Who gave these people the keys to the country?

I have a good friend who advised me some time ago that if you don’t know what to do, don’t do anything. Eventually what you’re supposed to do will show itself to you. I’ve tried to follow this strategy and it’s actually worked pretty well for me.

But my life is pretty simple. And my problems are equally simple. So me doing nothing usually has little downside. It’s not like the fate of the country is in my hands.

Unfortunately, it would seem that the people that are running the country have gotten the same advice. If they don’t know what to do, they do nothing.

It’s considerably more problematic than my doing nothing.

Case in point: Any number of government shutdowns and budget battles. The government has taken doing nothing to a whole new level. Their practice of procrastination could win Olympic medals.

We jumped over the fiscal cliff and now we’re being sequestered, apparently.

I’ve only been familiar with the term “sequester” as part of court cases until just recently. It usually means to keep a jury holed up in a hotel until they reach a verdict. Maybe that’s what we should do with Congress — lock them up in a room until they come up with a solution to current budget crisis.

The current budget crisis, for those who haven’t been paying attention, is a series of wide-ranging across-the-board budget cuts designed to be unpalatable to both parties. They focus on defense spending and domestic spending.

As is usual, the GOP is fine with the domestic spending cuts but wants the military cuts restored. And the Democrats want the domestic spending restored but isn’t as concerned about the military cuts. Democrats have suggested tax increases to offset the impending cuts. Republicans say no new taxes.

All this happens Friday unless someone does something to fix it. But all signs point to Congress following my friend’s advice of just doing nothing. Which, again, is fine for me. But not so fine for those with the keys to the country.

Of course, we’re the one’s who put them there.

See, you’d think that when choosing people to represent us in Washington, we’d pick the smartest people with the best ideas. But you’d be wrong. First of all, those who vote like to go with people who think like them as opposed to people who just think. Second, those who vote are frequently outnumbered by those who didn’t know what to do so they didn’t do anything.

Long story short: Pogo was right. We are our own worst enemies.

So as Friday draws near and nothing of any consequence is done in Washington, remember that we could have elected smarter people. But we chose not to.

Maybe we should all be sequestered before the next election.

Scott Leffler frequently does nothing. It’s for the best. But when he does anything mildly important, he tweets about it @scottleffler.

Just because it's your right, doesn't make it right

Last week’s column noted the oddity of people not voting when their vote could make all the difference in the world.

I hope you didn’t take that to mean I think everyone should vote. I don’t. 

You may have a Constitutional right to vote, but that doesn’t mean that it’s always the right thing to do. In fact, there are people who vote in every election who have no business doing so — right or not.

All across the country there are organizations (Republicans) who want to create so-called “Voter ID” laws under the assumption that people who shouldn’t be allowed to vote (illegal immigrants — and by immigrants, I mean Mexicans) are voting and swaying elections (in favor of Democrats). 

First of all, I’m not sure that this is a real problem. In other words, I don’t think it’s happening. At least not to the extent that these organizations would have you believe. Secondly, there are greater problems with voting, namely that complete idiots’ votes count exactly the same as mine.

And as long as you’re not one of those complete idiots, you should feel that it’s a problem, too.

The Founding Fathers argued for months about how much of a right you should be allowed to influence the government. While it’s popular to believe now that they all were in favor of us having complete control, that couldn’t be farther from the truth. In fact, until the ratification of the 17th Amendment — less than 100 years ago — we didn’t have a direct vote on the vast majority of our federal government. Judges are appointed by the president, the president is still technically elected by the Electoral College, and Senators were elected by the states themselves, not the voters. All we voted on was the House and some didn’t even think we should be allowed that right.

See, the Founding Fathers knew that for the most part, mankind is selfish and uninformed — both dangerous qualities, but a downright threat to national security when combined. 

But now we’ve got selfish uninformed people picking our elected officials. And then we get mad at them when they do what we want them to do — or when the don’t do what we want them to do.

Rather than a “Voter ID” law, I’d like to see a “Voter IQ” law. Not literally, mind you. I don’t want only “smart” people to be allowed to vote. Otherwise, I wouldn’t be allowed to vote and I’m selfish, too! 

I’d like to see a test when you enter the polling place with simple questions that anyone who’s voting should know the answers to. Things like: 

• What political party controls Congress?

• Who is the current vice president of the United States?

• What state was Mitt Romney formerly governor of?

I’d like the questions to be different each election year, but I’d like them to remain basic like that. And I’d like there to be five of them. Whatever percent you get right, your vote counts that much. This would help to weed out the people that vote because they feel they’re supposed to, but don’t do the required research — or the people who go and vote for the person they were “told” to vote for, but have no idea why they’re voting for that person.

Although voting is a right, we need to stop treating it as such and start treating it like the responsibility the Founding Fathers were afraid to give us because they knew we’d screw it up.

Random thoughts on state of society

The debate over health care in this country has gone from bad to worse, with accusations bandied about by both sides, saying that the GOP hates women and that the left hates religion.

Personally, I think both sides might be oversimplifying the issue a bit and everyone needs to step away from the microphone until cooler heads prevail.

I can say this however: Few things sicken me more than the number of people who hate in the name of their God. I say “their God” instead of just “God,” because it’s obviously a different God than the one I know.

Using religion as a means to attack someone just seems to go against everything religion is supposed to mean. It’s as though some people’s Bibles only came with the book of Leviticus. None of that feel-good New Testament stuff. It’s maddening.

•••

The Republican race for the White House continues to muddle along, ever closer to what almost looks like a guaranteed brokered convention. As you may know, I’m a Ron Paul fan, but he doesn’t have a snowball’s chance, so I basically don’t have a horse in that race. Come April 24, I won’t be able to vote in the New York primary, but I have to imagine it will actually count this year, something it seldom does.

•••

My oldest daughter was telling me the other day that she’s scared for the future because she’ll be voting in four years, but doesn’t know anything about the current race for the White House. She then named the four GOP candidates and stated briefly what they stand for — or at least what they are perceived to stand for.

Personally, I don’t fear for the future. I fear for the present because my 14-year-old daughter who considers herself uninformed knows more about the contest than most of my adult friends.

•••

I’ve long suggested that there should be an entrance exam to the voting booth complete with five basic questions about the candidates themselves. They should be factual questions that anyone who’s voting would know the answer to. Your grade on the exam would be equal to how much your vote counts. If you get only one question right, your vote only counts 20 percent. If you get them all right, your vote counts 100 percent. This would ensure that the most important decisions made in this great nation of our are being made from those in the know.

Unfortunately, it’s not that way and everyone’s vote counts the same meaning our decisions are being made by the dumb masses.

•••

I understand political expediency and the art of compromise, but I’m disappointed that Gov. Andrew Cuomo caved on his promise to veto the legislative district lines if they were not drawn by an independent (non-partisan) panel. As such, we are doomed to 10 more years of near-guaranteed incumbency protection.

The same people who have gotten us into the mess that we’re in are pretty much a shoe-in to keep us wallowing in the same mess for another decade.

Don't confuse kids on voting ...

Remember kindergarten?

No, this isn't going to be another column with my life story in it. You don't need to go through that again. And neither do I.

But, do you?

I remember crayons and tying my shoes and all sorts of fun stuff.

I don't remember voting. I'm fairly certain I didn't vote.

My 5-year old daughter Emily, however, voted for the first time two weeks ago. The same day you and I went to the polls, Emily cast a ballot voting in three races — the governor, comptroller and attorney general races — and on three propositions.

Let me begin by saying how über-cool it is that Emily got to vote.

The group that created, passed out and tallied the ballots — Kids Voting Western New York — said it's looking to increase voter participation in adults by inspiring people to start young.

It's a great idea and I applaud the dozen or so groups that fund the organization.

However, (you thought that was a happy column?) if you're going to do something, do it right.

The proposals that I mentioned should not have been voted upon by 5-year-olds like my daughter. They were designed for her, though, according to the ballot.

After her six questions, in fact, it said, "Grades K-2 Stop Here."

The first proposal was innocuous enough in my opinion — although I have heard some people complain about it: "Should the words 'under God' be eliminated from the Pledge of Allegiance?"

I can understand how to some children this will have meaning and they will give a resounding "no." Now, Emily didn't have good reasoning for this, but she too voted no.

The second proposal asked, "Should the New York State Education Department revise its high school graduation criteria?"

I asked Emily if she understood the question. She said she did.

"It means, 'Do you think the high school graduated?' " she told me.

Fair enough. I'm not sure I know what the question really means either, and I've covered five different school boards over the past 2 1/2 years.

The final question was my favorite: "Does the current method of funding offer all students the opportunity to meet New York State standards?"

Emily said yes.

I asked why.

"'Cause the high school kids are big," she said.

Huh?

I asked her if she knew what funding was. She said no.

I asked her what New York State standards were.

"They're things that stand up on an island in New York," she answered, matter-of-factly.

If only that were true, Emily.

These kids will learn politics' stupidities soon enough. Questions about state education funding need not be posed to kindergartners. Not to mention, doesn't simply asking the question — especially at such a young age — poison their minds? I don't send Emily to school to be propagandized into believing that state leaders don't give enough for her education.

Also, I understand that the voting process was rather chaotic — almost Florida-esque with long lines and what have you — potentially turning off potential life-long voters before their prime.

Maybe next year, kids should vote in their classes?

On a side note, I had heard ahead of time that she would be voting, but she and I really didn't talk about who she would vote for. I didn't want her to vote for someone just because daddy did.

As it turns out, though, Emily voted for the same three people that her father did — Golisano for governor, Havesi for comptroller and Spitzer for attorney general.

I asked her why.

She said because she had heard her mother and I talking about them.

That made me realize A) that I'm not as quiet as I think I am, B) maybe she listens to me better than I give her credit for and C) the propaganda method the educators use actually works.

Emily also told me that many parents of the kids in her class didn't let their children vote because they didn't have time or didn't want to wait in line.

That's a shame.

Finally, I was going to further show Emily the true importance of voting by asking her which member of the family should make all the decision for the next month or something.

But I scrapped that plan in fear that she'd pick the dog — or worse, her mother.