable person.

The Principles of the Independence Caucus can be found at http://cacheicaucus.blogspot.com/2009/08/candidate-vetting-principles.html

The Vetting Questions can be found at http://cacheicaucus.blogspot.com/2009/08/candidate-vetting-questions.html

Sincerely,

Michelle L. King
2009 Coordinator
Cache Independence Caucus
cacheicaucs@gmail.com

Speech by I-Caucus Co-Founder, Monte Bateman

2009-09-21T12:16:00.000-07:00

Logan City Primary Results

2009-09-16T08:53:00.001-07:00

Congratulations to Mike Morrill, Tony Wegener, and Steven Stokes! They have successfully made it through the primaries! We have some hard work ahead of us but we can do it and we will enjoy it! (For election results click here: http://www.loganutah.org/votingtable.cfm)

If you would like to help any of these gentlemen with their campaign please send an email to cacheicaucus@gmail.com. There are many ways to help. Tasks range from making calls or doing a little work on your computer in your own home to knocking on doors and everywhere in between. We have a fit for any life circumstance. YOU CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE!

Recording of Town Hall Forum

2009-09-12T21:01:00.000-07:00

The complete audio recording from our Logan City Town Hall Forum is now available. It includes short speeches from Mike Morrill, Steve Stokes, and Tony Wegener. They also answered questions from the audience.

Logan City Polling Locations

2009-09-09T09:25:00.000-07:00

Taken from http://www.loganutah.org/

NOTICE OF ELECTION
SEPTEMBER 15, 2009 PRIMARY
LOGAN MUNICIPAL ELECTION POLLING PLACES

Voting Precinct Polling Place

1 & 7 Logan Senior Citizens Center
240 North 100 East

2, 3 & 33 National Guard Armory
530 South 500 West

4 & 25 LDS Cache West Stake Center
825 North 200 West

5 & 6 Sunshine Terrace
225 North 200 West

8 & 10 Whittier Community Center
290 North 400 East

9 & 24 Wilson School
89 South 500 East

11, 15 & 23 Adams School
530 North 400 East

12, 13, 19, Lundstrom Student Center
20 & 21 1295 East 1000 North

14 & 22 Logan 8-25th LDS Ward Church
325 Lauralin Drive

16, 18, 26, & 28 LDS Central Stake Center
1255 North 600 East

17, 30 & 31 LDS Cache Stake Center
250 West 1200 North

27 & 32 Human Services Building
115 West Golf Course Road

29 Eastridge LDS Church
1350 Eastridge Drive

Polls are open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Election Day. To vote in this municipal election, a person must be a registered voter residing in the City of Logan. An absentee ballot may be voted by any registered voter. Applications and ballots are available at the office of the Logan City Recorder, 290 North 100 West, 716-9002.

Publication Date: Sunday, September 13, 2009\

DON'T FORGET TO BRING YOUR ID!

Make Sure You Register to Vote

2009-08-31T12:45:00.000-07:00

Primaries: September 15, 2009

Registration Deadline: Aug 31st

General: Nov 4, 2009

Registration Deadlines: by mail-Oct 5; in-office Oct 19

Precinct Maps:

County

Logan City

links to other cities in Cache

Polling Locations

Logan City Candidate Town Hall Forum

2009-08-25T19:56:00.000-07:00

Haven't heard much about who's running for office?

Want a chance to get to know your future elected officials?

Here is your chance to meet candidates sponsored by the Indpendence Caucus at the

Logan City Town Hall Forum

Tuesesday, September 8, 2009

7:00pm

Bridger School

1261 N 400 W

Get your questions answered by our sponsored candidate:

*Sumbit questions as a comment to this post or

*Email them to cacheicaucus@gmail.com. (We will not add you to a mailing list if you email a question.)

Please leave us a way to contact you because we may request that you ask your question in person at the Town Hall Forum.

Can't attend?

We will post a link where you can listen to or view the forum online.

Logan City Candidates 2009-Phase 3

2009-08-25T08:25:00.000-07:00

The following mayoral candidates have made it to Phase 3 of the vetting process:

Mike Morrill

John P. Clay

The following municipal council candidates have made it to phase 3 of the vetting process:

Chad Tilley

Robert Horning

Steven Stokes

Tony Wegener

Vetting Process

2009-08-25T08:14:00.000-07:00

What is vetting? Vetting is a process of examination and evaluation, generally referring to performing a background check on someone before offering him or her ...

Independence Caucus Vetting Process:

Phase 1. Candidates are given an introduction letter and a copy of the Articles of the Indpendence Caucus videos. They are given time to review them and decide if they wish to continue through the vetting process.

Phase 2. Candidates are given a copy of the vetting questions and are asked to answer them in an online form on the Indpendnece Caucus website. The questions are directly releated to the Independence Caucus principles that are described in the videos. They are given a numerical score and if they answer yes to 70% of the questions they move on to the next phase.

Phase 3. The local steering committee selects a set of open-ended questions that allow them to get to know the candidate better and give them a chance to explain their answers on the questionnaire. The questions are asked in a recorded interview and the recording is posted on the Indepdence Caucus website.

Phase 4. Indpendence Caucus members review all of the information in an online convention and at the end of the convention they all vote for which candidate they wish to endorse. A candidate must receive 70% of the vote in order to receive the endorsement.

Phase 5. We work our tails off to get our endorsed candidates elected!

Candidate Vetting Questions

2009-08-20T21:44:00.000-07:00

These questions will not make complete sense unless you have viewed the I-Caucus videos, which you can view here: Articles of the Independence Caucus.

A candidate must answer yes to a certain percentage of the questions to recieve an endorsement from the Indpendence Caucus.

Section 1: Proper Role of Government and National Sovereignty
The following 20 questions in this section are based on Principle #1:
The Independence Caucus adheres to the self-evident principle that all elected public officials, at both the state and federal levels, must take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States; and that this oath mandates that all public officials willingly fulfill the constitutionally enumerated responsibilities and powers of their elected office; and that this oath also mandates that all public officials refrain from taking any actions or passing any legislation that is not constitutionally empowered to their elected office.

1. Yes or No __________
Do you fully understand and agree that the 10th amendment limits the Federal Government to the *30 enumerated powers that are specified in the Constitution? (* Note: Twenty specific powers are enumerated in Article I, section 8 and the balance are found listed in various sections throughout the rest of the Constitution.)

2. Yes or No __________
With blatant disregard for the 10th Amendment; Congress has used the 68-year-old Supreme Court decision in Wickard v Filburn 317 U.S. 111 (1942) as justification to regulate and otherwise interfere with numerous areas of American business and American personal lives that were never granted or authorized by the Constitution. However, just because Congress has been allowed to do so doesn’t mean they should do so, therefore despite Wickard v Filburn and in compliance with the 10th amendment do you commit to oppose and vote against any PROPOSED legislation that purports to regulate or otherwise involve the Federal Government in any areas that are not specifically and expressly enumerated in the Constitution and are therefore reserved as the exclusive province of the states; such as Education, Energy, Welfare, Labor issues, Non-Interstate roads, farm subsidies, etc?

3. Yes or No __________
Despite Wickard v Filburn and in compliance with the 10th amendment , do you commit to oppose the expansion and/or the perpetuation of any and all EXISTING federal legislation and regulations in areas that are not constitutionally enumerated; and are therefore reserved as the exclusive province of the states; such as Education, Energy, Welfare, Labor issues, Non-Interstate roads, farm subsidies, etc; and do you also commit to support all efforts to return control over these areas back to the states?

4. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to vote in favor of “The Enumerated Powers Act H.R. 450” which requires each and every Act of Congress to contain a concise and definite statement of the constitutional authority relied upon for the enactment of each portion of that proposed Act?

5. Yes or No __________
Because Federal grants are unconstitutional unless directly related to some power specifically delegated to the Federal Government, and because a strict interpretation of the Constitution would eliminate upwards of 90% of the Federal-aid programs presently plaguing the nation; do you commit to oppose the granting of any Federal Grants that are not directly related to some power specifically delegated to the Federal Government?

6. Yes or No __________
Do you fully understand that the creation of fiat money at a rate faster than economic growth always and inevitably leads to inflation and a devaluation of our currency; and that allowing this to happen is the same as imposing a hidden tax on Americans; and do you further commit to oppose any legislation that would allow this to occur; and do you further commit to work towards repeal of any legislation that has allowed this to occur?

7. Yes or No __________
The Federal Reserve can currently enter into agreements with foreign central banks and foreign governments, yet the GAO is prohibited from auditing or even seeing these agreements. In addition, the Treasury’s supplementary financing accounts that fund Fed facilities allow the Treasury to funnel money to Wall Street without GAO or Congressional oversight. Therefore, do you commit to support the elimination of restrictions on GAO audits of the Federal Reserve; and
to mandate ongoing annual audits of the Federal Reserve?

8. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that the Federal government should not own any portion of private enterprise; nor should it compete with private enterprise in any areas not specifically enumerated in the Constitution; and do you commit to repeal any legislation that has allowed government to own portions of private enterprises?

9. Yes or No __________
Do you fully understand that the Federal Government’s creation of “Government Sponsored Enterprises (“GSE”) and the 70 years of government crafted rules, regulations, and edicts concerning GSE’s have allowed the GSE’s to create Moral Hazard incentives for financial institutions to lower their underwriting standards and issue risky sub-prime loans, and by so doing these GSE’s allowed financial institutions to secure all of the profits on sub-prime loans while transferring all of the inherent risks onto the backs of American taxpayers?

10. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to support legislation to eliminate all GSEs; and will you commit to support legislation that would establish a date beyond which no further loan guarantees will be issued or honored by GSE’s; effectively allowing the “secondary mortgage” market to go fully private?

11. Yes or No __________
The financial damage of GSE’s was exacerbated by subsequent Federal Government edicts such as the “Community Reinvestment Act of 1977” (CRA) that have been used to create further Moral hazards for otherwise responsible financial institutions to issue mortgages to low-income credit risky individuals on homes they could not afford. Therefore, do you commit to vote for legislation that would repeal the CRA and any other legislation with similar design or purpose?

12. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that the free market should be allowed to operate unencumbered by US government intervention; including any and all import/export tariffs or quotas; and do you commit to oppose any legislation, authority, or edicts that would give any US or foreign citizens or corporations an advantage against competitors or potential competitors regardless of where that competitor’s business may be based?

13. Yes or No __________
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was designed to license and allocate the traffic on the air waves but in direct violation of the First Amendment the FCC has often used its licensing power to control or attempt to control the editorial content of programs. Do you commit to oppose any legislation that would allow the FCC to violate the 1st amendment rights of any
American individuals and/or businesses via any attempts to control or mandate the editorial content of radio and television programs?

14. Yes or No __________
The Constitution makes no specific provision for the federal government to hold any lands other than a federal reserve for the capital (the District of Columbia); therefore do you commit to support legislation requiring the Federal Government to transfer ownership of all Federal Lands back to the individual states that they are located within; with the exceptions of the District of Columbia, and existing military bases and military ranges?

15. Yes or No __________
The Constitution places restraints on Congress and the executive branch, so as not to wage war casually and without proper declaration, yet presidents from Truman to the current day have used the United Nations Security Council as a substitute for congressional authorization of the deployment of United States Armed Forces. Do you commit to a strict adherence to the rule of law and the Constitution in regards to any potential declaration of any war; and do you commit to using your constitutional legislative authority to hold the executive branch accountable to the same Constitutional standards?

16. Yes or No __________
In direct violation of national sovereignty, some factions have encouraged the U.S. Executive Branch to use the United Nations and it’s agencies to implement domestic policy in pursuit of international, environmental, economic, education, social welfare and human rights policy, both in derogation of the legislative prerogatives of Congress and of the 50 State legislatures, and further in derogation of the rights of the American people to constitute their own civil order.
Do you commit to oppose and vote against any legislation and/or oppose any efforts by the executive or judicial branches to recognize or implement any United Nations actions, decrees, or programs that would interfere with or supersede our sovereign national government and/or the sovereignty of any of our 50 state governments?

17. Yes or No __________
In direct violation of national sovereignty, some factions have advocated the implementation of a global tax (“The Tobin Tax”) on international currency transactions to be collected by the United Nations for funding of U.N. programs. Do you fully understand that the United Nations possesses no legitimate taxing authority; and do you commit to oppose and vote against any legislation and/or oppose any efforts by the executive branch to recognize or implement any taxation of American Citizens for any United Nations programs or purposes; and/or the
programs and purposes of any entity outside of the United States?

18. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to oppose any legislation or treaties which would do one or more of the following: Limit the sovereignty of the United States, Violate the rights of the People as spelled out in the Bill of Rights, and/or any treaties that would have the effect of creating laws which are applied to the people directly instead of to the government?

19. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to support legislation that would require the re-approval of any existing or new treaty or agreement entered into by the US every 10 years, starting from the date of signage?

20. Yes or No __________
The 2nd point in the “Code of Ethics for U.S. Government Service”, adopted on July 11th, 1958 by the U.S. House of Representatives with the Senate concurring; stipulates that any person in government service should “Uphold the Constitution, laws, and legal regulations of the United States and of all governments therein and never be a party to their evasion.” Therefore, in regards specifically to all existing Federal Immigration laws, do you commit to uphold the
Constitution, laws, and legal regulations of the United States and of all governments therein and never be a party to their evasion; including full funding and completion of all legislated border security measures?

Section 2: Congressional Transparency & Code of Ethics
The following 6 questions in this section are based on Principle #2:
The Independence Caucus adheres to the self-evident principle as expressed in the 3rd point in the “Code of Ethics for U.S. Government Service”, adopted on July 11th, 1958 by the U.S. House of Representatives with the Senate concurring; which stipulates that any person in government service should “Give a full day's labor for a full day's pay; giving to the performance of his duties his earnest effort and best thought.” Therefore; it is inexcusable for any Congressman to allow bills to be passed that have not been read and/or that have not had sufficient time for public review. Furthermore; it is inconsistent with this code for any Congressman to say that they voted in favor of bad legislation because there “were other good things contained in that legislation”.

21. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to oppose any and all bills, regardless of their merit, if those bills are not posted on a publicly accessible website for a minimum of 72 hours, while Congress is in session, before either House of Congress is asked to vote on it?

22. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that when any amendment to a bill is passed which adds to or takes away from the original text of that bill, the 72 hour period must begin anew before either House of Congress can vote on it?

23. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to support legislation that would require all members of Congress to certify that they have read all bills that they vote upon in their entirety?

24. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to oppose and vote against any proposed legislation that contains “both good and bad portions” and do you agree that it would be an indefensible position to vote for legislation that you knew incorporated unconstitutional government authority just because there were other portions of that legislation “that were good”?

25. Yes or No __________
It is inconceivable that any Congressman could read and understand this years 1,100 page “Cap & Trade” bill in 72 or hours or less. It is self evident and common sense that it would take at least 15 minutes to truly read, absorb, investigate, and understand each page of complex legislation. Therefore, do you commit to support legislation requiring that any proposed legislation that exceeds 288 pages in length would require that legislation to be posted on a publicly accessible website for a minimum of 15 additional minutes beyond the 72 hour minimum time for each additional page beyond the 72nd page, while Congress is in session, before either House of Congress votes on it? In other words, a 1,100 page bill such as this year’s “Cap & Trade” bill would require a minimum public posting of 275 hours for Congressional Review before it could be voted on.

26. Yes or No __________
It is at best irresponsible and at worst deceptive to produce legislation that is 1,100 pages long in the first place. Therefore, do you commit to support legislation requiring that any proposed legislation contain a ONE PAGE summary of every action and effect of that legislation; and that if the summary of actions and effects can not be contained on one single page that the proposed legislation must be declared too cumbersome and rejected?

Section 3: Federal Budget Process: (The Unified Fixed-Pie Budget)
The following 3 questions in this section are based on Principle #3:
The “Unified Fixed Pie Budget” (as proposed by the Independence Caucus) begins with and adheres to the self-evident principle that, except in times of National Emergency, it is irresponsible for Government at any level to increase their overall spending if a deficit was incurred the previous year.

27. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to vote against any budget that proposes to increase overall spending if a budget deficit was incurred the previous year?

28. Yes or No __________
Existing “5 year baseline budgeting” formulas contain an inherent bias towards budget expansion, result in misleading measurements of the budgetary effects of proposed legislation in future years; are often used to falsely claim that there will be a balanced budget in future years; and are often used to falsely claim that “spending cuts are being made” even though total dollars spent are actually being increased. Therefore, in order to reduce political posturing and accounting manipulations of the Federal Budget process; do you agree that our Federal Budget should begin each year with a “Zero-Baseline” that will allow Congress to revisit the validity and effectiveness of all budget items each and every year?

29. Yes or No __________
Accounting manipulations and “projections” are often used to claim that a budget is “balanced” or will result in surplus over a given period of time. However, the only accurate way to define if a surplus or deficit is occurring is to ask two simple questions; namely a) “How much revenue did you collect last year regardless of source?” and B) “How much money did you spend last year regardless of purpose?” and then subtract B from A. In order to reduce political posturing and accounting manipulations of the Federal Budget process; do you fully agree that this is the only acceptable way to determine if the previous years budget was “in deficit”?

The following 9 questions in this section are based on Principle #4:
The “Unified Fixed Pie Budget” (as proposed by the Independence Caucus) adheres to the self-evident principle that Congress must weigh the costs and merits of various spending proposals; and must prioritize federal spending within a pre-established finite spending limit.

30. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that the overall Federal Budget must be a “fixed pie” that has a preset spending limit in place, and that those spending limits should be established by a set formula which Congress must adhere to each year?

31. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that if the previous years’ budget resulted in a DEFICIT, then all federal budgets and programs must begin the following years appropriation process frozen at the exact level of the previous year’s outlay?

32. Yes or No __________
Because it would be irresponsible to increase spending in a deficit year, do you agree that if the previous years’ budget resulted in a DEFICIT, then overall spending at the federal level must not increase?
33. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that if the previous years’ budget resulted in a DEFICIT, then any new spending items or increase in existing spending items that a Congressman would want to propose must be proposed and voted on in tandem with 102% corresponding budget cuts of existing item(s) that are already in the budget?

34. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that if the previous year budget resulted in a SURPLUS, then the actual surplus dollars from the previous year can only be applied first to the national debt, or if and when the national debt has been retired the surplus can then only be set aside for future unfunded liabilities?

35. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that if the previous year budget resulted in a SURPLUS, then the new federal budget can increase by no more than 50% of the previous year’s surplus? (For example, if the surplus the previous year turns out to be $20 billion, Congress can increase the federal budget by $10 billion. This allows for natural growth but gives Congress a prudent and sensible cap on that growth, because we may not have as much growth or surplus the following year.)

36. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that if the previous year budget resulted in a SURPLUS, then after the new federal budget has increased by 50% of the previous year’s surplus, any further spending proposals must be proposed and voted on in tandem with 100% corresponding budget cuts of an existing item or items that are already in the budget?

37. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that if the previous year budget resulted in a SURPLUS, and if and when the national debt is retired and no unfunded liabilities remain (if ever), then the current tax rates must be decreased by a percentage equal to 50% of the previous year’s surplus? (For example; if the surplus equals 2% of the total revenues received, then taxes should be reduced by 1%).

38. Yes or No __________
Our Federal Budget includes a $28 million annual subsidy for mohair subsidies which were originally authorized to hold down the cost of military uniforms, but the military has not used mohair in uniforms since the Korean War. This is just one example of federal programs that continue perpetually with no annual review. With the federal government operating more than 240 education programs, 342 economic development programs and 71 business support programs, there is no question that many of these are wasteful and duplicative programs that
government has no business spending taxpayer dollars on. Therefore, do you commit to support legislation establishing a mandatory Sunset Clause in all spending legislation that provides for its expiration on a specified date unless it is deliberately renewed?

The following 5 questions in this section are based on Principle #5:
The “Unified Fixed Pie Budget” (as proposed by the Independence Caucus) adheres to the self-evident principle that the Government appropriation process should be both a transparent and honest process.

39. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that the annual Federal Budget must include and present a full picture of all future Federal obligations and promised benefits, with payments set aside each year in order to plan for any and all future obligations and promised benefits when they come due?

40. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that the annual Federal Budget must be contained on one and only one set of books; i.e. all items that are currently “off budget” such as Social Security and Medicare must be returned back to the “on budget” set of books?

41. Yes or No __________
The current budget process does not adequately account ahead of time for emergencies that inevitably arise, such as Hurricanes, Earthquakes, the war on terror, etc. and as a result an annual “un-funded liability” is created that Congress needs to keep addressing with additional spending after the budget has been finalized and approved. Therefore, do you agree that the annual budget must responsibly plan better for emergencies, and eliminate these recurring “un-funded liabilities”, by requiring the inclusion of a projected “Emergency Spending Reserve” into the current budget process that equals a minimum of 110% of the average annual amount of “emergency spending” over the previous 5 years?

42. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that all budget rules and processes established to cap spending and deficit limits should only be set aside in times of national emergency if approved by a 2/3 supermajority of both house of Congress?

43. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that if any budget rules or processes are set aside in time of emergency by a 2/3 supermajority of both house of Congress, that the “setting aside” expires at the end of the current budget year? The following 3 questions in this section are based on Principle 6:
The “Unified Fixed Pie Budget” (as proposed by the Independence Caucus) adheres to the self-evident principle that it is ineffective to have 3 separate budgets (Presidential, House, and Senate) that can only be reconciled “in Conference”; and that having 3 separate budgets is ultimately irresponsible because the entire “Conference Budget Reconciliation” process consistently results in unauthorized earmark items being added into the budget at the last minute with no vetting, no debate, and no cost-benefit analysis.

44. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that both houses of Congress and the President should work with and on only one budget (The“Unified Fixed Pie Budget”) for the entire annual budgeting process, and that we should no longer have separate Presidential, House and Senate Budgets?

45. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that all spending bills for the Unified Fixed-Pie Budget should originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other bills?

46. Yes or No __________
In 30 of the past 31 years, Congress has failed to complete the budget process on time. As a result, a “continuing resolution” is passed that allegedly “provides funding for existing federal programs at current or reduced levels” until the new budget is completed. However, in practice these “continuing resolutions” almost always end up with additional spending and earmark
items quietly added in by Congress with no vetting, no debate, and no cost-benefit analysis.
Therefore, in order to stop this misuse of the budgeting process and to hold Congress accountable for meeting their legislated budget deadlines; do you commit to work towards passing legislation to mandate that failure to complete and institute a new budget on time would automatically make the previous year’s budget the de facto budget for the current year with no additional spending items allowed?

Section 4: Earmark Process Reforms
The following 11 questions in this section are based on Principle #7:
The Independence Caucus adheres to the common sense principle that Congressional appropriations should only be earmarked if they meet the following 4 criteria:

A – The Earmark Request must go through an open vetting process;
B - The Earmark Request must be scrutinized by the committee system; within the required committee time frames and deadlines;
C - The Earmark Request must have an appropriate federal nexus; and may not be requested for projects that are the responsibility of states and/or local communities to fund.
D - The Earmark Request must only be for a specific purpose, and cannot be awarded to private
individuals or companies that have not gone through a transparent competitive bidding process.

47. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that all earmark requests must have an established federal nexus, e.g., interstate commerce, aid in compliance with federal mandates, or other projects for which a defensible purpose exists for requesting federal government funding under the U.S. Constitution?

48. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that all earmark requests must receive proper vetting and debate by the appropriate subcommittee, which should compare and prioritize the requests with other spending items?

49. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that all earmark requests must be submitted to the Appropriations Subcommittee of jurisdiction prior to the committee deadline, and that no earmark request should be approved that bypassed these important Subcommittee reviews?

50. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that all earmark requests must allow for the appropriate Executive Branch agency to have a reasonable period in which to review the project to ensure it is eligible to receive funds and meets goals established in law and official policies, BEFORE it is approved?

51. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that any Public entities that receive earmarks which require the hiring of private vendors may only award contracts to for-profit private entities through a transparent competitive bidding processes?

52. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that Congressional members should post all earmark requests prominently on an official government website (earmarks.gov) along with all information about all projects for which they submit requests, including the proposed recipient, the recipient’s address, the amount, and an explanation of the purpose and federal nexus of the request?

53. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that once (and if) the earmarked project is funded, Congressional members must submit into an official government website (earmarks.gov) a detailed finance plan showing how the federal monies will be spent and justifying the use of taxpayers’ resources?

54. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that once the earmarked project is completed, the earmark recipients must submit into an official government website (earmarks.gov) a “project summary” that shows an “actual vs. budgeted accounting” of how taxpayers’ resources were used?

55. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that Congressional members should certify that neither they nor their spouse, nor any of their staff members, nor their staff members’ families will benefit financially from approval of the earmark request?

56. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that all earmark requestors from public agencies must sign a financial certification stating that neither the requesting official nor anyone within the agency has any direct or foreseeable pecuniary interest in the project?

57. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that each appropriations bill should be available for public scrutiny on the day its subcommittee reports the bill, and that a list detailing each earmark request in the bill and the name of the Member who made the request should accompany the bill?

The following 3 questions in this section are based on Principle #8:
The Independence Caucus subscribes to the principle that the Congressional appropriations process must be free from the taint of abuse, stains of corruption, cronyism, or charges of “pay to play” type schemes, wherein members of Congress submit earmark requests in exchange for campaign support or other favored treatment. However, our research and the research of others has exposed that far too many members of Congress have abused earmarks to reward their special interest campaign donors; and as a result the entire process must be reformed.

58. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to support legislation that would prohibit the awarding of earmarks in exchange for campaign contributions?

59. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to support legislation that would require recipients of earmarked funding to disclose the amount of money that they spent on registered lobbyists to obtain the earmark and to identify their lobbyists?

60. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to support legislation that would require disclosure of fundraisers hosted, co-hosted, or otherwise sponsored by earmark beneficiaries and their lobbyists and require disclosure of their contributions for other events involving legislative and executive branch officials?

Section 5: Federal Taxation Policy
The following 12 questions in this section are based on Principle 9:
The Independence Caucus subscribes to the self-evident principle that the only legitimate purpose of our national taxation policy is the original intent of raising necessary revenues to fund constitutionally enumerated government services. However, it is the contention of the Independence Caucus that the Federal Government has fundamentally changed the original intent and purpose of our national tax policies to be little more than an endless writing and re-writing of favorable tax treatment of one arbitrary group over another. Our nation’s tax policies must be returned to their original purpose.

61. Yes or No __________
Do you fully understand that the 17,000 plus pages of the current U.S. Tax Code consist of endless “loopholes” that are manipulated by lobbyists and lawyers for the benefit of their clients and by other special interests; and that this is why there are more lobbyists registered in Washington, D.C. for “taxes” than for any other issue, and that for this reason we must ensure that our tax system treats all individuals and groups exactly equally?

62. Yes or No __________
Under the current tax system, the annual writing of “new tax code” places Congress in the role of picking economic winners and losers; i.e. “This group gets a tax break, but this group does not”. Do you commit to oppose and vote against any tax legislation that treats one or more group of taxpayers differently than other groups of tax payers?

63. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that it is far wiser and more equitable to stop taxing production, and to tax ONLY consumption instead?

64. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to support and work for the passage of a National Sales Tax (“NST”) with no exemptions or exclusions, plus an attached “pre-bate” feature; which is the only tax system that eliminates favorable tax treatment of one group over another; while simultaneously creating numerous incentives and benefits for the growth of the national economy?

65. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to oppose and vote against any new tax legislation that taxes or continues to tax production?

66. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to oppose and vote against any new tax legislation that does not subject all Americans to the same consumption tax rate with no exceptions and no exclusions?

67. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to oppose and vote against any new tax legislation that does not have a “pre-bate” feature, as currently included and written in the proposed ‘Fair Tax” legislation in the 111th Congress, and as explained and outlined in the 7th Article of the Independence Caucus?

68. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that when money is being transferred out of the country for any reason, it should correctly be considered to be “consumed”; and that money should be taxed (at the current NST rate) as it leaves the country?

69. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that under a National Sales tax; businesses must be protected against Un-Funded Mandates by providing those business retailers with a percentage of the revenues collected and remitted to the federal government to compensate them for administration costs?

70. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that because individual states have the most experience administering sales taxes and because of the principles of federalism, that the 50 individual states would bear the primary responsibility for administering the national sales tax; and that those states must be protected against Un-Funded Mandates by providing those states with a percentage of the revenues collected and remitted to the federal government to compensate them for administration costs?

71. Yes or No __________
Do you agree that a properly implemented NST plan would avoid “cascading” to ensure the same effective tax rate across all types of property and services (horizontal equality), irrespective of the number of companies or stages of production that were necessary to bring the good or service to market (vertical equality); and that to protect against "cascading" effects—imposing multiple levels of taxation on the same product--the sales tax must be exempt from tax inputs at each intermediate stage of production and should only be calculated and levied at the end point at which it is consumed?

72. Yes or No __________
To avoid an incentive to consume through the medium of “tax free” government; and to avoid an incentive to consume through the medium of government versus the private sector, do you agree that under a properly implemented NST that government output and purchases would NOT be exempted from the sales tax, and that a sales tax should also be imposed on government purchases from the private sector?

Section 6: The Rule of Law and The Right to Contract
The following 5 questions in this section are based on Principle 10:
The Independence Caucus subscribes to the self-evident principle that the only legitimate purpose of our national taxation policy is the original intent of raising necessary revenues to fund constitutionally enumerated

73. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to support and follow the Rule of Law; specifically:

A. Laws must be applied equally to all, including all government officials.

B. No “Ex Post facto” Laws - Laws must be prospective in nature so that the effect of the law may only take place after the law has been passed. (For example, the court cannot convict a person of a crime committed before a criminal statute prohibiting the conduct was passed)

C. No “Ex Post Facto” penalties – The penalty for violating a law must be prospective in nature so that the effect of the penalties may only take place after the law has been passed. (For example, the penalty for entering the country illegally cannot be reduced or changed for those who illegally entered the country before the change in penalty was passed.)

D. Executive orders and policies written by Government agencies should not have the force of law - Citizens should not answer to arbitrary and discretionary edicts and decisions of governmental officials; instead, they should answer only to a well-defined, previously established laws that are passed ONLY by Congress.

74. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to uphold the people's right to enter into a contract for employment between themselves and the employer, as well as their right to join or form an union if they deem it necessary or desirable?

75. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to uphold the people’s right to own property; and to oppose any efforts by government to exercise eminent domain and take such property without just compensation?

76. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to allow eminent domain only for the use of government for the common good, and not for transfer to a third party under any circumstances?

77. Yes or No __________
Do you commit to support the right of two parties to enter into a contract and that the government has no power to change the terms of the contract, except the judicial branch and then only to settle dispute about those terms?

Section 7: Personal Character and Standards
The following 3 questions in this section are based on Principle 10:
The Independence Caucus subscribes to the self-evident principle that “Character matters”; that character is the expression of the personality of every individual; and that an individual’s character reveals itself in their conduct. Further, the Independence Caucus subscribes to the self evident principle that our elected officials should model and advance the following 12 principles in their daily lives and actions:

• Honesty Reverence Hope Thrift Humility Charity
• Sincerity Moderation Hard work Courage Personal responsibility Friendship

Further, the Independence Caucus subscribes to the self evident principle that people are not perfect, that they can mistakes, that they can learn from their mistakes, they can change their ways, and forsake actions that are not principled or virtuous; and that before re-gaining public trust a reasonable amount of time must pass for any person who has made un-principled choices in their past to demonstrate that they have learned and have changed. Further, the Independence Caucus subscribes to the self evident principle that a passage of 10 years is a
sufficient period of time to demonstrate a true change of heart and character.

78. Yes or No __________
Do you certify to your constituents and/or intended constituents that you have not committed a felony crime, or have committed any act which would raise a reasonable question as to your individual moral character; including breaking marital vows or any other contractual obligations or oaths of office, within the past 10 years

79. Yes or No ________
Do you pledge to your constituents and/or intended constituents that you will not commit a felony crime, or commit any act which would raise a reasonable question as to your individual moral character; including breaking marital vows and any other contractual obligations or oaths of office, from this point forward?

80. Yes or No ________
Do you pledge to your constituents and/or intended constituents that if you are elected and do commit a felony crime, or commit any act which would raise a reasonable question as to your individual moral character; including breaking marital vows and any other contractual obligations or oaths of office, from this point forward, that you would resign immediately from your elected position?

Principles of the Indpendence Caucus

2009-08-20T21:38:00.000-07:00

The following are the principles that the candidate vetting questions are based on:

Proper Role of Government and National Sovereignty
Principle 1: The Independence Caucus adheres to the self-evident principle that all elected public officials, at both the state and federal levels, must take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States; and that this oath mandates that all public officials willingly fulfill the constitutionally enumerated responsibilities and powers of their elected office; and that this oath also mandates that all public officials refrain from taking any actions or passing any legislation that has not been constitutionally empowered to their elected office.

Congressional Transparency & Code of Ethics
Principle 2: The Independence Caucus adheres to the self-evident principle as expressed in the 3rd point in the “Code of Ethics for U.S. Government Service”, adopted on July 11th, 1958 by the U.S. House of Representatives with the Senate concurring; which stipulates that any person in government service should “Give a full day's labor for a full day's pay; giving to the performance of his duties his earnest effort and best thought.”It is inconsistent with this Code for any Congressman to allow bills to be passed that have not been read and/or that have not had sufficient time for public review.Furthermore, it is inconsistent with this code for any Congressman to say that they voted in favor of bad legislation because there “were other good things contained in that legislation”.

Federal Budget Process: (The Unified Fixed-Pie Budget)
Principle 3: The “Unified Fixed Pie Budget” (as proposed by the Independence Caucus) begins with and adheres to the self-evident principle that, except in times of National Emergency, it is irresponsible for Government at any level to increase their overall spending if a deficit was incurred the previous year.

Principle 4: The “Unified Fixed Pie Budget” (as proposed by the Independence Caucus) adheres to the self-evident principle that Congress must weigh the costs and merits of various spending proposals; and must prioritize federal spending within a pre-established finite spending limit.

Principle 5: The “Unified Fixed Pie Budget” (as proposed by the Independence Caucus) adheres to the self-evident principle that the Government appropriation process should be both a transparent and honest process.

Principle 6: The “Unified Fixed Pie Budget” (as proposed by the Independence Caucus) adheres to the self-evident principle that it is ineffective to have 3 separate budgets (Presidential, House, and Senate) that can only be reconciled “in Conference”; and that having 3 separate budgets is ultimately irresponsible because the entire “Conference Budget Reconciliation” process consistently results in unauthorized earmark items being added into the budget at the last minute with no vetting, no debate, and no cost-benefit analysis.Earmark Process Reforms

Principle 7: The Independence Caucus adheres to the common sense principle that Congressional appropriations should only be earmarked if they meet the following 4 criteria:1 – The Earmark Request must go through an open vetting process;2 - The Earmark Request must be scrutinized by the committee system; within the required committee time frames and deadlines;3 - The Earmark Request must have an appropriate federal nexus; and may not be requested for projects that are the responsibility of states and/or local communities to fund.4 - The Earmark Request must only be for a specific purpose, and cannot be awarded to private individuals or companies that have not gone through a transparent competitive bidding process.

Principle 8: The Independence Caucus subscribes to the principle that the Congressional appropriations process must be free from the taint of abuse, stains of corruption, cronyism, or charges of “pay to play” type schemes, wherein members of Congress submit earmark requests in exchange for campaign support or other favored treatment.However, our research and the research of others has exposed that far too many members of Congress have abused earmarks to reward their special interest campaign donors; and as a result the entire process must be reformed.

Federal Taxation Policy
Principle 9: The Independence Caucus subscribes to the self-evident principle that the only legitimate purpose of our national taxation policy is the original intent of raising necessary revenues to fund constitutionally enumerated government services.However, it is the contention of the Independence Caucus that the Federal Government has fundamentally changed the original intent and purpose of our national tax policies to be little more than an endless writing and re-writing of favorable tax treatment of one arbitrary group over another.Our nation’s tax policies must be returned to their original purpose.