Commentary: An open letter to the Nevada Supreme Court
For the Nevada Appeal
Are “the people’s” Constitutional rights to elect our representatives being ignored by the secretary of state, the Nevada Legislature and the courts? The U.S. Constitution clearly states that the “people,” not a political committee, have the authority to elect members to the House of Representatives. The Nevada Revised Statutes (293.165) states the political parties may fill vacancies if it is for a nomination, not an election, meaning “the people” have no voice in selecting a candidate. No primary, only the respective party’s State Central Committee to hand pick a candidate.
Just for your information, each political party consists of 1 percent or less of registered voters. Unless you participated in your party’s precinct meetings and county conventions, you cannot be a member of your party’s state central committee; therefore you had no say in selecting the candidate of your choice.
The Credentials Report last Saturday for the Republican State Central Committee meeting showed that out of the 348 members only 199 were present with 124 proxies for a total of 323 votes. There were 25 other members missing in action.
In what other election in this nation’s history has “proxies” been used to elect a representative to public office? Historically, and for a good reason, eliminating candidates in a primary election is a sound and honest method of electing our representatives. The law as written by not allowing a primary, usurps your constitutional rights to participate in choosing your representatives. It bestows that power upon your party’s state central committee.
There are rumblings about the time constraints and the necessity to fill the CD2 vacancy. If so, why move Heller only to create the vacancy? The decision makers knew it would require a special election. The law for filling a vacancy in the House of Representatives is convoluted and needs fixing. It’s obvious that giving the power to the party central committees is out of order. It does not represent the people’s choice.
I am not in favor of judges legislating from the bench, but in this case the law is so dismissive of the “people’s rights” it may be necessary. To protect the rights of the “people” of Nevada, especially those in CD2, the court must fight for the “rights of the People” and direct the secretary of state to schedule a primary election to select the candidates for CD2. The voters in CD2 need to stand up and demand that our rights to elect our representatives be restored to conform to the Constitution of the United States.