The New York State Legislature did something last week that the vast majority of Americans support. And I wish they hadn’t.
By an overwhelming majority in both the state Senate and the Assembly — and in bipartisan fashion — the Legislature approved something known as the “National Popular Vote.”
In short form, the National Popular Vote agreement would bind the state to allocate its electoral votes to whichever presidential candidate gets the most votes nationwide, no matter whether they actually gained the most votes in New York. In order for the agreement to take place, however, enough states need to approve similar agreements.
The National Popular Vote is a means to an end — around the Electoral College — which a large percentage of Americans disapprove of. It would ensure that the candidate who wins the hearts and minds of most Americans wins the White House. It empowers people. It’s good for people. But — it’s bad for America.
While I’d venture to guess that most Americans don’t comprehend the purpose behind the Electoral College, the Founding Fathers put it in place for good reason. And that reason exists in 2014 as it did in 1787.
The Electoral College essentially evens the playing field between big states and small states. It gives states like Delaware and New Hampshire a bit of a leg up, while diluting the power of states like New York and California. Yes, a vote for president in Wyoming or South Dakota actually carries a bit more weight than a vote for president in Texas or Florida — in a manner of speaking.
While most people argue that that’s a bad thing and that the bigger states should carry more power, I disagree — as did the writers of the Constitution.
Big states with lots of people tend to have urban interests, for example. They tend to not have as much rural interests, though. In a way, the Electoral College protects small-town folks and farmers. In a way, it protects people like Western New Yorkers — especially those that live on country roads or count cows on their way to grandma’s house.
Plus, the National Popular Vote ignores the fact that we’re not the “United People of America.” We are the “United States of America.” And as more power flows from the states and into the direct hands of the voters, what it really does is empower the federal government. The more power the federal government has, the less power the people have. So by pushing the National Popular Vote, people are actually giving up some of their power to the federal government, which will take as much as it’s given. And once it’s given enough, it will be powerful enough to take the rest.
Strong states make for a strong nation. A strong federal government, however, makes only for a strong government.
Scott Leffler has no desire to live in Wyoming or South Dakota. But he’s sure there’s some fine people there. Maybe they should follow him on Twitter @scottleffler.
Showing posts with label Election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Election. Show all posts
Thursday, April 3, 2014
Thursday, November 7, 2013
Taking issue with elections issues
Everyone should have voted Tuesday. But few of us did.
I was one of those who took the time to get out there and cast my ballot. It was kind of sad how little there was to actually vote for. Many seats in my city were uncontested. That seemed to be popular in many municipalities across Western New York.
Of course, I can’t blame people for not wanting to run for office. I wouldn’t want to deal with the pressure that comes from being an elected official. Aside from a small stipend, you mostly get paid in grief.
But it’s still sad only having one option to vote for. It’s not much of a vote. “Hey kids, do you want broccoli for dinner? Or broccoli?” Seriously. Not much of an option.
There were three “races” in which my only option was broccoli. I chose not to eat. I’ve made a habit of refusing to vote for any candidate who runs unopposed — no matter how much I might actually like that candidate. It’s my protest against the system, I suppose. Plus it saves ink.
My other frustration with the system is that each candidate can run on multiple lines. It’s called “fusion voting.” It should be called “the great scam.” Basically, major party candidates work their hardest to also secure their position on minor party lines. They have to do this because some people just won’t vote “Republican.” But they’ll vote “Conservative” or whatever.
As I told my friend Tim Schmitt from WLVL on Tuesday night, if you will vote for a candidate, but only on a line other than “Republican” or “Democrat,” you need to grow up. Your claim that “I’ve never voted Republican in my life” is juvenile. It’s like Bill Clinton not inhaling or “not having sexual relations with that woman, miss Lewinsky.” Really, you’re no better than Bill Clinton.
My last disappointment from this year’s election was the passage of Proposition 1, the referendum to allow casino voting in New York State. Although I have no opposition to casinos and generally think that anything that doesn’t infringe on others’ rights should be legal, I was offended by the way the ballot measure was worded, as well as how it was marketed.
The propaganda for the initiative pretty much said if you vote against it, you hate money and progress. So of course people voted for it. Well, at least the people who voted. Not that there were many of them.
Scott Leffler is a voter who votes. Vote for him on Twitter @scottleffler.
I was one of those who took the time to get out there and cast my ballot. It was kind of sad how little there was to actually vote for. Many seats in my city were uncontested. That seemed to be popular in many municipalities across Western New York.
Of course, I can’t blame people for not wanting to run for office. I wouldn’t want to deal with the pressure that comes from being an elected official. Aside from a small stipend, you mostly get paid in grief.
But it’s still sad only having one option to vote for. It’s not much of a vote. “Hey kids, do you want broccoli for dinner? Or broccoli?” Seriously. Not much of an option.
There were three “races” in which my only option was broccoli. I chose not to eat. I’ve made a habit of refusing to vote for any candidate who runs unopposed — no matter how much I might actually like that candidate. It’s my protest against the system, I suppose. Plus it saves ink.
My other frustration with the system is that each candidate can run on multiple lines. It’s called “fusion voting.” It should be called “the great scam.” Basically, major party candidates work their hardest to also secure their position on minor party lines. They have to do this because some people just won’t vote “Republican.” But they’ll vote “Conservative” or whatever.
As I told my friend Tim Schmitt from WLVL on Tuesday night, if you will vote for a candidate, but only on a line other than “Republican” or “Democrat,” you need to grow up. Your claim that “I’ve never voted Republican in my life” is juvenile. It’s like Bill Clinton not inhaling or “not having sexual relations with that woman, miss Lewinsky.” Really, you’re no better than Bill Clinton.
My last disappointment from this year’s election was the passage of Proposition 1, the referendum to allow casino voting in New York State. Although I have no opposition to casinos and generally think that anything that doesn’t infringe on others’ rights should be legal, I was offended by the way the ballot measure was worded, as well as how it was marketed.
The propaganda for the initiative pretty much said if you vote against it, you hate money and progress. So of course people voted for it. Well, at least the people who voted. Not that there were many of them.
Scott Leffler is a voter who votes. Vote for him on Twitter @scottleffler.
Monday, January 14, 2013
Crisis mode is the new black
It seems to me like more and more we’re not normal unless we’re in the midst of a crisis.
I don’t know if it’s the effect of American Idol or it we were all raised on WWF or what, but more and more it seems like anything non-life-threatening is just boring to us.
First is was the end of the world prediction. Then the next one. Then the Mayan one. Then the Fiscal Cliff. And now we’re worried about the debt ceiling. Again.
Government shutdowns are the new norm and the possibility that we might know where our next meal or paycheck is coming from is just so passe. If we’re not living on the edge these days, it’s like we’re not living.
From the crisis that was the election to the economic crisis that followed in the months after, we’re glued to our TVs and newspapers wondering what horrible tragedy may meet us next.
I can’t help but wonder why. What is it we get out of it? Or maybe it’s just me. Maybe I have a deluded view of the world and I’m the only one intrigued by these things.
In fact, there are people all around the world — even here in the US of A — that not only don’t know what the Fiscal Cliff is all about, they probably have no clue who won the American election. I either pity them or am jealous, I’m not sure which.
The latest grand plan, although I’m not sure whose plan it is, is to mint a trillion dollar coin to deal with the impending debt ceiling doom. A trillion. That’s a 1 with 12 zeros after it. It looks like this: 1,000,000,000,000.
If you worked for the next 70 years, you could easily save up a trillion dollars. Assuming of course, you didn’t eat … and you made $274.7 million a month. And some change.
To be completely honest with you, my life is kind of boring. I wake up. I eat. I putz around. I go to work. I come home. I putz around. I sleep. I repeat. On weekends, it’s a little more exciting because I actually get to spend time with my kids. And we watch movies where things blow up.
But movies where things blow up are not nearly as compelling as the possibility that the fabric of society completely unravels. Which is where we’ve constantly been for the past few years.
I mean, really. Your life pales in comparison to the impending doom predicted by some Mayan thousands of years ago who created a calendar which allegedly foretold the end of the world, right?
So we take the latest crisis and we hang on in hopes that it will be more exciting than the last crisis, which — let’s be honest — was a little ho hum, right?
Maybe some day we’ll go back to just living our lives. Going to work. Sleeping. And watching Bourne movies with the kids.
Until then, bring out the trillion dollar coin.
Scott Leffler majored in sarcasm in college. He had a double minor in apathy and lunch. Feel free to make a futile effort of following his twisted logic on Twitter @scottleffler.
I don’t know if it’s the effect of American Idol or it we were all raised on WWF or what, but more and more it seems like anything non-life-threatening is just boring to us.
First is was the end of the world prediction. Then the next one. Then the Mayan one. Then the Fiscal Cliff. And now we’re worried about the debt ceiling. Again.
Government shutdowns are the new norm and the possibility that we might know where our next meal or paycheck is coming from is just so passe. If we’re not living on the edge these days, it’s like we’re not living.
From the crisis that was the election to the economic crisis that followed in the months after, we’re glued to our TVs and newspapers wondering what horrible tragedy may meet us next.
I can’t help but wonder why. What is it we get out of it? Or maybe it’s just me. Maybe I have a deluded view of the world and I’m the only one intrigued by these things.
In fact, there are people all around the world — even here in the US of A — that not only don’t know what the Fiscal Cliff is all about, they probably have no clue who won the American election. I either pity them or am jealous, I’m not sure which.
The latest grand plan, although I’m not sure whose plan it is, is to mint a trillion dollar coin to deal with the impending debt ceiling doom. A trillion. That’s a 1 with 12 zeros after it. It looks like this: 1,000,000,000,000.
If you worked for the next 70 years, you could easily save up a trillion dollars. Assuming of course, you didn’t eat … and you made $274.7 million a month. And some change.
To be completely honest with you, my life is kind of boring. I wake up. I eat. I putz around. I go to work. I come home. I putz around. I sleep. I repeat. On weekends, it’s a little more exciting because I actually get to spend time with my kids. And we watch movies where things blow up.
But movies where things blow up are not nearly as compelling as the possibility that the fabric of society completely unravels. Which is where we’ve constantly been for the past few years.
I mean, really. Your life pales in comparison to the impending doom predicted by some Mayan thousands of years ago who created a calendar which allegedly foretold the end of the world, right?
So we take the latest crisis and we hang on in hopes that it will be more exciting than the last crisis, which — let’s be honest — was a little ho hum, right?
Maybe some day we’ll go back to just living our lives. Going to work. Sleeping. And watching Bourne movies with the kids.
Until then, bring out the trillion dollar coin.
Scott Leffler majored in sarcasm in college. He had a double minor in apathy and lunch. Feel free to make a futile effort of following his twisted logic on Twitter @scottleffler.
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Let the pundit battle rage on
Like many of the pundits that you see on TV spouting off about politics, I went to school for journalism and political science. Unlike (seemingly) many of them, I was not in the least bit surprised by last week’s election results.
There is a battle brewing between words and numbers and right now, numbers are winning.
See, many of the political analysts thought they understood how polls worked and many of them tried to read them themselves as though they were soothsayers reading tea leaves or something. Then they mixed in a healthy dose of “gut instinct” and came up with their conclusion that the election was going to be a nailbiter and Gov. Mitt Romney had a good chance of winning because unemployment was high — among other reasons.
I’m not an analyst. I don’t pretend to read polls. I don’t pretend to understand polls. In fact, I don’t like dealing with numbers at all. Math is so not my strong suit. But I’m smart enough to know that, acknowledge it and use a lifeline to “phone a friend.”
For the past three elections, that “friend” has been Nate Silver*. He’s been spot on in reading the poll numbers, giving them weight, and figuring out what they all mean. Taking his cue from his ability to analyze baseball statistics, Silver created a website devoted to analyze polling statistics for elections. And a brand was made.
For some reason, Silver’s polling numbers got under some people’s skin this year — primarily because they didn’t like the results, I think. It was a classic case of attacking the messenger.
But now that the election has come and gone and Silver was overwhelmingly correct in his “predictions,” there will be a new fight - between Silver’s new (and old) fans and those who still believe that gut instincts and intuition plays a role.
I suppose it is possible that Silver’s dead-on predictions in the 2008, 2010 and 2012 election cycles are all a matter of happenstance. It’s theoretically plausible that he’s just gotten lucky for the past three elections. But the odds are that he’s just smart.
Sadly, people are already talking about who will run for what office in two years and four years. Personally, I’m not ready for that. I think we should finalize the results of this election first.
Apart from the battle for the House, Senate and White House, though, many political pundits — analysts, whatever — face an uphill battle for mere relevancy. And just as people hoped and prayed that Obama would be a one-term wonder, there are many secretly (and some openly) praying for the downfall of Nate Silver and his ability to do math.
That’s a battle I’m excited to watch. Granted, it’s inside baseball, but for a political geek like me it’ll be fun.
* Scott Leffler isn’t actually friends with Nate Silver. He just has an overactive imagination and a horrible penchant for mixing metaphors. Follow him on Twitter @scottleffler.
There is a battle brewing between words and numbers and right now, numbers are winning.
See, many of the political analysts thought they understood how polls worked and many of them tried to read them themselves as though they were soothsayers reading tea leaves or something. Then they mixed in a healthy dose of “gut instinct” and came up with their conclusion that the election was going to be a nailbiter and Gov. Mitt Romney had a good chance of winning because unemployment was high — among other reasons.
I’m not an analyst. I don’t pretend to read polls. I don’t pretend to understand polls. In fact, I don’t like dealing with numbers at all. Math is so not my strong suit. But I’m smart enough to know that, acknowledge it and use a lifeline to “phone a friend.”
For the past three elections, that “friend” has been Nate Silver*. He’s been spot on in reading the poll numbers, giving them weight, and figuring out what they all mean. Taking his cue from his ability to analyze baseball statistics, Silver created a website devoted to analyze polling statistics for elections. And a brand was made.
For some reason, Silver’s polling numbers got under some people’s skin this year — primarily because they didn’t like the results, I think. It was a classic case of attacking the messenger.
But now that the election has come and gone and Silver was overwhelmingly correct in his “predictions,” there will be a new fight - between Silver’s new (and old) fans and those who still believe that gut instincts and intuition plays a role.
I suppose it is possible that Silver’s dead-on predictions in the 2008, 2010 and 2012 election cycles are all a matter of happenstance. It’s theoretically plausible that he’s just gotten lucky for the past three elections. But the odds are that he’s just smart.
Sadly, people are already talking about who will run for what office in two years and four years. Personally, I’m not ready for that. I think we should finalize the results of this election first.
Apart from the battle for the House, Senate and White House, though, many political pundits — analysts, whatever — face an uphill battle for mere relevancy. And just as people hoped and prayed that Obama would be a one-term wonder, there are many secretly (and some openly) praying for the downfall of Nate Silver and his ability to do math.
That’s a battle I’m excited to watch. Granted, it’s inside baseball, but for a political geek like me it’ll be fun.
* Scott Leffler isn’t actually friends with Nate Silver. He just has an overactive imagination and a horrible penchant for mixing metaphors. Follow him on Twitter @scottleffler.
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Something scary is in the air
It’s the scariest time of the year. And no, I’m not talking about Halloween. I’m talking about election time.
This is my last column prior to election day and I could tell you who to vote for but I have no intention of ever doing that. Ever.
I just hope that people will vote based on knowledge and fact instead of voting for the person they share a skin color with or the person their spouse or favorite media mogul told them to.
The real scary thing going on right now is that people DO vote based on those things. And with an election as close as some are projecting it to be, I hate to see the whole thing decided by people who don’t know what they heck they’re doing.
Whether it’s the presidential election or the race for your local congressional seat or even your state assemblyman or senator, informed decisions are crucial.
Like you, I’ve been inundated with political mailers and commercials and even water cooler talk from people who want me to vote for their candidate. Facebook has been almost unbearable with all the political banter — as if anyone’s Facebook post has ever swayed someone else’s mind. Actually, I’m sure it has and that just leads to me thinking that my being scared is warranted.
The scariest thing for me, though, is the fear. The number of people who seem to think that these United States are so fragile that any one man — be it Barack Obama or Mitt Romney — could bring about its demise in four short years is truly frightening.
There are a system of checks and balances in place to prevent that from happening. Some of those checks in balances are the electoral system itself. Others are those we elect.
While my friend and fellow columnist Bob Confer expressed some concern in his most recent writing that we are headed towards a monarchy, I have no such fear. I believe that the system put in place by our founders remains intact and completely capable of protecting us from the potential that any one man (or woman for that matter) could destroy our freedoms.
That’s not to say that everything is hunky-dory. No, I think that America is sick and in need of a healing. I think we’ve become far too obsessed with what government can do for us and much less interested in what we can do for ourselves … or for our country.
When we look upon government to save us, ask yourself what we need saving from. The all-too-obvious answer is ourselves. So cut out the middleman and do it yourself. Vote not for the person who’s going to help you the best but who’s going to help America the best. Maybe it’s the same person. Maybe it’s not. But this systemic greed doesn’t flow from the top down. It flows from the bottom up. And only we can change it.
As you get ready to vote next Tuesday, I ask only that you base your vote on knowledge instead of fear.
Scott Leffler is a raving lunatic whose weekly rantings are available each week in this paper and online. Shorter daily-ish rantings are available on Twitter @scottleffler.
Monday, April 23, 2012
Superstitions and the power of one
It's funny the little things we do. Some of them are done without really thinking about it. Some of them are very much on purpose. Call them habits. Call them idiosyncrasies. Superstitions, even. But we all have our peculiarites.
I've mentioned before my penchant for stirring Kool-Aid with a wooden spoon and the fact that it never even seemed odd to me until my girlfriend pointed it out. After some research, I concluded that it was a learned trait, as my mother had stirred Kool-Aid with a spoon.
I have other oddities.
I do things in four-counts. For example, if I'm stirring something, I will stir it four, eight, 12, 16, 20, 24, etc. times. I would never stir it 17 times. It's some sort of built in rhythmic harmony that I only just realized about myself. Maybe it's from eight years of playing the trumpet and counting in 4/4. Or maybe I'm just odd.
Milk and sugar has to go in my coffee before the coffee does. I tell myself that this is scientific and that it allows the pouring of the coffee to help mix the ingredients, but I know that it isn't going to matter since I'm going to stir it in perfect measure.
Superstitions and oddities are never more on display that when sports is involved. You see people joke all the time that the Sabres (or Bills or whatever) won or lost the game based upon who was there: "That's is, Martha, you're not allowed to go to any more games. They lose every time you go!"
But that's just joking ... right?
As deeply as you may know that your attendance or lack thereof has no real bearing on how your team plays, you can't help but feel like maybe they would have done a little better if you had gone. Or had you not turned the TV off. Or gone for a bathroom break. I cannot explain, but it's true of me and since I'm a perfect example of humanity, I figure it must be true of everyone.
And it's not just attending/watching the game. You've got to wear the right shirt. And the right hat. And maybe the right pair of socks. After all, who doesn't have lucky socks?
I have no idea if Mitt Romney has lucky socks. But it's my understand that as a Mormon, he has magic underwear. Yes, that's possibly the worst segue in the history of ever, but it's all I've got to switch from sports to politics right now. So stay with me, please.
Willard "Mitt" Romney, as you surely know, will be the GOP nominee for the presidency. Come November we will all have the opportunity to vote for him, Barack Obama, and a variety of other people, the vast majority of whom we've never heard of before.
But if historical data is accurate, fewer than six in 10 of us will actually vote. There seems to be this theory that one vote doesn't matter — or that voting doesn't matter — despite historical evidence to the contrary. Every single election going back 150 years could have had a different outcome had those who didn't vote cast votes for the losing candidate. Every single one.
So I can't help but wonder, why are we all so willing to wear old socks and dirty shirts to "help" our team win when we won't even go take part in a game that we've actually been invited to play? Why do we feel so powerless in a system designed to be powered by us? And what can we do to change that?
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Election night bloopers and jokes
I’ve mentioned before that politics is one of my favorite sports, and election night is my Superbowl.
Just like the real Superbowl, no two election nights are the same. Sometimes things go exactly how you expect them, and sometimes there’s a wardrobe malfunction at half time or a wide-right field goal with time running out.
This year, I was quarterbacking election coverage for the Lockport Union-Sun & Journal. We had our team in place and were in the typically boring part of the evening — the “now we wait” part.
In truth, there are several “now we wait” parts. We wait for polls to close. We wait for results to come in. And then we wait for candidates to talk to us. This was the second “now we wait” part, waiting for the numbers to come in.
I sat in the newsroom waiting for fresh numbers from the board of elections, and our team was out in the field waiting to talk to candidates and taking pictures of the evening’s candidates’ parties.
Our staff photographer, Joe Eberle, was popping back and forth from Republican headquarters at Danny Sheehan’s to Democratic County Clerk Candidate Pat Murphy’s headquarters at the Shamus Restaurant. Meanwhile, one of our freelance photographers, Heather Grimmer, had set up camp at Lockport’s Democratic headquarters, the Davison Road Inn.
The Davison Road Inn, or D.R.I., was the home to Democratic mayoral candidate Mike Pillot and candidate for alderman, Shirley Nicholas.
We knew the mayoral race was going to be tight and could go either way. The refuse and recycling issue in Lockport had made Mayor Mike Tucker vulnerable. It had done the same with 1st Ward Alderwoman Richelle Pasceri. In fact, she had lost the GOP primary to Nicholas for that very reason.
Potentially, we had two upsets on our hands, and we wanted to have a photographer on hand to snap pictures of the happy winners at Democrat headquarters, if that’s the way it played out.
Unfortunately, our photographer, Heather, was asked to stop taking photographs — and leave — by adherents to the Democrats’ campaigns.
“We don’t like the Union-Sun and we’d like you to leave,” is the paraphrase that was relayed back to me.
Heather — a professional photographer, but a novice at politics — called to ask me how to proceed. Me — not being a novice at politics — was rather upset at the lack of class and professional decorum on display by the Democrats. And frankly, I was a bit shocked. I mean, this just isn’t the way it works.
Side note for those who don’t know me well: The only thing I dislike more than Democrats are Republicans.
Heather had every right to stay at D.R.I., a point reiterated to her by the staff of the D.R.I. But I told her to leave the restaurant without taking any photos. If the candidates and their people didn’t want their pictures in the paper, then, by golly, they weren’t going to be.
And all I could think was, “If this is the way these people treat others, I hope to God they don’t get elected.”
They didn’t. Karmic justice, if you ask me.
Just like the real Superbowl, no two election nights are the same. Sometimes things go exactly how you expect them, and sometimes there’s a wardrobe malfunction at half time or a wide-right field goal with time running out.
This year, I was quarterbacking election coverage for the Lockport Union-Sun & Journal. We had our team in place and were in the typically boring part of the evening — the “now we wait” part.
In truth, there are several “now we wait” parts. We wait for polls to close. We wait for results to come in. And then we wait for candidates to talk to us. This was the second “now we wait” part, waiting for the numbers to come in.
I sat in the newsroom waiting for fresh numbers from the board of elections, and our team was out in the field waiting to talk to candidates and taking pictures of the evening’s candidates’ parties.
Our staff photographer, Joe Eberle, was popping back and forth from Republican headquarters at Danny Sheehan’s to Democratic County Clerk Candidate Pat Murphy’s headquarters at the Shamus Restaurant. Meanwhile, one of our freelance photographers, Heather Grimmer, had set up camp at Lockport’s Democratic headquarters, the Davison Road Inn.
The Davison Road Inn, or D.R.I., was the home to Democratic mayoral candidate Mike Pillot and candidate for alderman, Shirley Nicholas.
We knew the mayoral race was going to be tight and could go either way. The refuse and recycling issue in Lockport had made Mayor Mike Tucker vulnerable. It had done the same with 1st Ward Alderwoman Richelle Pasceri. In fact, she had lost the GOP primary to Nicholas for that very reason.
Potentially, we had two upsets on our hands, and we wanted to have a photographer on hand to snap pictures of the happy winners at Democrat headquarters, if that’s the way it played out.
Unfortunately, our photographer, Heather, was asked to stop taking photographs — and leave — by adherents to the Democrats’ campaigns.
“We don’t like the Union-Sun and we’d like you to leave,” is the paraphrase that was relayed back to me.
Heather — a professional photographer, but a novice at politics — called to ask me how to proceed. Me — not being a novice at politics — was rather upset at the lack of class and professional decorum on display by the Democrats. And frankly, I was a bit shocked. I mean, this just isn’t the way it works.
Side note for those who don’t know me well: The only thing I dislike more than Democrats are Republicans.
Heather had every right to stay at D.R.I., a point reiterated to her by the staff of the D.R.I. But I told her to leave the restaurant without taking any photos. If the candidates and their people didn’t want their pictures in the paper, then, by golly, they weren’t going to be.
And all I could think was, “If this is the way these people treat others, I hope to God they don’t get elected.”
They didn’t. Karmic justice, if you ask me.
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
For everything there is a season
I’ve always liked Halloween.
As a kid, Halloween gave me an excuse to eat as many Snickers bars as possible in a very short period of time. I’m almost surprised I made it through the Halloweens of my youth, given the amount of sugar I consumed.
Also as a kid, I always enjoyed the Halloween parade at my school, Military Road Elementary School, which is now just a big abandoned building. Some say it’s haunted. Of course, some say every big abandoned building is haunted. They have overactive imaginations.
As a teenager, it was my love of scary movies that took over. I have no idea why it is people enjoy being scared, but they do. Many of my favorite movies are of the horror variety.
When my kids were younger, I enjoyed Halloween vicariously through them. They got excited about the costumes — and no doubt, the candy. I enjoyed walking around the neighborhood with them and hearing everyone comment on their costumes.
As an adult, my favorite part about Halloween is the costumes. It’s amazing some of the things that some people wear out in public. I’m not sure when Halloween made the transition from “wear something scary” to “wear almost nothing,” but I’m not complaining.
I also enjoy carving pumpkins. I’m not particularly good at it, but I have fun doing it anyway. I’m usually a bit of an overachiever when it comes to jack-o-lantern carving. I have some great pictures throughout the years.
I find it funny that the same holiday has meant so many different things over the years. I guess that’s called growing up.
Another thing that Halloween means these days is that it’s almost election time. This has been a rather hum-drum election year. There are no major statewide races. There are no Congressional races. And despite the fact that there are stories about the race for the White House in the news every single day, that’s not this year either.
I’m looking forward to the end of election season, nonetheless.
Election season is almost a Halloween of its own. Normal people change into something different to bad-mouth perfectly good citizens and make the rest of the world think they’re sinister and scary.
After Halloween (and election season), it’s a mad dash to the end of the year — and Christmas.
Stores used to wait until after Halloween to start putting up Christmas displays. That tradition seems to have been changed. This year, I saw Christmas stuff and Halloween stuff go out at the same time.
I love me some Christmas, but I do wish it would wait until after spooky season.
It’s funny how fast the last two months of the year always go. The calendar gets from Nov. 1 to Dec. 31 in what seems like a couple days. But Jan. 1 to March 1, on the other hand, take much, much longer.
For now, I’ll just enjoy the season we’re in — with the candy and the movies and the decorations and the costumes. And the political fliers and the commercials and the lies and the propaganda.
As a kid, Halloween gave me an excuse to eat as many Snickers bars as possible in a very short period of time. I’m almost surprised I made it through the Halloweens of my youth, given the amount of sugar I consumed.
Also as a kid, I always enjoyed the Halloween parade at my school, Military Road Elementary School, which is now just a big abandoned building. Some say it’s haunted. Of course, some say every big abandoned building is haunted. They have overactive imaginations.
As a teenager, it was my love of scary movies that took over. I have no idea why it is people enjoy being scared, but they do. Many of my favorite movies are of the horror variety.
When my kids were younger, I enjoyed Halloween vicariously through them. They got excited about the costumes — and no doubt, the candy. I enjoyed walking around the neighborhood with them and hearing everyone comment on their costumes.
As an adult, my favorite part about Halloween is the costumes. It’s amazing some of the things that some people wear out in public. I’m not sure when Halloween made the transition from “wear something scary” to “wear almost nothing,” but I’m not complaining.
I also enjoy carving pumpkins. I’m not particularly good at it, but I have fun doing it anyway. I’m usually a bit of an overachiever when it comes to jack-o-lantern carving. I have some great pictures throughout the years.
I find it funny that the same holiday has meant so many different things over the years. I guess that’s called growing up.
Another thing that Halloween means these days is that it’s almost election time. This has been a rather hum-drum election year. There are no major statewide races. There are no Congressional races. And despite the fact that there are stories about the race for the White House in the news every single day, that’s not this year either.
I’m looking forward to the end of election season, nonetheless.
Election season is almost a Halloween of its own. Normal people change into something different to bad-mouth perfectly good citizens and make the rest of the world think they’re sinister and scary.
After Halloween (and election season), it’s a mad dash to the end of the year — and Christmas.
Stores used to wait until after Halloween to start putting up Christmas displays. That tradition seems to have been changed. This year, I saw Christmas stuff and Halloween stuff go out at the same time.
I love me some Christmas, but I do wish it would wait until after spooky season.
It’s funny how fast the last two months of the year always go. The calendar gets from Nov. 1 to Dec. 31 in what seems like a couple days. But Jan. 1 to March 1, on the other hand, take much, much longer.
For now, I’ll just enjoy the season we’re in — with the candy and the movies and the decorations and the costumes. And the political fliers and the commercials and the lies and the propaganda.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Finally it's time to move on
It’ll all be over soon.
Like most people in Western New York — especially the media, I have to presume — I’ve been looking forward to today for quite a while. After tonight, we don’t have to worry about commercials for or against any of the candidates in the special election for the 26th Congressional District. After tonight, I don’t have to worry about Kathy Hochul and Jane Corwin blowing up my email. After tonight, I can delete the #NY26 saved search on my twitter. After tonight it’ll all be over.
I hope.
I thought the same thing a week ago today about the school budget votes, particularly the sports complex vote in the Lockport City School District. And last Wednesday afternoon, I still wasn’t sure if that proposal had passed or failed. So there is a possibility that tomorrow morning, I’ll still be waiting, wondering and watching as candidates bring in high-priced lawyers from Washington much like George W. Bush and Al Gore did in Florida in the 2000 presidential election.
The polling numbers lately in the 26th district seem very close, with one poll over the weekend showing Democrat Kathy Hochul with a 4 percent lead, which was within the margin of error, and a second showing her a six-point lead, just outside the margin of error. Please, God, don’t let there be a recount. The voters of Western New York have suffered long enough.
For members of the media, especially those covering the election — which I’ve done a bit of this time around — election night is an awesome thing. I enjoyed election nights when I worked in radio, but there’s something about working in a newsroom on election night. Waiting for polling numbers to come in from places you’ve never heard of.
I’ve heard “jokes” before that war is God’s way of teaching us geography. Elections do the same thing for members of the media. Analyzing congressional districts might not sound fun to you, but there are maps of the 26th district on people’s desks in newsrooms across Western New York.
I’ve enjoyed seeing stories I’ve written picked up by other news outlets across the state, as well as seeing stories written by people I know and respect spread out across the state.
Because of the nature of this election and the potential implications, all eyes are on us today. Media outlets I love to watch and read have been talking about the same things I’m talking about. The same things you’re talking about. It all makes the world very small, and more importantly, centered around us.
There have been days in the past few weeks where I have wished that Chris Lee had just kept his shirt on, but what’s done is done.
It’s time to move on.
Thankfully.
Hopefully.
Like most people in Western New York — especially the media, I have to presume — I’ve been looking forward to today for quite a while. After tonight, we don’t have to worry about commercials for or against any of the candidates in the special election for the 26th Congressional District. After tonight, I don’t have to worry about Kathy Hochul and Jane Corwin blowing up my email. After tonight, I can delete the #NY26 saved search on my twitter. After tonight it’ll all be over.
I hope.
I thought the same thing a week ago today about the school budget votes, particularly the sports complex vote in the Lockport City School District. And last Wednesday afternoon, I still wasn’t sure if that proposal had passed or failed. So there is a possibility that tomorrow morning, I’ll still be waiting, wondering and watching as candidates bring in high-priced lawyers from Washington much like George W. Bush and Al Gore did in Florida in the 2000 presidential election.
The polling numbers lately in the 26th district seem very close, with one poll over the weekend showing Democrat Kathy Hochul with a 4 percent lead, which was within the margin of error, and a second showing her a six-point lead, just outside the margin of error. Please, God, don’t let there be a recount. The voters of Western New York have suffered long enough.
For members of the media, especially those covering the election — which I’ve done a bit of this time around — election night is an awesome thing. I enjoyed election nights when I worked in radio, but there’s something about working in a newsroom on election night. Waiting for polling numbers to come in from places you’ve never heard of.
I’ve heard “jokes” before that war is God’s way of teaching us geography. Elections do the same thing for members of the media. Analyzing congressional districts might not sound fun to you, but there are maps of the 26th district on people’s desks in newsrooms across Western New York.
I’ve enjoyed seeing stories I’ve written picked up by other news outlets across the state, as well as seeing stories written by people I know and respect spread out across the state.
Because of the nature of this election and the potential implications, all eyes are on us today. Media outlets I love to watch and read have been talking about the same things I’m talking about. The same things you’re talking about. It all makes the world very small, and more importantly, centered around us.
There have been days in the past few weeks where I have wished that Chris Lee had just kept his shirt on, but what’s done is done.
It’s time to move on.
Thankfully.
Hopefully.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
The questions that don't get asked ...
Sometimes questions that don't get asked are the ones that should.
I'm not sure how or why, but I was talking about politics with my oldest daughter on Sunday and she asked me, “what's the point of political parties?”
I attempted to explain it the best way I could, telling her it was sort of an indication to others of who your friends were. “It's kind of like football jerseys,” I said. “It's so you know who to throw the ball to.”
Except, that's a horrible explanation.
And the more I attempted to think of a metaphor for the reasoning for political parties, the more frustrated I got. Because, honestly, I just can't.
As the lame ducks in Congress convened in Washington yesterday, the Democrats pushed to get certain things done before the end of their session, knowing that come January when the Republicans take over, their ideals will be put on hold for at least two years.
Many political pundits are split over whether the Democrats will get anything meaningful accomplished in the next month and a half. Some think they'll ram some legislation through and others think they'll simply bicker, much like they have been doing for the last 22 months.
So here's a question that seldom gets asked aloud: Why do we have an election and then wait nearly two months to put the people we elected into office?
Sure there are some races that remain undecided. Votes need counted. And recounted. But for the most part, we know the winners and losers of the mid-term election. Ironically, the losers get a month and a half back at the controls.
In a manner of speaking, each election, we have a pre-planned revolution – a mutiny of sorts. And then we tell the captains we had just revolted against that they have six more weeks at the helm. Why don't we throw them out on their behinds immediately?
For some masochistic reason, I looked forward to watching the Bills game on Sunday. Every week the Bills frustrate me, and yet, I as hoping to watch the game. Unfortunately I couldn't because it was blacked out locally.
Football fans understand the blackout. If the game doesn't sell out, we don't get to watch it. Have you ever thought about the logic in that? If not enough people think the game is worth paying to watch, you don't get to watch it for free.
NFL: “Sorry, but your team is horrible. The only way you can watch them is to pay.”
Does that make sense to anyone?
Some questions, I guess, don't have good answers. And sometimes it takes a 13-year-old girl, a dysfunctional group of middle-aged white men, or a shoddy football team to make you realize that.
Be sure to read next week as we learn why we drive on a parkway, but park on a driveway. Plus, why are there interstate highways in Hawaii?
I'm not sure how or why, but I was talking about politics with my oldest daughter on Sunday and she asked me, “what's the point of political parties?”
I attempted to explain it the best way I could, telling her it was sort of an indication to others of who your friends were. “It's kind of like football jerseys,” I said. “It's so you know who to throw the ball to.”
Except, that's a horrible explanation.
And the more I attempted to think of a metaphor for the reasoning for political parties, the more frustrated I got. Because, honestly, I just can't.
As the lame ducks in Congress convened in Washington yesterday, the Democrats pushed to get certain things done before the end of their session, knowing that come January when the Republicans take over, their ideals will be put on hold for at least two years.
Many political pundits are split over whether the Democrats will get anything meaningful accomplished in the next month and a half. Some think they'll ram some legislation through and others think they'll simply bicker, much like they have been doing for the last 22 months.
So here's a question that seldom gets asked aloud: Why do we have an election and then wait nearly two months to put the people we elected into office?
Sure there are some races that remain undecided. Votes need counted. And recounted. But for the most part, we know the winners and losers of the mid-term election. Ironically, the losers get a month and a half back at the controls.
In a manner of speaking, each election, we have a pre-planned revolution – a mutiny of sorts. And then we tell the captains we had just revolted against that they have six more weeks at the helm. Why don't we throw them out on their behinds immediately?
For some masochistic reason, I looked forward to watching the Bills game on Sunday. Every week the Bills frustrate me, and yet, I as hoping to watch the game. Unfortunately I couldn't because it was blacked out locally.
Football fans understand the blackout. If the game doesn't sell out, we don't get to watch it. Have you ever thought about the logic in that? If not enough people think the game is worth paying to watch, you don't get to watch it for free.
NFL: “Sorry, but your team is horrible. The only way you can watch them is to pay.”
Does that make sense to anyone?
Some questions, I guess, don't have good answers. And sometimes it takes a 13-year-old girl, a dysfunctional group of middle-aged white men, or a shoddy football team to make you realize that.
Be sure to read next week as we learn why we drive on a parkway, but park on a driveway. Plus, why are there interstate highways in Hawaii?
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Railing on rails ... and more
This is one of those weeks where there's a lot going on in my head, but only one column to get it all out there. As such, I present to you a semi-random stream of consciousness.
I suppose I should say something about the election last week. It went exactly as I expected. Cuomo trounced Paladino. The Republicans crushed the Democrats in Congress. And I voted for two winners.
Okay, so I wasn't sure I'd vote for any winners, but sometimes you get lucky, right?
Although the thought of having another Cuomo in office frightens me, I was impressed by the governor-elect's acceptance speech. Let's hope he can really do some good because we're stuck with him for a while unless he ends up being "Client 10."
I'm looking forward to having a leiutenant governor from Western New York. Hopefully Robert Duffy can remind Cuomo that we exist occasionally.
I know Rochester isn't technically Western New York, but, come on. It is.
I like the city of Rochester. I don't go there as often as I'd like to. Maybe if we had a better transportation system, I would.
Maybe if we get some of the $1.2 billion in high-speed rail funding that Ohio and Wisconsin have opted out of, we can improve that transportation system and I can go to Rochester.
Last week, the governors-elect of those states said they didn't want the funding that had been planned to go to their states and Congresswoman Louise Slaughter offered to take it off their hands.
I've been a fan of the concept of high-speed rail since before it was a national discussion. Other places have it. Why can't we?
The thought of being able to hop a train and be to New York City in a few hours is quite compelling, don't you think? Our current train system takes approximately four years (only a slight exaggeration) to get from here to there. Seriously, though, it's faster to take a bus.
That just doesn't seem right.
I've seen the proposed map for high-speed rail. It goes from New York to Niagara Falls and then up to Toronto. This will make it easier for Jets fan to commute to Bills games and root against the "home team."
The Bills game on Sunday was disheartening. Of course, the loss was sad, but not unexpected. The bigger disappointment was the number of Bears fans in attendance. Or maybe they weren't Bears fans. Maybe they were just Bills detractors.
It seems like every game that's been played in Toronto has had just as many (if not more) people rooting against the Bills as rooting for them. To call it a home game is a joke.
Not that this year's Bills had much of a chance, but it is a little frustrating that every other team in the league has eight home games and eight away games. Ours, meanwhile, has seven home games and nine away games. It's like the 2005 Saints, except instead of a natural disaster forcing the team out, it's the economy.
Maybe Cuomo can fix the economy. If for no other reason than to stop the Bills from having to play in Toronto any more.
I suppose I should say something about the election last week. It went exactly as I expected. Cuomo trounced Paladino. The Republicans crushed the Democrats in Congress. And I voted for two winners.
Okay, so I wasn't sure I'd vote for any winners, but sometimes you get lucky, right?
Although the thought of having another Cuomo in office frightens me, I was impressed by the governor-elect's acceptance speech. Let's hope he can really do some good because we're stuck with him for a while unless he ends up being "Client 10."
I'm looking forward to having a leiutenant governor from Western New York. Hopefully Robert Duffy can remind Cuomo that we exist occasionally.
I know Rochester isn't technically Western New York, but, come on. It is.
I like the city of Rochester. I don't go there as often as I'd like to. Maybe if we had a better transportation system, I would.
Maybe if we get some of the $1.2 billion in high-speed rail funding that Ohio and Wisconsin have opted out of, we can improve that transportation system and I can go to Rochester.
Last week, the governors-elect of those states said they didn't want the funding that had been planned to go to their states and Congresswoman Louise Slaughter offered to take it off their hands.
I've been a fan of the concept of high-speed rail since before it was a national discussion. Other places have it. Why can't we?
The thought of being able to hop a train and be to New York City in a few hours is quite compelling, don't you think? Our current train system takes approximately four years (only a slight exaggeration) to get from here to there. Seriously, though, it's faster to take a bus.
That just doesn't seem right.
I've seen the proposed map for high-speed rail. It goes from New York to Niagara Falls and then up to Toronto. This will make it easier for Jets fan to commute to Bills games and root against the "home team."
The Bills game on Sunday was disheartening. Of course, the loss was sad, but not unexpected. The bigger disappointment was the number of Bears fans in attendance. Or maybe they weren't Bears fans. Maybe they were just Bills detractors.
It seems like every game that's been played in Toronto has had just as many (if not more) people rooting against the Bills as rooting for them. To call it a home game is a joke.
Not that this year's Bills had much of a chance, but it is a little frustrating that every other team in the league has eight home games and eight away games. Ours, meanwhile, has seven home games and nine away games. It's like the 2005 Saints, except instead of a natural disaster forcing the team out, it's the economy.
Maybe Cuomo can fix the economy. If for no other reason than to stop the Bills from having to play in Toronto any more.
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Happy election day. Now go vote. Or don't.
If you're reading today's column in hopes that I'll provide some advice or insight on voting today, then I have most certainly failed you.
If you know what you're voting for or against, then by all means head to the polls and cast your ballots. If you were waiting for my suggestions, do us all a favor and sit this one out. There are enough followers in the world. And there are far too many uninformed voters.
I know how I'm voting. And I know that most of the votes I cast will be for people who will not win their races. I'm okay with that. Voting isn't about siding with the winners. It's about siding with your conscience … your beliefs.
A vote for a candidate you believe in is never wasted, no matter how slim the odds of their election.
Tomorrow morning the newspapers and talk shows will be filled with people telling you what the results of todays election mean. They'll all be full of it. And likely full of themselves. Today's election is no more crucial than last years. Or next years. Today's election is the will of the people. As it is every year.
Lots of people have spent lots of money telling you that this election is the biggest thing since sliced bread … or peanut butter … depending on what they compare things to. You can listen to them and believe that the world is falling apart, or you can rest assured that no matter who wins today, the sun will rise tomorrow and we'll still have the same problems to deal with.
Sure, it may be true that the person you vote for is more capable of fixing those problems than the other person (or people) on the ballot. But in the long run, America will still be America, living on for our children … and our children’s children.
I will sleep easy tonight knowing that tomorrow is one day closer to the future … and the future holds wonderful things. The future will be cleaner, healthier and more prosperous. It will be ruled by intellect instead of fear. And compassion will win out over greed.
Today is just a hiccup. A rest stop on life's highway. A mere grain of sand in life's hourglass. No matter what happens today, we can fix it tomorrow. Or the tomorrow after that.
Many people will go to bed tonight in horror, knowing that the person they hoped would get elected lost. They'll write off the election process, saying it's a sham. They'll curse out their neighbors, saying they're ignorant for voting the way they did. They'll look into moving to Canada. Or France. Or whatever. They'll say their business can't survive in this environment and they'll have to put it up for sale.
Those people are wrong on many levels. Differences of opinions is one of the things that makes this great nation of ours so great in the first place. The ebb and flow of the direction of our country keep it on the straight and narrow – over the course of the trip. The political pendulum must swing. And swing, it will.
Maybe your vote will help it swing the way you want it to. Maybe your vote will prevent it from swinging too far. Or maybe you won't vote and you'll just watch as the pendulum swings.
No matter, tomorrow will come. And we'll all have to pick ourselves up by our boot straps and keep moving forward.
As long as we do that, the brand of politicians running the Capitol Building or the statehouse won't matter.
If you know what you're voting for or against, then by all means head to the polls and cast your ballots. If you were waiting for my suggestions, do us all a favor and sit this one out. There are enough followers in the world. And there are far too many uninformed voters.
I know how I'm voting. And I know that most of the votes I cast will be for people who will not win their races. I'm okay with that. Voting isn't about siding with the winners. It's about siding with your conscience … your beliefs.
A vote for a candidate you believe in is never wasted, no matter how slim the odds of their election.
Tomorrow morning the newspapers and talk shows will be filled with people telling you what the results of todays election mean. They'll all be full of it. And likely full of themselves. Today's election is no more crucial than last years. Or next years. Today's election is the will of the people. As it is every year.
Lots of people have spent lots of money telling you that this election is the biggest thing since sliced bread … or peanut butter … depending on what they compare things to. You can listen to them and believe that the world is falling apart, or you can rest assured that no matter who wins today, the sun will rise tomorrow and we'll still have the same problems to deal with.
Sure, it may be true that the person you vote for is more capable of fixing those problems than the other person (or people) on the ballot. But in the long run, America will still be America, living on for our children … and our children’s children.
I will sleep easy tonight knowing that tomorrow is one day closer to the future … and the future holds wonderful things. The future will be cleaner, healthier and more prosperous. It will be ruled by intellect instead of fear. And compassion will win out over greed.
Today is just a hiccup. A rest stop on life's highway. A mere grain of sand in life's hourglass. No matter what happens today, we can fix it tomorrow. Or the tomorrow after that.
Many people will go to bed tonight in horror, knowing that the person they hoped would get elected lost. They'll write off the election process, saying it's a sham. They'll curse out their neighbors, saying they're ignorant for voting the way they did. They'll look into moving to Canada. Or France. Or whatever. They'll say their business can't survive in this environment and they'll have to put it up for sale.
Those people are wrong on many levels. Differences of opinions is one of the things that makes this great nation of ours so great in the first place. The ebb and flow of the direction of our country keep it on the straight and narrow – over the course of the trip. The political pendulum must swing. And swing, it will.
Maybe your vote will help it swing the way you want it to. Maybe your vote will prevent it from swinging too far. Or maybe you won't vote and you'll just watch as the pendulum swings.
No matter, tomorrow will come. And we'll all have to pick ourselves up by our boot straps and keep moving forward.
As long as we do that, the brand of politicians running the Capitol Building or the statehouse won't matter.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
What about the other guys?
One week from today we head to the polls to choose – among other things – the next governor of the great state of New York.
Most of you already probably know who you're voting for. Like the vast majority of New Yorkers, you'll be voting for one of the candidates of the two major parties. You knew this before the candidates were announced.
The Democrats will be voting for Andrew Cuomo and the Republicans will be voting for Carl Paladino. There will be some exceptions, of course, but for the most part, that's how it will go down.
There are others out there, though, who aren't sure who to vote for yet. The thought of another Cuomo in office scares you. Maybe this one has actually figured out how to tax the oxygen in your lungs. His father was pretty close to figuring that out. And Paladino makes you nervous, too. He's a bit of a loose canon. What might he do if actually elected?
There's been some clamoring on the internet over the last week, asking for a debate between just Paladino and Cuomo. Ever since the circus that was the only gubernatorial debate, the Paladino camp has pushed for a debate between just himself and Cuomo, claiming that people deserve that debate.
Something tells me that it's the Paladino people clamoring for this format because their guy was outshined during the last debate. They want a chance to siphon votes off of Cuomo, who holds what appears to be an insurmountable lead over their guy.
I feel like I know plenty about Andy Cuomo … and Carl Paladino. The last thing I want is a debate between just the two of them. Then again, I already know that I won't be voting for either one of them. I realize this puts me in the minority.
I'd prefer to see a debate between the five candidates we don't know as much about. Now, maybe you feel like you learned enough about them during the first debate and subsequent media coverage since, but compare that to the media coverage we've gotten about Carl and Andy for the past several months. It's a pittance.
I'd rather hear more from Kristen Davis, the former madam who got Eliot Spitzer in all that hot water. I know she wants to legalize prostitution (which I agree with), but I'd like to hear more.
I'd prefer to hear more from Jimmy McMillan, who thinks the rent is too damn high and says you can marry your shoes. He seemed a bit off, but he deserves to be heard.
I'd like to hear more from Howie Hawkins, the Green Party candidate who delivers packages by day. How would he lower our taxes?
I should be able to hear more from Charles Barron, the Freedom Party candidate and New York City Councilman. How exactly would slapping the closest white guy to him help our situation?
And of course, I'd like to hear more from my party's candidate, Warren Redlich. We seem to agree on a lot, but if he's such a good Libertarian, why is he actually a registered Republican?
Unfortunately, my five person “also-running” debate is unlikely. So I'll have to do what I always have to do come election time. I'll have to do my own research and come to my own conclusion.
Those of you who aren't yet sure who you're voting for should do the same. And it probably wouldn't hurt those of you who already know who you're voting for, either. The Democrats and Republicans got us into this mess, don't forget.
Most of you already probably know who you're voting for. Like the vast majority of New Yorkers, you'll be voting for one of the candidates of the two major parties. You knew this before the candidates were announced.
The Democrats will be voting for Andrew Cuomo and the Republicans will be voting for Carl Paladino. There will be some exceptions, of course, but for the most part, that's how it will go down.
There are others out there, though, who aren't sure who to vote for yet. The thought of another Cuomo in office scares you. Maybe this one has actually figured out how to tax the oxygen in your lungs. His father was pretty close to figuring that out. And Paladino makes you nervous, too. He's a bit of a loose canon. What might he do if actually elected?
There's been some clamoring on the internet over the last week, asking for a debate between just Paladino and Cuomo. Ever since the circus that was the only gubernatorial debate, the Paladino camp has pushed for a debate between just himself and Cuomo, claiming that people deserve that debate.
Something tells me that it's the Paladino people clamoring for this format because their guy was outshined during the last debate. They want a chance to siphon votes off of Cuomo, who holds what appears to be an insurmountable lead over their guy.
I feel like I know plenty about Andy Cuomo … and Carl Paladino. The last thing I want is a debate between just the two of them. Then again, I already know that I won't be voting for either one of them. I realize this puts me in the minority.
I'd prefer to see a debate between the five candidates we don't know as much about. Now, maybe you feel like you learned enough about them during the first debate and subsequent media coverage since, but compare that to the media coverage we've gotten about Carl and Andy for the past several months. It's a pittance.
I'd rather hear more from Kristen Davis, the former madam who got Eliot Spitzer in all that hot water. I know she wants to legalize prostitution (which I agree with), but I'd like to hear more.
I'd prefer to hear more from Jimmy McMillan, who thinks the rent is too damn high and says you can marry your shoes. He seemed a bit off, but he deserves to be heard.
I'd like to hear more from Howie Hawkins, the Green Party candidate who delivers packages by day. How would he lower our taxes?
I should be able to hear more from Charles Barron, the Freedom Party candidate and New York City Councilman. How exactly would slapping the closest white guy to him help our situation?
And of course, I'd like to hear more from my party's candidate, Warren Redlich. We seem to agree on a lot, but if he's such a good Libertarian, why is he actually a registered Republican?
Unfortunately, my five person “also-running” debate is unlikely. So I'll have to do what I always have to do come election time. I'll have to do my own research and come to my own conclusion.
Those of you who aren't yet sure who you're voting for should do the same. And it probably wouldn't hurt those of you who already know who you're voting for, either. The Democrats and Republicans got us into this mess, don't forget.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Less is better ...
Less is not more. Never. But it might be better.
That's the question Niagara County voters have to answer for themselves as they pull the lever today on a ballot initiative to reduce the size of the Niagara County Legislature from 19 members to 15.
Proponents say the measure will save the county money by eliminating the salaries of the four legislators – a $60,300 savings per year. Opponents say it will reduce the level of representation for county residents as each legislator will have to look after a larger number of incumbents. Each legislator currently serves about 11,000 constituents. If the downsizing goes through, each will have about 14,000 constituents.
I say both arguments are hogwash.
The real savings comes not from the reduction of salaries in the legislature itself, but from the reduction of salaries of friends and loved ones who get themselves plum jobs in government. Instead of 19 people with pet projects trying to find family members and neighbors jobs, there will only be 15 people doing such. The nepotism savings alone could be hundreds of thousands of dollars per year … not to mention the potential savings from having less pet projects to worry about.
Meanwhile, the argument that a smaller legislature will be less responsive to residents needs makes an assumption that the legislature is responsive to your needs. I'm pretty sure we can agree that's a flawed argument. I mean, really, how often do you see your legislator? I'm going to guess you see them every other October when they're on your doorstep telling you what a great job they've done, right?
There's another theory that certain members of the legislature only favor the reduction because they can then reduce the number of seats allocated to Niagara Falls, thereby reducing the Falls' political power … and the number of Democrats in the legislature.
While I could see the benefit of such a power grab, it seems a bit too conspiracy theory for me and I thereby reject it. That said, I would like to see the districts redrawn by some sort of neutral third party when it's time for redistricting. I would also like to win the lottery. Odds are probably about the same. And I don't play the lottery.
Personally, I support the reduction of the legislature and think you should, too. I think the positives of potential savings far outweigh the negatives of unresponsiveness, mainly because I don't buy the argument to begin with.
I'll make it easy on you if you've yet to cast your vote. If you like to save money hold up one hand. If you only see your legislator around election time hold up another hand. If you've got both hands in the air, vote yes to downsize. If you've only got one hand in the air, vote no. And if you have no hands in the air, you've got more money than brains.
A personal side note: This is the first election in about a dozen years where I'm not working as a reporter or commentator election night. I have done so my entire time I've been back in Western New York and had also been a reporter my last two years in Ohio.
I'm not sure how this makes me feel, to be honest. It's weird, that's for sure.
But I'll still be participating in the election … by voting. Odds are, actually, that I've already voted by the time you read this. If you haven't voted yet and the polls are still open, please go vote. Men and women have died so you could.
That's the question Niagara County voters have to answer for themselves as they pull the lever today on a ballot initiative to reduce the size of the Niagara County Legislature from 19 members to 15.
Proponents say the measure will save the county money by eliminating the salaries of the four legislators – a $60,300 savings per year. Opponents say it will reduce the level of representation for county residents as each legislator will have to look after a larger number of incumbents. Each legislator currently serves about 11,000 constituents. If the downsizing goes through, each will have about 14,000 constituents.
I say both arguments are hogwash.
The real savings comes not from the reduction of salaries in the legislature itself, but from the reduction of salaries of friends and loved ones who get themselves plum jobs in government. Instead of 19 people with pet projects trying to find family members and neighbors jobs, there will only be 15 people doing such. The nepotism savings alone could be hundreds of thousands of dollars per year … not to mention the potential savings from having less pet projects to worry about.
Meanwhile, the argument that a smaller legislature will be less responsive to residents needs makes an assumption that the legislature is responsive to your needs. I'm pretty sure we can agree that's a flawed argument. I mean, really, how often do you see your legislator? I'm going to guess you see them every other October when they're on your doorstep telling you what a great job they've done, right?
There's another theory that certain members of the legislature only favor the reduction because they can then reduce the number of seats allocated to Niagara Falls, thereby reducing the Falls' political power … and the number of Democrats in the legislature.
While I could see the benefit of such a power grab, it seems a bit too conspiracy theory for me and I thereby reject it. That said, I would like to see the districts redrawn by some sort of neutral third party when it's time for redistricting. I would also like to win the lottery. Odds are probably about the same. And I don't play the lottery.
Personally, I support the reduction of the legislature and think you should, too. I think the positives of potential savings far outweigh the negatives of unresponsiveness, mainly because I don't buy the argument to begin with.
I'll make it easy on you if you've yet to cast your vote. If you like to save money hold up one hand. If you only see your legislator around election time hold up another hand. If you've got both hands in the air, vote yes to downsize. If you've only got one hand in the air, vote no. And if you have no hands in the air, you've got more money than brains.
A personal side note: This is the first election in about a dozen years where I'm not working as a reporter or commentator election night. I have done so my entire time I've been back in Western New York and had also been a reporter my last two years in Ohio.
I'm not sure how this makes me feel, to be honest. It's weird, that's for sure.
But I'll still be participating in the election … by voting. Odds are, actually, that I've already voted by the time you read this. If you haven't voted yet and the polls are still open, please go vote. Men and women have died so you could.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Primary challenged
So here we are – once again – at a crossroads ... kind of.
Tuesday is primary day across the grand state of New York and there are elections galore ... kind of.
Actually, in the Niagara County Legislature, there are primary contests in less than half of the districts. The odds are higher that you don't have a legislature race to vote in Tuesday than that you do. And if you're in Erie County, your odds of voting aren't much better. Only six of 15 races have primary opponents.
And many of the races afford you the “opportunity to ballot” or right your candidate in – an arcane system designed to protect incumbency and the “party” hierarchy.
This is partly the reason so few people are willing to carry petitions and raise money and do the legwork to run for office. And then there's the people that run again and again, only to be crushed by the system and/or the electorate. It's sort of politics ... Sisyphus style. Roll the rock up the hill. Near the top. It slips and crushes you. Start over tomorrow ... or next year as the case may be for many of the perennial also-rans.
Many voters seem to sit the primary out. It's not as exciting. It's not as sexy. It's not as something. Who knows. But they wait until the November election before they decide to get out and vote. By then they have their choices between the incumbent (or a clone of that incumbent) and some person they've never heard of. And they throw their arms up in disgust, muttering something akin to, “Why do we always have to choose between the same lot of idiots?”
And they seem to forget that they had a chance to change the lot of idiots just two months prior, but took a pass.
Leonard Roberto, founder of Primary Challenge, has expressed his frustration with this process on numerous occasions. I've discussed it personally with him at a handful of chance meetings.
Primary Challenge knows that by the time you get to the general election, the die has been cast. The real opportunity for change comes in the primary itself – hence the name. And the main reason for that opportunity is the fact that fewer people get out to vote.
Simply put, if you're one of 1,000 people casting a vote, you get one one-thousandth of the decision. If you're one of 100 people voting, you get a hundredth of the vote, making your vote 10 times more powerful.
Now, the math might not be to scale. I've never been good with math. But the logic stands.
You may be to the point where you think I'm telling you to get your butt to the ballot box on Tuesday and vote. But I don't necessarily encourage that. Not unless you know what you're voting on.
Truly, the only thing worse than our apathy is our lack of knowledge on the issues before us. It doesn't matter how much you care about your community, if you don't know who stands for what, you're just voting for the sake of some misguided civic pride. It's kind of like driving with a blindfold on. You'll get somewhere, but the odds are you won't like it.
Fortunately, there are tools out there which you can inform yourself with. For example, your daily paper. Hint. Hint. Nudge. Nudge. But your time is running short. Do some reading. Figure out what you want. And pull the lever. Assuming you're in the minority of those who gets to vote.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)