Wednesday, March 10, 2010


Quick update. As many of you know I have been in Frankfort quite a bit working on legislation on behalf of Charitable Gaming and the horsemen in our Commonwealth. So far SB 222 has been received favorably by many and I expect a committee vote in the near future.

In the meantime I received word today that SB 64, a bill I have been fighting for to bring transparency and accountability to the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife, has passed on the Senate floor and now goes to the House for a vote.

Finally, we are seeing some positive action in Frankfort.

In the meantime SB 53, the bill designed to allow independent voters a voice in primary elections, continues to be stalled in the House by Rep. Darryl Owens who is refusing to let it go to the floor for a vote.

It is time for Darryl Owens to realize his job is not to stall bills at his whim but to allow them to be voted on. There is legislation before you that deserves a floor vote. Grow a pair and let your vote speak for you. It is time the minority quit being ignored in Frankfort.

I will keep you informed as the session continues to move forward.


  1. Sorry but I don't see why independents should be able to vote in primary elections. Primaries are functions of a party and if you want to take part in a party nominating function than you should have to join a party.

  2. So you are of the opinion if you do not belong to a aprty than your voice should not matter? If so that is an insult to what America is all about in my opinion.

    Thanks for the comment.

  3. I haven’t made up my mind on SB 53 and really haven’t studied the issue either, but I can certainly see the potential for misuse if independents were allowed to vote in primary elections. For instance, an unopposed incumbent might ask independent supporters to vote for the perceived "weaker" candidate in the other party's primary. Politics can be a dirty business, and SB 53 does not seem to help with that.

    I don’t think anyone is of the opinion that independents should be ignored; however, the purpose of the primary is for political parties to select their nominee for the general election. Independents have every opportunity to align themselves with one of the major parties and participate in their primary process. If they choose not to – whether because of a difference in ideology or otherwise – I’m not sure they should have a say in a party’s nominee. And if they don’t believe in the principles of either party, why would they want to participate in either party’s primary?

    Independents are still able to cast their vote in the general election and determine the eventual winner – Republican, Democrat, or third party. Thoughts?

    Here’s my crude analogy: Pepsi’s R&D department is experimenting with recipes for a new product to be debuted on American Beverage, the premier soft drink show sweeping the nation. Coke, confident it already has a superior product, is going to stick with its Classic Coca-Cola recipe. Question, should Ale-8’s R&D department be able to help determine which new Pepsi recipe gets to be debuted on American Beverage? I say no.


Thank you for reading LNP. Open and honest discussions of local politics and relevant issues is important to voter understanding. Please listen to the "Ed Springston Show". We broadcast Monday through Thursday evenings at 7 PM on local media outlets. Please check for the links.
Yours truly,
Ed Springston


The Metro removal hearing case against Dan Johnson ended about the way it began. With many in disbelief. I could not understand how the &q...