State of Utah v. Kenneth Jenkins : Brief of Appellee

APPEAL FROM CONVICTIONS FOR FORGERY, A THIRD DEGREE FELONY, IN VIOLATION OF UTAH CODE ANN. § 76-6-501 (1997); THEFT, A CLASS B MISDEMEANOR, IN VIOLATION OF UTAH CODE ANN. § 76-6-404 (1997); AND SPOUSE ABUSE, A CLASS A MISDEMEANOR IN VIOLATION OF UTAH CODE ANN. § 77-36-1(2)(1997) IN THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR UINTAH COUNTY, THE HONORABLE JOHN B. ANDERSON, PRESIDIN

Presidential Elections - The Right to Vote and Access to the Ballot

The following article is a tripartite effort by Mitchell Berger and Grace E. Robson, members of the Florida Bar; John B. Anderson, a member of the Nova Southeastern University\u27s Shepard Broad Law Center faculty; and a team of two of the students at that law school, Jason Blank and Tom Brogan, to examine the subject of ballot access for non-major party candidates in presidential elections in the wake of the recent decision of the Supreme Court of Florida in Reform Party of Florida v. Black.\u27 Mr. Berger has furnished a critical analysis of that decision. Our team of students has catalogued the ballot access laws of the fifty states and the District of Columbia. John B. Anderson has reviewed United States Supreme Court decisions on the subject of ballot access specifically, and then also more generally on the way in which they reflect on the electoral process; a process which for a century and a half has been dominated by our two major parties. His criticism of the resulting duopoly of political power and control should be attributed to him alone and not to the other members of this collaborative effort. However, both Mr. Berger and Mr. Anderson support the idea of a constitutional amendment putting forth an affirmative right to vote as both necessary and desirable as a predicate for any effort to achieve a more uniform approach to ballot access in future presidential contests. We also join in our appreciation for the research assistance of Messrs. Blank and Brogan and their contribution to our joint effort

The Wooster Voice (Wooster, OH), 1980-05-23

Representative John B. Anderson, an independent candidate for president, wins Wooster\u27s mock election. The issue recaps a lecture given by Waker E. Andersen, a member of the U.S. State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research, regarding the hostage crises in Iran and the presence of Soviet troops in Afghanistan. An article analyses Cheryl Steams\u27 senior independent study art exhibit that deals with the lives of the elderly. Carl Vazquez and Wooster shortstop-pitcher Mike Knox are elected co-recipients of the Branch Rickey Memorial Award for most outstanding baseball players.https://openworks.wooster.edu/voice1971-1980/1247/thumbnail.jp

History of the XVI Corps from its activation to the end of the war in Europe

With the activation of the XVI Corps on 7 December 1943, the War Department added another fighting Corps to its rapidly expanding Army of the United States, a Corps that was destined within little more than a year to make an historic assault across Europe\u27s Rhine River and to play an important part in the United States Ninth and First Armies\u27 encirclement of the vital Ruhr industrial area and the total defeat of Nazi Germany. Under the command of Maj. Gen. John B. Anderson, Corps commander since shortly after its organization, the XVI Corps proved in training and in combat operations its right to a place among the leading Corps of the United States armies. It conducted an efficient training program in preparation for combat prior to its departure from the United States. Arriving in France, it assumed the responsibility of processing troops as they arrived on the European Continent and protected the Normandy beaches from possible counter-attacks by hostile forces on the nearby Channel Islands. The XVI Corps protected the Ninth United States Army\u27s northern flank in the Roer River assault, driving the German foe from the Roer to the Rhine River so relentlessly that enemy units in the north were unable to aid the hard-pressed German forces being hammered on other sectors of the Ninth Army front. It smashed across the Rhine in a great inland amphibious operation and drove inexorably onward to assist in trapping crack German Armies in the Ruhr valley. The Corps swept the Germans from the big industrial cities north of the Ruhr River, including Essen, Dortmund, Duisburg, and Gelsenkirchen, swinging south as the Ninth and First Armies combined to crush all enemy resistance in the Ruhr. Then, turning from tactical operations to other duties, it directed the military occupation and government of the greater section of the German provinces of Westphalia, Lippe, and Schaumburg Lippe.https://digicom.bpl.lib.me.us/ww_reg_his/1082/thumbnail.jp

An Analysis of the 2004 Nader Ballot Access Federal Court Cases

The article begins by stating that voters ability to vote for minor party candidates for presidential elections have generally been protected by federal courts as long as they have gotten some media exposure, and Ralph Nader, after not having received this protection attempted to file for injunctions in federal courts. It then goes through Naders claims and suits, including against a discriminatory number of signatures, whether out of state circulators may work, his North Carolina and Ohio write-in lawsuits. The articles conclusion is that federal courts did a poor job in deciding whether to grant Nader injunctive relief and how their decisions go against the essence of a democratic society which should be allowed to vote for whomever they want

On the Possibility of Democracy and Rational Collective Choice

The paper challenges the 'orthodox doctrine' of collective choice theory according to which Arrow’s 'general possibility theorem' precludes rational decision procedures generally and implies that in particular all voting procedures must be flawed. I point out that all voting procedures are cardinal and that Arrow’s result, based on preference orderings cannot apply to them. All voting procedures that have been proposed, with the exception of approval voting, involve restrictions on voters expressions of their preferences. These restrictions, not any general impossibility, are the cause of various well known pathologies. In the class of unrestricted voting procedures I favor 'evaluative voting' under which a voter can vote for or against any alternative, or abstain. I give a historical/conceptual analysis of the origins of theorists’ aversion to cardinal analysis in collective choice and voting theories