In 1939 the Hatch Act was passed in order to stop corrupt Democrat politicians from using federal government employees to influence congressional elections. At that time, Democrat President Roosevelt’s Works Progress Administration was using its influence to secure employment for folks in exchange for political contributions for preferred candidates. Decrying such blatant corruption from the liberal executive branch, both the Republican Party and the conservative wing of the Democrat party decided to pass legislation to prevent the federal meddling in elections. The original Act was intended to restrict the political campaign activities of federal employees (elected officials were exempt), including campaigning for office, as well as federal employees using their influence with the promise of jobs, promotions, contracts, etc., in order to influence campaigns.
Over time however, like most laws, the Hatch Act has morphed into something outside of its intent. Since 1939, the definition of “federal employee” has been extended to include any state, county, and city employees where the local government chooses to use federal money to fund 100% of their salary. Therefore, a local Iowa government employee doing local government work, who has no say over who in her department is funded with federal dollars, and who cannot possibly influence a federal election or promise a federal job, can lose her freedom to run for local office if her superiors chose to fund her salary 100% with federal funds. So, in other words, at the whim of management, those of her peers who aren’t 100% federally funded will have more freedom than she will. Does that seem right and fair?
Why is it that laws intended to stop the corruption of Washington D.C. never really seem to do that, and instead are used against ordinary private citizens, to silence their voice and limit their participation? In fact, many of the recent Hatch Act election violations investigated by the Office of Special Counsel have been focused more on local government races, not federal. So, because our state and local governments decided to whore themselves out to the feds for money- our money no less – our liberty ends up getting pimped. Is anyone else tired of the feds using this as an excuse to continually meddle in our local affairs?
No small town local candidate has money it takes to fight the feds in court. This is why I believe that the Hatch Act is an arcane, unconstitutional law that needs to be repealed, as its original purpose of fighting federal corruption is not being accomplished. Like most federal law, it is not being used to protect us; it is being used to control us. So, while my county Democrats seem perfectly fine spending more of our money and lying prostrate to federal control,, the county Republicans are not. We believe that the final authority always lies with the people, not the feds. We believe that every citizen should have a political voice, and a political choice, and that the feds have no right to take that away from you without constitutional justification. Our Republican candidates believe in liberty, fiscal responsibility, the rule of constitutional law, and that they are the people’s servants, not their masters.
The feds may have intimidated and silenced one of our local candidates who only wants to serve, but do not let them intimidate or silence you. You, the citizen voter, are not bound by the Hatch Act. You are the ultimate authority when it comes to voting for whom you believe will serve us best. Please use it on November 4th, and remind the feds of their place.
“When the most lavishly funded federal government on the planet comes after you, eventual guilt or innocent is irrelevant: the process is the punishment.” ~ Mark Steyn, from his May 31st, 2013 article, The Lois Lerner Defense, which covered the IRS scandal