Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a lawyer but admittedly know nothing about election law or the Hatch Act except what I've just read above. But, seems to me that the Democratic *endorsement* is not the same as running as a Dem. The pledge doesn't require her to run as a Dem, and the election itself is still non-partisan. No?

1) An affirmation that the candidate:
a) is legally eligible to run for Arlington County School Board;
b) is a Democrat;
c) is a resident of and registered to vote in Arlington County, Virginia; d) does not intend to run against – or support, endorse or assist any
candidate who is opposed to – a Democratic nominee or endorsee in
the general election;
e) is not a member of any other political party;
f) has not participated and will not participate in the nomination or
endorsement process of any other political party for the general
election; and
g) has read, understood and agrees to abide by these Rules.
[b]Reads pretty "I'm a democrat" to me.

I forgot about c. By seeking their endorsement you’re basically saying you’ll quit if you don’t get it. Nice

So you're effectively declaring that you are not running as an independent. By signing that, you are running as a Democrat endorsed candidate or not at all. How is that not partisan?

Of course it is, but lawyers.

I sympathize with Walker. The AC/DC could choose to steer clear of the school board races and let people like her run without engaging in a partisan beauty contest that clearly runs afoul of the Hatch Act by any normal estimation. Why don’t they?

Because if they did not seek to control the ostensibly non partisan school board, it could serve as a platform for independents who would upset their agenda, our segregated housing policies in particular, which absolutely dominate local politics like no other issue. A popular independent candidate who questioned those policies impact on schools is their worst nightmare.

on that note- recognize that Symone was 'Coalition of Arlingtonians for Responsible Development (CARD) Steering Committee on Schools (2017-2018)'

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a lawyer but admittedly know nothing about election law or the Hatch Act except what I've just read above. But, seems to me that the Democratic *endorsement* is not the same as running as a Dem. The pledge doesn't require her to run as a Dem, and the election itself is still non-partisan. No?

1) An affirmation that the candidate:
a) is legally eligible to run for Arlington County School Board;
b) is a Democrat;
c) is a resident of and registered to vote in Arlington County, Virginia; d) does not intend to run against – or support, endorse or assist any
candidate who is opposed to – a Democratic nominee or endorsee in
the general election;
e) is not a member of any other political party;
f) has not participated and will not participate in the nomination or
endorsement process of any other political party for the general
election; and
g) has read, understood and agrees to abide by these Rules.
Reads pretty "I'm a democrat" to me.

I forgot about c. By seeking their endorsement you’re basically saying you’ll quit if you don’t get it. Nice

So you're effectively declaring that you are not running as an independent. By signing that, you are running as a Democrat endorsed candidate or not at all. How is that not partisan?

Of course it is, but lawyers.

[b]I sympathize with Walker. The AC/DC could choose to steer clear of the school board races and let people like her run without engaging in a partisan beauty contest that clearly runs afoul of the Hatch Act by any normal estimation. Why don’t they?

Because if they did not seek to control the ostensibly non partisan school board, it could serve as a platform for independents who would upset their agenda, our segregated housing policies in particular, which absolutely dominate local politics like no other issue. A popular independent candidate who questioned those policies impact on schools is their worst nightmare.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a lawyer but admittedly know nothing about election law or the Hatch Act except what I've just read above. But, seems to me that the Democratic *endorsement* is not the same as running as a Dem. The pledge doesn't require her to run as a Dem, and the election itself is still non-partisan. No?

1) An affirmation that the candidate:
a) is legally eligible to run for Arlington County School Board;
b) is a Democrat;
c) is a resident of and registered to vote in Arlington County, Virginia; d) does not intend to run against – or support, endorse or assist any
candidate who is opposed to – a Democratic nominee or endorsee in
the general election;
e) is not a member of any other political party;
f) has not participated and will not participate in the nomination or
endorsement process of any other political party for the general
election; and
g) has read, understood and agrees to abide by these Rules.
[b]Reads pretty "I'm a democrat" to me.

I forgot about c. By seeking their endorsement you’re basically saying you’ll quit if you don’t get it. Nice

So you're effectively declaring that you are not running as an independent. By signing that, you are running as a Democrat endorsed candidate or not at all. How is that not partisan?

Of course it is, but lawyers.

I sympathize with Walker. The AC/DC could choose to steer clear of the school board races and let people like her run without engaging in a partisan beauty contest that clearly runs afoul of the Hatch Act by any normal estimation. Why don’t they?

Because if they did not seek to control the ostensibly non partisan school board, it could serve as a platform for independents who would upset their agenda, our segregated housing policies in particular, which absolutely dominate local politics like no other issue. A popular independent candidate who questioned those policies impact on schools is their worst nightmare.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a lawyer but admittedly know nothing about election law or the Hatch Act except what I've just read above. But, seems to me that the Democratic *endorsement* is not the same as running as a Dem. The pledge doesn't require her to run as a Dem, and the election itself is still non-partisan. No?

1) An affirmation that the candidate:
a) is legally eligible to run for Arlington County School Board;
b) is a Democrat;
c) is a resident of and registered to vote in Arlington County, Virginia; d) does not intend to run against – or support, endorse or assist any
candidate who is opposed to – a Democratic nominee or endorsee in
the general election;
e) is not a member of any other political party;
f) has not participated and will not participate in the nomination or
endorsement process of any other political party for the general
election; and
g) has read, understood and agrees to abide by these Rules.
[b]Reads pretty "I'm a democrat" to me.

I forgot about c. By seeking their endorsement you’re basically saying you’ll quit if you don’t get it. Nice

So you're effectively declaring that you are not running as an independent. By signing that, you are running as a Democrat endorsed candidate or not at all. How is that not partisan?

Of course it is, but lawyers.

I sympathize with Walker. The AC/DC could choose to steer clear of the school board races and let people like her run without engaging in a partisan beauty contest that clearly runs afoul of the Hatch Act by any normal estimation. Why don’t they?

Because if they did not seek to control the ostensibly non partisan school board, it could serve as a platform for independents who would upset their agenda, our segregated housing policies in particular, which absolutely dominate local politics like no other issue. A popular independent candidate who questioned those policies impact on schools is their worst nightmare.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a lawyer but admittedly know nothing about election law or the Hatch Act except what I've just read above. But, seems to me that the Democratic *endorsement* is not the same as running as a Dem. The pledge doesn't require her to run as a Dem, and the election itself is still non-partisan. No?

1) An affirmation that the candidate:
a) is legally eligible to run for Arlington County School Board;
b) is a Democrat;
c) is a resident of and registered to vote in Arlington County, Virginia; d) does not intend to run against – or support, endorse or assist any
candidate who is opposed to – a Democratic nominee or endorsee in
the general election;
e) is not a member of any other political party;
f) has not participated and will not participate in the nomination or
endorsement process of any other political party for the general
election; and
g) has read, understood and agrees to abide by these Rules.
[b]Reads pretty "I'm a democrat" to me.

I forgot about c. By seeking their endorsement you’re basically saying you’ll quit if you don’t get it. Nice

So you're effectively declaring that you are not running as an independent. By signing that, you are running as a Democrat endorsed candidate or not at all. How is that not partisan?

Of course it is, but lawyers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a lawyer but admittedly know nothing about election law or the Hatch Act except what I've just read above. But, seems to me that the Democratic *endorsement* is not the same as running as a Dem. The pledge doesn't require her to run as a Dem, and the election itself is still non-partisan. No?

1) An affirmation that the candidate:
a) is legally eligible to run for Arlington County School Board;
b) is a Democrat;
c) is a resident of and registered to vote in Arlington County, Virginia; d) does not intend to run against – or support, endorse or assist any
candidate who is opposed to – a Democratic nominee or endorsee in
the general election;
e) is not a member of any other political party;
f) has not participated and will not participate in the nomination or
endorsement process of any other political party for the general
election; and
g) has read, understood and agrees to abide by these Rules.
[b]Reads pretty "I'm a democrat" to me.

I forgot about c. By seeking their endorsement you’re basically saying you’ll quit if you don’t get it. Nice

So you're effectively declaring that you are not running as an independent. By signing that, you are running as a Democrat endorsed candidate or not at all. How is that not partisan?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a lawyer but admittedly know nothing about election law or the Hatch Act except what I've just read above. But, seems to me that the Democratic *endorsement* is not the same as running as a Dem. The pledge doesn't require her to run as a Dem, and the election itself is still non-partisan. No?

1) An affirmation that the candidate:
a) is legally eligible to run for Arlington County School Board;
b) is a Democrat;
c) is a resident of and registered to vote in Arlington County, Virginia; d) does not intend to run against – or support, endorse or assist any
candidate who is opposed to – a Democratic nominee or endorsee in
the general election;
e) is not a member of any other political party;
f) has not participated and will not participate in the nomination or
endorsement process of any other political party for the general
election; and
g) has read, understood and agrees to abide by these Rules.
[b]Reads pretty "I'm a democrat" to me.

I forgot about c. By seeking their endorsement you’re basically saying you’ll quit if you don’t get it. Nice

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a lawyer but admittedly know nothing about election law or the Hatch Act except what I've just read above. But, seems to me that the Democratic *endorsement* is not the same as running as a Dem. The pledge doesn't require her to run as a Dem, and the election itself is still non-partisan. No?

1) An affirmation that the candidate:
a) is legally eligible to run for Arlington County School Board;
b) is a Democrat;
c) is a resident of and registered to vote in Arlington County, Virginia; d) does not intend to run against – or support, endorse or assist any
candidate who is opposed to – a Democratic nominee or endorsee in
the general election;
e) is not a member of any other political party;
f) has not participated and will not participate in the nomination or
endorsement process of any other political party for the general
election; and
g) has read, understood and agrees to abide by these Rules.
[b]Reads pretty "I'm a democrat" to me.

Anonymous wrote:Simply declaring that you are a Democrat (which is what seeking the endorsement requires) does not violate the Hatch Act, I don't think. I can work for the Federal government and be an active member of the Democratic or Republican party.

While I don't like the endorsement process for these non-partisan elections, the part which I think is indefensible is the requirement that if you seek the endorsement but don't get it, you agree in advance not to run in the general election. This effectively turns the endorsement process into a nomination process, which is entirely antithetical to the idea behind the non-partisan nature of the election.

Anonymous wrote:I'm a lawyer but admittedly know nothing about election law or the Hatch Act except what I've just read above. But, seems to me that the Democratic *endorsement* is not the same as running as a Dem. The pledge doesn't require her to run as a Dem, and the election itself is still non-partisan. No?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a lawyer but admittedly know nothing about election law or the Hatch Act except what I've just read above. But, seems to me that the Democratic *endorsement* is not the same as running as a Dem. The pledge doesn't require her to run as a Dem, and the election itself is still non-partisan. No?

Did you read the part where seeking the ac dc endorsement requires the candidate to declare Democratic Party affiliation. She’s already declared herself a democrat by filing. Seems like she is in violation of the hatch act, unless somehow it’s permissible to run as a democrat for the purposes of the caucus and an independent (as everyone technically does) in the general. It’s a violation of the spirit of the law, but then again, so is the ac dc involvement in a non partisan election a violation of the ideal of keeping partisan politics out of at least one corner of our democracy.

I did, but that's the same pledge anyone voting in an ACDC school board caucus has to fill out. I don't believe feds are prohibited from voting in those caucuses, right? It's not the same thing as declaring yourself as a candidate of that party. Close, I grant you, but distinguishable.

The advisory opinion a PP just cited to says: "f you solicited or advertised the endorsement of the Democratic Party or other partisan political party, or used the resources of XDC or other partisan political party to further your campaign, these actions could transform your independent candidacy into a partisan one" (emphasis mine). This more recent opinion reiterates that certain activity could make non-partisan partisan: https://osc.gov/Documents/Hatch%20Act/Advisory%20Opinions/Federal/Nonpartisan%20Election%20Becoming%20Partisan%20and%20Related%20Issues.pdf. So, in theory, there's wiggle room. But this same 2009 letter clearly answers "no" to the question of receiving assistance from a partisan group. Given the ACDC's recent history of including SB candidates on "blue wave" signs and the like, I would think she definitely has a problem here.

Completely agree with you that ACDC involvement violates the spirit of keeping partisan politics out of what really should be non-partisan affairs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a lawyer but admittedly know nothing about election law or the Hatch Act except what I've just read above. But, seems to me that the Democratic *endorsement* is not the same as running as a Dem. The pledge doesn't require her to run as a Dem, and the election itself is still non-partisan. No?

Did you read the part where seeking the ac dc endorsement requires the candidate to declare Democratic Party affiliation. She’s already declared herself a democrat by filing. Seems like she is in violation of the hatch act, unless somehow it’s permissible to run as a democrat for the purposes of the caucus and an independent (as everyone technically does) in the general. It’s a violation of the spirit of the law, but then again, so is the ac dc involvement in a non partisan election a violation of the ideal of keeping partisan politics out of at least one corner of our democracy.