12 responses to “Elections Board members doing good job in difficult times”

1. 

   Defenestration

   August 15, 2022

   Ben Franklin never said any such thing. Nor would he, since he as well as all the other Framers were acutely aware that they created a Union, not a Republic.

   Let’s set that aside, because there’s another issue just as important: Government ought to be open, transparent, and at all times subject to public scrutiny. The conduct of those who serve in government should be respectful of the citizenry, and not imperious as has been reported about this Board.

   That we have people sitting in positions of authority who believe it appropriate to threaten the citizens they serve with criminal charges is inexcusable. That they do it in response to legitimate concerns over corruption in elections tends to indict the character of the Board, not the citizens who petition it.

   Speaking of criminal – had any actual threats of violence been made, then arrests would have followed. That nobody has been arrested is sufficient evidence to show that no actual threat of violence existed. It has become a fashionable tactic for politicians to make these claims in order to distract the public from real issues of concern. People should not fall for such chicken little tactics.

   Log in to Reply
   1. 

      Lever Up

      August 15, 2022

      looks like he did say it according to the library of congress.

      Log in to Reply
      1. 

         Defenestration

         August 16, 2022

         The Library of Congress makes no such claim. The only historical account of this comes from the notes of James McHenry, a Maryland delegate to the Constitutional Convention. He recounts the event twice in his writings, but the two accounts differ from each other in key details including time and place. Also, the person to whom Franklin is alleged to have said this – a Mrs. Powell of Philadelphia – wrote 30 years later that this never happened to her.

         Again, Franklin in particular would never have claimed the United States to be a Republic. He was as close to being an anti-Federalist as you could be without actually being an anti-Federalist. And even the Federalists would have scoffed at the strong central government necessary to be considered a Republic.

         Log in to Reply
      2. 

         Doon

         August 17, 2022

         For clarification, “Mrs. Powel” was Elizabeth Powel, wife of the Philadelphia Mayor (Samuel Powel). She is so referenced in McHenry’s daily journal (on Sept. 18, 1787) on the quoted exchange. The second written account was again by McHenry, 15 years later in a political leaning newspaper. Here he extended the quoted exchange to include a response to the second question of “And, why not keep it.”

         Yes, Powel couldn’t recall this exact conversation some 27 years later she wrote, but she did not deny that she had this type of exchange with Mr. Franklin, since her entertainment parties (French Salon style) for the delegates and guests did include discussions on political and social issues, even in front of the ladies.

         As for Franklin who was more of a Federalist, he wrote to a friend (F. Grand) in France that same year in 1787 suggesting that if the Constitution does succeed, they may want to pass something similar there, a “Federal Union and One Grand Republick” of their own.

         Log in to Reply
         1. 

            Defenestration

            August 17, 2022

            Good to see someone who knows some history.

            I neglected to mention Federalist #10, where Hamilton (writing as Publius) puts fine point on the distinction between a Republic and the Union, saying “In the extent and proper structure of the Union, therefore, we behold a republican remedy for the diseases most incident to republican government.”

            Log in to Reply
            1. 

               Doon

               August 17, 2022

               Most scholars agree that it was probably Madison that authored #10. Publius being the pseudo for Hamilton, Madison, & Jay. The main point in #10 was a strong united republic would be more effective than individual states at controlling narrow interests or … “factions” as Madison liked to call them. Btw, Franklin at this juncture although present on some occasions, had checked out mentally (age) but was in favor of them and for ratification.

   2. 

      Doug Tucker

      August 15, 2022

      It has also “become a fashionable tactic” to interrupt public proceedings with loud bursts of accusatory statements civilly inappropriate to those same proceedings.

      Log in to Reply
      1. 

         Defenestration

         August 16, 2022

         I know Fox News or CNN or whichever media outlet you prefer would have you to believe that. It sells commercials. In reality, 99% of public meetings are absolute snooze-fests. Try attending them in person to see for yourself.

         As for the other 1%… an actual quote from President Obama is that “…democracy is messy”.

         Log in to Reply
         1. 

            Spyglass

            August 16, 2022

            Good thing we aren’t a Democracy…Obama could use some education on that matter.

            Log in to Reply
            1. 

               Stranger Than Fiction

               August 16, 2022

               I think of the United States as a democratically elected republic. That is more so since 1913 when senators became popularly elected instead of appointed by legislators. The electoral college has given us five presidents who did not win the popular vote, and none of them were stellar. And of course, the appointment and confirmation process of one entire branch of government is anything but democratic. So, yes, we are not a pure democracy, but we have many democratic characteristics.

            2. 

               Defenestration

               August 17, 2022

               This is a problem of understanding for many (most actually). The word democracy as we use it today actually comes from two separate words who were combined due to like spelling. One was based on “demo kratia”, which translates as “people rule”, or more correctly “from the authority of the people”. The other democracy was “demos kratos”, translating to “peoples power”, or more correctly “forceful acts of a mob”. Both definitions were available to the Founders (who would have studied latin and greek), but they generally used “democracy” derisively indicating a preference for the latter definition. Fisher Ames in his letter to the Massachusetts ratifying convention called democracy “a volcano which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction.” The former definition of the word didn’t honestly become popular until the early 20th century when European Monarchs proved unable to restrain the capacity for industrial destruction their wars wrought on the continent, and it was generally agreed by the Anglo-Franco alliance that democratic governance should be the new order of Europe. (That version of democracy was actually the dominant meaning of the word for the French; their version derived from the middle french demokratia which was directly from Koine greek.)

               We have democratic aspects to our government as Stranger points out. But that’s entirely because as the Catholic Concord of 1433 established, governments only exist as long as the people tolerate them. Or as the Declaration of Independence says it, governments “[derive] their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

2. 

   ConcernedCas

   August 15, 2022

   Thank you for the counterpoint to the previous letter about the Election Board. My dealings with the Election Board have been just how you stated it to be. They have been professional and polite. Thank you for your observation

   Log in to Reply