Nothing like a good e-mail to get the juices flowing. I will leave this as it is. Y’all can decide if you will be Dumbocrats and sheeple and dig CCDC Chair Charlotte Valyo’s pretzel logic or will you stand up, look at your by-laws and ease your Grandma and her flying monkeys into party retirement?
What does the email say? I am including verbiage in case screen shot is not clear and Chesco Dems? “Bubble” well….:
From: Marcy Cornell office@chescodems.org
Date: Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 3:35 PM
Subject: Retention Explanation
To: Marcy Cornell office@chescodems.org
Cc: Charlotte Valyo chair@chescodems.orgDear CCDC,
I apologize for yet another email. I am receiving questions regarding retentions. Some information is being shared that is not complete nor necessarily factual.
1) Retention is not an election. Court of Common Pleas Judges are elected once, for a ten-year term. After ten years, they are placed on the ballot for retention. The purpose of retention rather than running again is to remove politics from the judiciary. Once elected, judges are to make decisions based on the law and facts, not on political affiliation or political views. There is no red or blue, they are to think black (robes). This process was written into the Pennsylvania Constitution to ensure the independence of our courts.
2) Judge Carmody and Judge Hall will both age out before their next term ends, which will open up two seats for us to elect our candidates. This also makes it unlikely either would run for a higher Court seat.
3) Judge Carmody and Judge Hall are not extremists but are moderates and have earned the respect of their fellow judges and the legal community. I have spoken with our Democratic Court of Common Pleas Judges, most of our judicial and county candidates, and Democratic attorneys in Chester County. All unanimously support both judges and have only positive things to say about both.
4) If these judges were not retained what would happen?
a. The Chester County Court of Common Pleas would lose 2 judges, burdening an already overburdened Court.
b. Governor Shapiro can appoint attorneys to fill judicial vacancies, but this requires approval by the Republican controlled State Senate. The likelihood that the Republican controlled Senate would vote to approve Democratic judges is very low. Therefore, we will either have no appointments or two Republican judges who could be and probably would be younger and much more conservative.
c. If two Republican judges were appointed, both would be running as incumbents in the next election.
5) Bubbling “No” for these moderate and respected judges diminishes the effect of our bubbling “No” in the future when more extreme judges are up for retention.
6) For statewide judicial retentions, the Pennsylvania State Committee is bubbling the Democrat up for retention as a “Yes” and the Republican blank.
7) Based on the information above and following the lead of the Pennsylvania State Committee, CCDC will not be bubbling in a recommendation for retention for the Court of Common Pleas.
Regards,
Charlotte
Still feeling like a newbie here. I don’t understand the political crap here. Where I came from, the Sheriff WAS in charge of the prison, there was no retention of judges, etc. 😱😱😱😱😱😱
**
I have spoken with our Democratic Court of Common Pleas Judges,
**
Despite Charlotte Valyo’s implication that Chesco CP Judges engaged in political activity that violates the CJC, I don’t believe any judge actually engaged in such conduct.
Between the errors and the impropriety.. and candidly the fact it got out :-P, that email is prima facie evidence of political malpractice attributable to Charlotte Valyo, CCDC Chair. That however, is precisely what the CCDC signed up for…;-)
The relevant question is whether or not Charlotte solicited sitting CP judges to violate the Code of Judicial Conduct and the PA Constitution? Her email implies she did. And if she didn’t, then her email contains at least one misrepresentation.
I really don’t grasp the controversy, if any. If a judge is doing their job properly, why wouldn’t we want to retain them? Let’s save our breath for US Senate and US Supreme Court.
Because Democrats aren’t supposed to endorse Republicans and the Republicans do not endorse Democrats. And you don’t know that it doesn’t go against your bylaws if anyone can find your by-laws that is because they seem to be a moving target along with a lot of the record-keeping.
Let’s save our breath from the stench that started in West Chester politics decades ago and continues today. The disgusting backroom deals in WC and the state itself were cited by a WC democrat council member in a public meeting just last month. Let the borough solicitor fix it, huh? They’ve been doing so for three decades or so? Absolute power. The omnipresent knee jerk defense of the local political status quo is part of the issue. As it has been said, all politics is local.
A political party’s job…it’s supposed to work like this.. and eventually, why it isn’t.
As a “Gatekeeper” to the ballot, a political party’s sole job is to find, recruit, train, and endorse candidates for the platform the party adopts by and through its committee people. In reality, anyone, so long as they are qualified and have the necessary petitions, they’re on the primary ballot – even if they are not “Endorsed.”
So that no one person can put their thumb on the scale, political organizations, like any other public interest non-profit organizations work through committees like GOTV, candidate recruitment, etc. At the end of it all, before the fun begins with primary season, the party has its conventions and they vote for endorsement. Keep in mind that by the convention, candidates have visited the various affiliate county party organizations within the county that have jurisdiction for the office they seek. Once the convention is done, assuming good order under the by-laws and fair dealing, that’s it.. The endorsed slate is done and it’s the job of committee people to get their voters out. It only works predictably well when from the bottom up and the top down, it’s all aligned around the slate, the values they are running – as well as being a referendum on how they’ve governed and whether that governance is in keeping with stated values. Win or lose, voters decide. It’s up to a party to educate and advocate. If the message has merit, there’s no reason for under-handed dealing.
What’s stated above is generic for any party of any stripe.
The goal of any party should be one thing: “Be identified with good government.” Can a party, whilst being transparent and not hide the ball do that? One way a party can do that is understand the nuance that while we live under a political form of government, when in government, a party’s elected officials DO NOT engage in party politics – except when they are running. That’s for candidates….. But there must be boundaries.
Here’s the trick, there’s this pesky thing called the First Amendment. This is an example of when we often say in the political backrooms – “While we live in a democracy, we don’t always practice it.” What that really means is that a good party, enforces party discipline and behavior around a set of values. And one of those values needs to be that whenever one of “Ours” gets elected, “We” as a party respect that they are no more our rep in government than anybody else.
Dialing in the details before us, there are three big things that concern me. The first, I’ve already explained the issues with Charlotte Valyo’s email, implicating both improper judicial contact and a general disregard for what retentions are for. It’s important to note that the carve out I specified above for candidates in general, that carve-out is narrower for judicial candidates. Again, as a matter of propriety, no competent political leader does, much less put in writing what’s in that email.
The second issue has to do with the general feeling that the Democratic Administration isn’t getting sufficient credit. All politics being local, let’s respect that. We’ve recently that the Democratic controlled commissioners were sitting on American Rescue funds…as a hedge against raising taxes. That’s not me saying that.. It’s Josh Maxwell saying that.. Roll the tape.. 😉
That isn’t what those funds were for. They were meant to be used – to help create jobs, drive the economy. i.e. the stuff Joe Biden ran on.. And somewhat hypocritically, this local Democratic organization claims to support. Part of a county political party’s job is to also be in line with their state and national organizations as well. Other than whatever this “Leader’s” whims are, there’s no discerning what governing or political intelligence exists..
On the tax matter, and the fact that we haven’t had a county-wide reassessment in 31 years…which is crazy! If you’ve had a significant renovation/addition to your home that was a trigger for reassessment of your property, then you, D, R, or I – is getting screwed. How? Because it presents a tax realization event for the government, that is run incompetently because it is scraping for funds… So, to remedy that, folks get nailed hard on their reassessment. Fortunately, at least for the time being, we have a constitution, property rights, and due and process. A cottage industry in this county are tax assessment appeals. So many properties in this county are under assessed. And it has not been comprehensively re-adjusted in a way that fits within things like the equal protection clause, 5th amendment, etc. It’s like zoning.. You can’t cherry-pick just the ones you want to do. And after 31 years, I don’t know what we’re going to do because the system was never designed to withstand 31 years of neglect.
Both parties have let us down – because a fiction has been painted for the public.. TAXES==BAD. You get a new kitchen…Get that nice Main Line Sub-Zero or Viking Range.. You pay for it. You don’t look to your neighbor to pay for it. And yet somehow, a world of make believe has been thrust upon us. We see it in Tredyffrin with the EIT. Government has to be funded. And think of the government employees we rely upon to do the work that is necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of her inhabitants. Democrat or Republican…I still think at a core, that’s what Chesco folks are about. Play it down the middle. Make your case. No BS.. Let the voters decide.
The third issue is voter reg. If the CCDC was doing it’s job, the voter reg stats would be MUCH more in favor of D’s. It seems that the CCDC strategy is “We’re not Trump..” That’s just weak-sauce lazy – if that’s the only thing. This CCDC isn’t doing ANYTHING to educate or promote what real Democratic values are.
As for the other committee, I don’t pay it any mind because I’m not a Republican. When I vote, I evaluate the candidate. I’m at a loss, R or D..to find folks I can credibly for – because none of them that I can vote for – which is Tredyffrin and County – have a value set that essentially about sincerely endeavoring to do the right thing, in the right way, for the right reason.
As of today, Chesco is a living production of the Lord of the Flies. Who reps Ralph? Who reps Jack? Who reps Piggy?…………………………Who reps Roger????
Being stranded on an island without adult supervision is serious business. Between the parties an the elected county officials, we have is two pair: 2 Jacks, 2 Rogers…and. Poor Ralph is left in the deck.. The MAGA crew..Earth 2… That’s doesn’t preclude an Earth 3 for the CCD..