Dumb questions about the US political system.

Deb -- my, you have lots'a queries in that post above. As to a president having changed sides, so to speak, while in office, no, this has never happened. See the post above from JoefromChicago. Our registration process is much the same as yours. You have to register to become a voter. If you do not change residence and do vote in most elections, your registration remains on file with no further action on your part. There is no penalty for not voting, but if you haven't voted in a long time (it varies from state to state), your name will be removed from the rolls. When you register, no party affiliation needs to be indicated. The only time you have to declare yourself as being in favor of one party or the other is if you wish to vote in the primaries. These are, after all, partisan events, designed to select a party's candidates for the general election. (See my post above on this.) Lessee....what else did you ask?...Last not wealthy president. Probably Eisenhauer, but I could be wrong on that.

Oh yeah. Electing judges. I find that bizarre myself. Let someone else comment on it. As for electing District Attorneys who -- as you correctly surmise -- are the heads of the prosecutorial arm of the judiciary, it is generally felt that this process assures impartiality on the part of the DA. A prosecutor chosen by the people is less likely to toe the line than one who owes his job to a political appointment. In theory, anyway. His/her job (again, in theory) is to protect the innocent as well as to prosecute the guilty. Thus, an elected DA is seen as less likely to try and railroad a defendant just because the Governor doesn't like the creep. It seldom works that way in practice, but that's the theory.

Happy now?

I'm not sure what Dean's personal wealth level is but I'd always guessed that he was "well to do" but not uber-rich.

IMO, what made his campaign different wasn't his own personal wealth but that he raised huge amounts of money from the not-rich-at-all.

The traditional method of gearing up a major campaign to to hob-nob with the rich and get them to donate large amounts to your campaign. Dean didn't go after the rich. He payed attention to the "common people" and went after millions of $25 donations instead of a few hundred $100,000 donations.

By rejecting the party big-wigs and going straight to individual voters he tried to run a true grassroots campaign.



Not all judges are elected and those that are tend to be the ones you never hear about. The most common elected judges are probably probate judges and they aren't involved in much else politically.

Judges in the State Criminal and Supreme courts and the Federal Circuit, Appeals and Supreme Courts are all appointed positions.



(Your assumption is correct here! ) The ideal is an independent prosecutor that is free of political baggage and is willing to look into and prosectute political corruption amongst those in power along with their other work. How well that actually works varies greatly. Sometimes they just collude with the other politicos.

I should also point out that there are HUGE differences in how things work from state to state. In my little town here in MA (pop. 4,400) we typically have 40-60 people running for 20 or so elected positions in town. Pretty much every public function has an elected head or oversight committee. The "Board of Library Trustees" is my own personal fav. We elect 5 people to oversee a library operation that fits in a 2,000 sq. ft building, has one employee and an annual operating budget of about $70,000.

The area where I was living before moving up here the only elected positions were at the county level and there were 4 or 5 positions. IMO, that was a much more effificent operation.

Not in my state, and not in a lot of other states either. In Illinois there are two kinds of trial court judges: circuit judges and associate judges. All circuit judges are elected, all associate judges are appointed. But only circuit judges can hear certain kinds of cases (e.g. felonies). Furthermore, all appellate and supreme court judges in Illinois are elected.

Hmmmm... another question: What about the sheriffs? Do they get elected? What are their duties? How do you have to be qualified in order to run for sheriff?



I just don't understand the concept of sheriffs at all, so pardon my ignorance!

(In most European countries you just have the police. In Denmark they are not even armed.)

P.S.: I understand this is not really a question about the US political system. Unless they get elected. Then it could be, I guess.....???

In Georgia--

In order to be Sheriff, you must know a really dirty secret about the mayor, or a councilman,....or be a scary guy, who can intimidate lots of people.

---or you are the brother of the local judge.

I believe sheriffs in all areas are elected. I have no idea why this is an elective office, however.

In most states, a sheriff is the chief law enforcement official for a county. In my experience, sheriffs are elected officials (much like chief prosecutors are elected). Sheriff's deputies (which are equivalent to police officers), on the other hand, are just employees: they're not elected.

To the best of my knowledge, sheriffs are elected everywhere. They function at a county level. These days, with municiapl and state police forces being what they are, a sheriff's duties are quite circumscribed. As a rule, they do not investigate crimes, they do not regulate traffic. Most places their chief duty is prisoner transport and running the county jail. In a very populous county (e.g. Cook County, IL) they would have a sizeable force of deputies, hired hands who do the actual work while the sheriff pushes papers around on his/her desk. (In Suffolk County, MA, where Boston is located, the sheriff is definitely a she: Sheriff Cabral just won re-election last year and nobody messes with that Cape Verdean lady.)

So - the sheriff runs the police? But is not a police officer? What are the qualifications for Sheriff?

Thanks again for all the answers folk!!!!

(Reading)

Just a little excursus to history:
a 'reeve' was an important appointed (by the King) official, as with the "shire reeve", i.e., the "sheriff". (The [medieval] German 'Graf' hold a similar position: an Imperial official, even actually outranking a duke.)

Oh - thought Graf was "count".

The things you learn!!!

Walter, thanks for that information. Now I understand the etymology of so many words in your response. Shrive is an interesting word. I wonder if there is a connection.

A Sheriff is a law enforcement officer but they have different functions depending on the location. Here in MA they are responsible for security in the Courthouses and running many of the prisons but they aren't who you'd call in case of an emergency.

The local Police Dept. handles all things related to traffic and criminal investigations up to a certian level (at which the State Police take over).

We end up with a municipal Police Dept, a County Sheriff and State Police. They all work together as need be but one isn't subservient to the other. Then there are different Federal level law enforcement agencies that have their own functions.

All of these are neatly (or not so!) divided up into areas of jurisdiction.

William I of England regarded the Anglo-Saxon "earl" as a synonym for "count", and while this was not correct, it was a practical equivalency.

Blimey!

We just have State police - and a small Commonwealth force.

Local police ARE state police.

[Same here: local police = state police.

(And now the 'Federal Border Police' becomes 'Federal Police', with same tasks, e.g. protection of boundaries, airports, railway stations, federal buildings, emabassies; railway police, coast guard in the North Sea and the Baltic Sea, including Europe's largest non-military law enforcement aviation agency)]

... last time I was in MA, I drove on the MassPike into Boston and noticed some "Highway Police" buildings along the road... I THINK. Was I mistaken? And how would they fit in?

You probably aren't mistaken. There are a few buildings right on the Mass Pike that the MA State Police use. The State Police are responsible for traffic control (i.e. speeding tickets!) on the State Highways and for dealing with accidents that happen on state roads. Most of their offices seem to be located right on major highways. Partially, methinks, to give them quick access to get around the state.

Here in MA we don't have a seperate "Highway Police" per se. They are the Highway Division of the State Police.

Sheriff is a law enforcement officer. So are his or her deputies. So far as I know, the only nationwide qualification is an ability to be elected.

Now, in and around New Mexico, they have serious enforcement duties. They do enforce traffic law, and they are who you call in an emergency, if you are not in an incorporated city. Well, actually, you call 911. Hopefully, they notify the sheriff's department. We do have state police. They have a district office in town, and the last I heard, there were two officers assigned to the district. That wouldn't be much coverage by itself. Oh yeah, the sheriff operates the county jail, and several DWI detention facilities.