electioneering
Well, here's something interesting...
Submitted by Frank Eaton on Fri, 05/02/2008 - 2:30pm.ยง 163-165.2. Sample ballots.
(b) Document Resembling an Official Ballot to Contain
Disclaimer. - No person other than a board of elections shall
produce or disseminate a document substantially resembling an
official ballot unless the document contains on its face a
prominent statement that the document was not produced by a board
of elections and is not an official ballot.
(2001-460, s. 3, effective January 1, 2002)
He Who Can Do No Wrong
Submitted by James on Tue, 10/23/2007 - 7:33pm.
Mr. Art Pope, admired around these parts as the Puppetmaster (parody, satire, public figure), has apparently given one of his old adversaries an offer he couldn't refuse. The Dome has the story:
Former NC Rep. Stephen LaRoque of Kinston has apologized to former state Rep. Art Pope of Raleigh, who he had accused of buying legislators by pouring money into contested Republican primaries, Rob Christensen reports.
First off, let me congratulate Rob Christensen on getting the names right in his piece. After bungling (and not apologizing) a mention of NCBlue instead of BlueNC this morning, he's apparently sharpened his reportorial skills. But beyond that welcome bit of accuracy, the intrigue in the Pope-LaRoque saga gets really interesting.
Morgan vs. Pope: Round 9
Submitted by James on Wed, 02/21/2007 - 6:31pm.Some stories, like the decline and fall of Jim Black, refuse to die. Which is exactly the case in the blood feud between Art Pope and Richard Morgan, two luminaries in the North Carolina Party of Greed.

As you may remember, Art Pope (fondly known around these parts as the Puppetmaster) dumped half a million dollars of his family's corporate money into the 2006 Republican primaries. He focused particularly on stomping out Richard Morgan, who had the audacity to work with Democrats over the years in the General Assembly. In hopes of purifying the party and remaking it in his own arrogant image, the Puppetmaster bankrolled a campaign to support Joe "the Hairdresser" Boylan against Morgan in Moore County. Morgan challenged his spending as electioneering, but was rebuffed by the idiots at the State Board of Elections.
Democracy took a sucker punch this week when the North Carolina State Board of Elections voted to allow the sale of legislative seats to fat-cat corporations. In an embarrassing display of incompetence, board chairman Larry Leake and his hapless colleagues went through the motions of hearing Richard Morgan's complaint with barely a nod in the direction of decorum or seriousness. Loony Larry even had this to say to a reporter from the Southern Pines Pilot:
Asked if the board could not really have ruled just the same way in about 20 minutes - without all the testimony and argument - Leake just smiled.
And in this corner
Submitted by James on Sat, 12/16/2006 - 10:39am.
I finally got my hands on the Petition for Judicial Review by Richard Morgan, who is challenging the decision in favor of Art Pope's electioneering organization by the North Carolina State Board of Elections earlier this year. As you may recall, Pope's money was poured into the contest between Morgan and Hairdresser Puppet Joe Boylan, tilting the playing field and handing Boylan a surprise victory.
For new readers to BlueNC, this has been covered exhaustively, and with good reason. What's at stake is the integrity of our elections. Specifically, the state board found that a rich guy with unlimited corporate cash can spend as much as he wants to influence the outcome of elections. To be clear, no one (in this case) is questioning Pope's ability to spend his personal money. That's not the issue. Rather, the money used to influence this election came directly from Pope's business - which means it's corporate money.
If Pope wins this appeal, businesses in North Carolina will be free to pour millions into elections, effectively swamping the voices of We the People who are limited by campaign contribution laws in the amounts we can give.
The petition for review is 11 pages long. I've excerpted part of the section called "Bases for Appeal," which you can see if you click on the image. It's a bunch of legal mumbo jumbo, which you may find interesting, but there's an even more startling basis for appeal, which I wrote about on the day of the hearing.



