Sunday, October 26, 2008

If I Had A Vote

As some of you may know, I am not a registered voter (or registered anything, if that clears some things up). I usually get strange looks when revealing this information but, then, I am used to strange looks. I have just a few reasons why I refuse to participate in what most people call “the democratic process.”

1. Voting for politicians only encourages them, and I really believe this. If we stop voting for them, they’d all go away and we’d live happily ever after. Furthermore, when a candidate claims victory by securing 45% of the vote with a 45% election turnout they are not the real winner. Statistically, the real winner is “none of the above,” because 55% chose to not vote for any of the knuckleheads running in the election while the proclaimed “winner” received just a bit more than 20% of eligible registered voters. By most standards, 55%-20% is a landslide.

2. Speaking of knuckleheads, are any of you truly happy with the people who are elected to lead us? Think of your council members, county supervisors, assembly and senate members, Congressional members and president. Would you hire any of them to do anything for you (assuming you know their name)? Well I wouldn’t hire a single one to simonize my car so why would I want them to run a government that ultimately runs my life? Give me anarchy over wars, financial collapses and taxes any day; at least I’d have a fighting chance.

3. Finally, I am involved in the democracy process in that I help citizens participate in direct democracy – or, better put, citizens going around our elected officials with ballot measures that speak to needed change that is ignored by those we send to various capitols. It’s an imperfect system, but still better than relying on people we all wanted to beat up in school to make decisions on more than 6,000 laws that get offered in California each year alone.

Since my vote doesn’t count – and you should all be happy it doesn’t – I will at least try to influence others in voting on the various California ballot measures. If I convince a few of you to see it MY WAY, then I will have actually accumulated three or four votes, which is similar math to ACORN’s master plan. What follows is the first six of the 12 measures on the California ballot and how one should vote and the reasons why. The other six will be in a soon-to-be-published post.

Proposition 1A: SAFE, RELIABLE HIGH-SPEED PASSENGER TRAIN BOND ACT.
Normally I hate bond measures because they have to be paid back with interest and the way California’s bond rating is heading to junk bond status, that interest could add up to repayments of three times the original bond. However, in this case, I have two friends who are in the high-speed train business and they may get some work out of this and take me and the Mrs. to dinner a few times. Probably not an even exchange for the added tax burden, but I am feeling generous tonight and urging a Yes vote.

Proposition 2: STANDARDS FOR CONFINING FARM ANIMALS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
I would have to urge a Yes vote on this or suffer a hemorrhage to the head from the Girl (she would kill me in the name of animal rights, which probably doesn’t make much sense, but enough of a threat that I don’t want to take the chance). So, for the sake of keeping me alive, please vote Yes.

Proposition 3: CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL BOND ACT. GRANT PROGRAM. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Okay, another bond and this one will cost us $2 billion to repay. But, you know, it’s for children’s hospitals and there are not enough hospitals that specialize in care for childhood illnesses and injuries. It should also be noted that this group is a client of mine and paid for the down payment on my house so, please, have a heart and vote Yes.

Proposition 4: WAITING PERIOD AND PARENTAL NOTIFICATION BEFORE TERMINATION OF MINOR’S PREGNANCY.
To me this has always been a no-brainer. A minor need to get permission from a parent to take an aspirin in schools these days, they should at least have to get a parent’s permission to have an abortion. Sure, there will be many tough discussions with the parents and, assuming your parent is not Sarah Palin, the talk may not result in an unwanted pregnancy or a “Juno Situation.” There are also provisions in the measure that allow a minor to seek a parental notification waiver from a judge if it can be shown that a minor is potentially endangered by telling a parent. My only reservation is that this measure is sponsored by a couple of real weenies. But I would suggest a Yes vote anyway.

Proposition 5: NONVIOLENT DRUG OFFENSES. SENTENCING, PAROLE AND REHABILITATION. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Well the title sounds good and the concept of getting minor drug abusers out of our overcrowded jails seems like a good idea. But this measure fiddles around with a few other laws and actually allows reduced sentences for meth dealers and even makes it easier for white collar criminals (like corporate CEOs, real estate agents and mortgage and stock brokers) to walk. This measure was poorly drafted with the intent of getting one of the author’s kids out of jail. If I were to vote, I would vote No on this one.

Proposition 6: POLICE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT FUNDING. CRIMINAL PENALTIES AND LAWS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
This initiative has good intentions and nobody will be certain if it will pan out unless it’s tried. Essentially this measure puts more cops on the street aimed at curbing gang violence. Since California is one of the few states with a rising homicide rate – ostensibly gang related – it might be a good idea to make an attempt to keep fewer people from being killed. The authors of this measure (who should have had the sense to hire me instead of others) say it won’t cost any money to the taxpayer as they will set up an independent board to review police costs. They actually think they can counter the additional spending on more cops by cutting wasteful spending in other areas. It will be a good trick if they can do it and I highly doubt they will be successful, but I think the bottom line merits of the measure are worthy of a Yes vote.

So I will review the other six on the ballot and, soon, my recommendation for who you should vote for president. I am sure there is a lot of suspense riding on that one!

5 comments:

Sladed said...

NOW you've done it! A post that anyone and everyone can comment on, even if annonymously. I have so many comments that you're forcing me to do my own post at http://sladed.blogspot.com.

In the mean time I will disagree with your first point. Whether we vote or not, politicians will still run. Unless you qualify a ballot measure to overturn the constitutuion and have yourself appointed as the Grand Poobah, we will still have to vote for the lesser of two (or more) evils. I say that the "only encourages them" argument is a cop out.

I also disagree with your math. (Who was your math teacher, Skelley?) Actually, I disagree with your viewpoint. I say that when 55% of registered voters choose not to vote they may be saying "none of the above" or they may be saying "I'm not informed enough to decide" so they cast their ballot on some issues but not others. I think that's a good thing. One reason I hate registration drives, motor voter, get-out -the-vote campaigns, and other similar efforts is because I don't want people exercising their right to as uninformed nitwits.

For agreements and disagreements with your stances on the propositions, please stay tuned!

Laz said...

Boy, you got up on the wrong side of the Blogosphere....

Sladed said...

You got me fired up! I've posted my proposition positions at http://sladed.blogspot.com/2008/10/1st-6-california-propositions.html. In summary: 1A No, 2 No, 3 Yes, 4 Yes, 5 No, 6 No.

Anonymous said...

If you don't vote you have no right to complain about he government at all!!

Laz said...

Sure I can complain. I can complain about the choices all you others are making out there.