ASSEMBLY CANDIDATE JOSE MORENO COUNTERS HATCH ACT VIOLATION ALLEGATIONS
PRESS RELEASE, FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, April 21, 2012
CONTACT: Jose Moreno, Email: email@example.com
ANAHEIM – There has been a lot of speculation regarding my candidacy for the 69th Assembly District, and whether the federal Hatch Act applies to my campaign, which I am addressing in this press release.
With its enactment over 72 years ago, the Hatch Act was based on ending the possibility of corrupting influences from government offices that were intended to effect the outcome of “partisan elections.” While the Hatch Act’s legislative intent was just, unfortunately over time this law has been increasingly misused as a political weapon against specific candidates, with no bearing on thwarting corruption.
The Hatch Act has been used against my candidacy, which has resulted in a significant threat to my employment, which is my family’s main source of income and benefits. Shamefully, I have even been subjected to coordinated intimidation, which in my opinion has been unconstitutional and extreme.
I have steadfastly stated that I have absolutely not politicized my employment position to benefit my campaign. I do not have the ability to award jobs, government contracts, grant pay raises or give any other special favors in exchange for political support yet my main opponent, who is a County official, has done so and he is continually allowed to do so with no repercussions.
While some might say that this is business as usual, I say it is wrong regardless of one’s political point of view. This extrajudicial attempt to end my candidacy will not end government corruption, nor will it strengthen our democracy, instead it only serves to undermine our electoral process.
A 2008 Federal Judge ruling that was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States clearly supports my contention that our new non-partisan “Open Primary System”, is absolutely not a partisan election. In fact, our own California Secretary of State, refers to our California Voter Approved election system as a “voter nominated system.”
Prior to this June’s primary election, candidates from each of the political parties were nominated in the primary elections and they then ran against the other partisan nominated candidates in the general election. Obviously these previous elections were “partisan elections.”
The U.S. Office of Special Counsel specifically states, when referring to a Hatch Act violation that, “a partisan political election is one in which any candidate is to be nominated or elected as representing a party…” As such, since California’s electoral system this year is a non-partisan open primary election, called a voter-nominated election, in June and in November, the Hatch Act does not in fact apply to my campaign for the 69th Assembly District.
Again, the passage of Californian’s Proposition 14 and the affirmation of the Federal Judge ruling in WASHINGTON STATE GRANGE v. WASHINGTON STATE REPUBLICAN PARTY ET AL 552 US 442, provides ample evidence that I have not violated the Hatch Act.
The fact that a political party is designated on the ballot was allowed so to give voters a sense of what the candidate thinks. I have not sought a nomination or an endorsement from any political party. Both the State Law and the ruling aforementioned are publicly accessible information that should be consulted with before alleging a possible Hatch Act violation. I am a candidate on the ballot for the 69th Assembly District and my name is Jose “Joe “ Moreno.