I have often heard the story of the young boy who was flying a kite with his dad. Together they watched as their kite flew higher and higher. Eventually, the kite ran out of string and the boy …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
The Powell Tribune has expanded its online content. To continue reading, you will need to either log in to your subscriber account, or purchase a subscription.
If you are a current print subscriber, you can set up a free web account by clicking here.
If you already have a web account, but need to reset it, you can do so by clicking here.
If you would like to purchase a subscription click here.
Please log in to continue |
|
I have often heard the story of the young boy who was flying a kite with his dad. Together they watched as their kite flew higher and higher. Eventually, the kite ran out of string and the boy encouraged his father to let the string go so that the kite could continue to rise. The dad explained that if he let go the kite would fall.
The boy persisted and eventually the dad agreed to let the string go. Immediately, the kite began to fly erratically, and it soon fell to the ground. The dad then explained to his son that although the string appeared to keep the kite from going higher, it was in fact that same string that kept the kite anchored and in the air.
Like the string that allows the kite to fly by providing an anchor and direction, so too does the rule of law keep society aloft.
Unfortunately, I have seen instances when groups have tried to evade the rule of law in order to fly without restrictions. One notable example is the recent elections of officers for the Park County GOP.
On March 13, the Park County GOP came together for the election of its executive committee. This was done even though members of the executive committee knew there hadn’t been proper statutory notice of 10 days under W.S. 22-4-105. Before the vote started, a point of order was brought that since there had not been proper notice, the election could not take place. A motion to suspend the bylaws requiring notice was made, but the motion was ruled out of order because state statute requires the notice, and statutes cannot be suspended. The election was rescheduled for March 31.
On March 31, the party reconvened to elect officers (this time with proper statutory notice). While adopting rules for voting, a motion was made to follow the state statute which prohibits individuals from voting if they are not precinct committee people. The statutes regarding voting in these elections has been interpreted by the Wyoming Supreme Court to specifically restrict unelected executive committee members from voting. However, members of the executive committee presented a decision by the Wyoming GOP Dispute Resolution Committee claiming that statutes cannot control political parties. A motion was made to exclude the unauthorized people from voting because the party could not suspend state statute (much like the ruling made on March 13), but the motion was killed by the executive committee without a vote.
Why does this matter?
In Wyoming, political parties are specifically recognized by statute. As such, these bodies have certain privileges and rules that other social groups do not have. Two prime examples of the privileges of political parties are the ability to nominate candidates to fill vacant elected offices (like a County Assessor, Superintendent of Public Education, State Treasurer, U.S. Senator, etc.) and the use of public ballots to select their precinct representatives. To balance these privileges, political parties are required to follow basic statutory requirements.
Sadly, our political parties appear to fight against statutory control arguing that they are merely a social club like the local Elks Lodge. However, political parties are uninterested in relinquishing the same statutory powers which set them apart from groups like the Elks.
However, if political parties are in fact no different from other local social clubs, it would be surprising if statutes were not amended to remove the constraints AND privileges political parties currently have. Followed to its logical end, removing political parties from our statutes would prohibit them from selecting nominees when filling vacant elected offices resulting in a different process to fill vacancies like special elections, primary elections would likely become more open (like California’s “jungle primaries”), and parties would not be allowed to use public ballots for selecting their precinct representatives.
Perhaps some have the goal to remove parties from politics (an idea that George Washington likely would have supported); however, for those who do not want to see the systematic dismantling of political parties in Wyoming, I suggest we make one thing a priority in the administration of our parties — follow the law!
Just as a kite cannot have its string cut and refuse to obey the laws of physics, society cannot function to its fullest potential without laws. As for political parties, we cannot become so accustomed to our lofty privileges that we are willing to cut the statutory strings that attach us to society and not expect any consequences.