One Vote for Each Commissioner in Beaufort County | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Many people in Beaufort County have been upset for 25 years (it has been that long) about only having one vote during each two year election cycle for commissioner. There are either three or four commissioners running every two years. '

    Why one vote? During the early 1990's Beaufort County was sued because the board was all white. Using he county wide voting system it was impossible for blacks to be elected even though the county was almost 30 percent black. This was a federal law suit.

    The commissioners negotiated a settlement that would guarantee the election of two blacks out of seven. In order to make the guarantee work it was decided that four commissioners would run during one two year cycle and t three would run during the next two years. The guarantee came by only allowing each voter one vote regardless of how many are running (called limited voting). Not per candidate but for only one of the candidates. The system has worked in so far as keeping two blacks elected.

    However, there are some problems with the system. With larger numbers running with only one vote available per voter no candidate needed a large percentage of votes to win. Say there are three vacancies on the board, with 6 candidates running (two from each party) a theoretical 17 percent of the vote would make a win. Many voters want one vote for each of the three vacancies or three votes.

    Because of the small number of votes needed to win, candidates need only to find a small percentage of the votes to vote for them

    Several boastful candidates have promised voters that they would change the system. Because this is a political issue and with the oversight of the federal courts no one has presented a system that a majority can agree on and still get the federal nod. Actually, solving this problem has not gotten to the point of requiring federal approval.

    Some have accused me of not favoring change. I do not have a problem with change provided candidates are not disenfranchised. That is gerrymandered out of the ability to run for office. Also, any changes to this voting system should improve democracy.

    The biggest sin of limited voting has been the control the Democrats and liberals have maintained on the Board of Commissioners. We have never had a true Republican as chairman of the Board of Commissioners even though Republicans have been a majority on the board since about 2006.. The chairmen while being Republicans have been, without exception, RINO's (Republican In Name Only). The two Democrats on the board find two RINO's to make a deal with. The Democrats become Vice Chairman and the RINOs become Chairman. Two RINO votes plus two Democrat votes make a board majority to elect the chairman and raise taxes.

    The best way to break up this kind of corruption is to elect the Chairman and Vice Chairman at large. The present "crop of political experts" think districts are the way to go. Districts will not stop the deal making among the liberal Republicans and the Democrats. I can support almost any system that elects the Chairman and Vice chairman at large. This means the public can decide how liberal or conservative they want the county to be. At present two liberal Democrats and two liberal Republicans are calling the shots. As long as we have limited voting without allowing all the voters to decide who the chairman and vice chairman will be, we will have a liberal tax and spend county government.