Tag: civic participation

Straight Party Tickets

Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

While thinking about the importance of voting my mind led me back to a personal belief that voting a straight party ticket with one mark is a bad thing for government. I have nothing against someone choosing to cast all their votes for one party, but they should do so for each candidate – parties are not supposed to run the government, elected individuals are.

The only argument that I can imagine in favor of the straight party option on a ballot is that someone might accidentally vote for the wrong candidate when they mean to vote for candidates from a single party. Imagine that they vote D, D, D, D, D, D, R, D where that R was a candidate for the school board that they accidentally mixed up the name since there was less advertising for that race.

This is where technology can help us. Since we have already moved to touch-screen voting machines (here in Utah as well as many other places) we could change the straight party selection so that instead of casting our votes for us that selection would make the candidates from our chosen party stand out (change color, larger font – there are plenty of options) but the voter would still be expected to select the individual candidates for their votes to be cast in each race.

Tags civic participation, parties, voting machines

State

Join the Game

When we recognize that most “news” is really entertainment it’s easy to see that politics is really a sport. John Florez is absolutely right in saying It’s time we all join the game and back some rookies. Assuming that more people actually join the game sometime before election day John suggests:

Maybe this time voters will elect those candidates who will work in the public’s interest rather than being influenced by special interest money; and who will concentrate on exercising their “oversight responsibilities” — monitoring and enforcing the laws they pass — that incumbents have ignored. Maybe they can do “take-aways” regarding outdated and cumbersome laws that now fatten government at taxpayers’ expense and bog it down with process and no results.

Until voters stop reading incumbent’s mailings and start rooting for those who really believe government belongs to the people, the lobbyists will continue making their “drops” and make government work for them. Unless voters consider legislative candidates who take their oversight responsibilities seriously, rather than allowing them to write more laws, our government will get fatter. Voters who keep voting for the same team without looking at the player’s performance become part of the problem. Accountability is trash talk unless someone is there to make sure things get done and there are consequences.

Even if many voters take the time to get informed and participate in the process it’s possible that many incumbents would win and return to the seats they already hold. It’s all too easy for each incumbent to blame “the system” or their fellow legislators (especially those in the other party) for any existing problems that the voters see. That is why the invitation to “back some rookies” is important. In Utah that generally means that you should support a democratic party candidate. The only exceptions would be if there is some reason why the democratic candidate is not qualified for the position they are running for, or if there is a rookie on the Republican side of the race. If there are two qualified rookies then any vote you are comfortable with is a good vote, otherwise give preference to any rookie who looks like they are up to the job they are seeking over any incumbent.

We need to establish a pattern of voters kicking out incumbents (it’s not good enough to just have a regular turnover of incumbents retiring) so that candidates who win (thus becoming incumbents) will have a large incentive to be responsive to the voters rather than the party or anyone with deep pockets.

Tags civic participation, elections

life Local

Thwarted

Post author By David
Post date March 26, 2008
2 Comments on Thwarted

I had planned on participating in last night’s caucus meetings, but life intervened and I was not able to. That being said, I am still interested to learn what happened in those caucus meetings for my precinct (Lehi-08). I would love to know the outcome of the Republican and Democratic caucuses, especially the Democratic caucus I planned to attend. If anyone was at one of those, or knows how to get information on who was elected to positions in either party in this precinct please let me know.

Tags caucuses, civic participation, community

National technology

Open Congress

It becomes more and more clear each day how powerful the internet can be as a tool to improve our political process by enabling citizens to be informed. A great example of that is OpenCongress.org. The purpose of the site is to provide information on bills and members of congress. It only took me about two minutes to find 9 feeds on the site that any serious political blogger should have (of course the 9 feeds vary depending on where you live). For each member of the House or the Senate there are feeds for every roll-call vote (voice votes can”t be accurately tracked), for blog entries related to that person, and for news stories related to that person. The nine feeds are those three feeds for each of your senators and your representative. Everyone who is serious about politics should be aware of the members of congress who they have the chance to elect. For the Utah 2nd Congressional District those feeds are:

I have long admired the way Misty Fowler has widgets showing the recent votes of her representative and senators in her sidebar. I don’t know if I will display this kind of thing in my sidebar, but I will definitely be following them in my feed reader. Now I wish I had a site like OpenCongress at the state level.

Tags civic participation, information

National State

Important Changes

In a meeting with LaVarr Webb this morning two topics really stuck with me that seem to illustrate the most important political problems that we face as a nation. The particular issues we talked about were at the level of our state government, but both issues apply equally well to our federal government and often in more local government settings as well.

The first of these two topics that we talked about was the need for ethics reform – specifically gifts to legislators. Webb has close experience with politicians at the legislature over many years and he talked about how those legislators are often frustrated that people view or suspect them as being corrupt. He said that in his experience they rarely are corrupt but he believes that they can and should address this issue because our state legislature does not have strong safeguards in place against corruption in the event that someone were corrupt. I immediately thought about the Change Congress movement being pushed by Larry Lessig. Lessig articulates the problem as being one caused not by bad people but by “good people working in a bad system.” I believe that his primary method for changing the system is applicable to all such cases. We should persuade our candidates to commit to:

- Not take lobbyist or PAC money
- Ban earmarks (this problem seems most acute at the federal level)
- Support public financing of campaigns.

As citizens we can request that our candidates make these commitments. This can be a filter by which we can determine for ourselves which candidates are serious about changing the bad system. Personally, I will never support a candidate who will not commit to these principles over a candidate who has made this commitment. (And I will ask any candidate I hope to support to make this kind of commitment.)

We later got onto the issues of the violation of the principles of federalism. This is when government tramples the rights of individuals or lower levels of government. This happens so frequently in small ways that many people think it is how the system is supposed to work. Here the solution is that citizens must insist at each level of government that individual liberty and the sovereignty of lower levels of government be carefully protected. Obviously there are some cases where the good of the whole overrides the choice of a part but everyone should be as careful to guard against running over their neighbors with the ideas that they favor as they are at complaining when they feel imposed upon by the ideas of others (and sometimes we need to be more vocal when we feel that we are being bullied by the enforced ideals of others).

Tags civic participation, ideal, liberty

culture

Requirements for Voting

After I wrote about the value of caucuses I found an interesting opinion on lowering the voting age.

We should hasten the enfranchisement of this generation, born between 1980 and 1995, by lowering the voting age to 16. . . 16-year-olds who want to start voting should be able to obtain an “early voting permit” from their high schools upon passing a simple civics course similar to the citizenship test. Besides increasing voter registration, this system would reinforce the notion of voting as a privilege and duty as well as a right — without imposing any across-the-board literacy tests for those over 18.

I have often contemplated what might happen if we were to require a test similar to the citizenship test to become a registered voter. Of course that will remind us of some of the Jim Crow voting laws that had to be repealed in the south. Even if nobody intended to discriminate any test would have some bias in it which makes it difficult to imagine passing such a law. I had also considered a system of preferential voting where some criteria – passing a test, or caucusing rather than simply voting – would add weight to the votes cast by those who met the criteria.

I’m wary of the idea of lowering the voting age, but I’m still interested in finding ways to increase personal investment in casting votes – to “reinforce the notion of voting as a privilege and duty as well as a right.”

There were some very enlightening responses on the topic that are also worth reading. My thoughts are definitely a work in progress – any insight or opinion is appreciated.

Tags civic participation

General

Thoughts On Caucuses

The following snippet from a comment this morning (thanks Scott) really got me thinking.

{Republican} Caucuses are the domain of grass roots Republicans. They are dominated by politically informed people that consider themselves conservatives. Primaries are far more open.

One of the things that I have long thought would improve our country was if people had to invest themselves more to participate in the political process. It’s a tough balance to strike – even in my mind – because the process should be open to any who want to participate, but if the threshold for participation is too low voters will not take their participation seriously (less than 50% participation in most elections is evidence of that to me). Caucuses require a time commitment and therefore the people who participate in them don’t take their participation lightly.

I’m not declaring that all our voting should be through a caucusing process, but I am wondering if we might learn something from this to help find a way to raise the threshold for participation (especially in primaries) enough to make people take their role seriously while keeping it low enough that anyone can participate who is so inclined.

Thoughts?

Tags caucuses, civic participation, primaries

culture life

Polls Are Open

“I Voted”

If you are registered and you haven’t yet – do. If you have already – encourage others to vote as well.

Tags 2008, civic participation, primaries

State

Bloggers – Turn Out Utah

Earlier today, before significant numbers of ballots had been counted, the news coming out of New Hampshire was that turnout was way up and some precincts were requesting more ballots. In response to that, JM Bell and Misty Fowler each suggested that we’d love to have that problem in Utah. The more I think about that the more I am convinced that not only would we love to have that “problem” but have four weeks to actively work to achieve that in our state.

I’ve suggested before that any election with high turnout is a good election. Let’s make this into such an election. Starting now, let’s light up the Utah Political Blogosphere with ideas and thoughts to inspire people to turn out and vote in the primary election. Misty has set a good example by posting reminders about registration deadlines and information about how to register. What else can we do to encourage people to participate?

People all around the country have wondered why Iowa and New Hampshire should have so much influence on our elections – let’s show that Utahns can be as politically involved as Iowans.

If you are interested in pushing for this let me know – share your ideas of how we can encourage people online and offline to get to the polls. If you don’t think that higher turnout is valuable, convince me that low turnout has any benefit to our state or our nation.

Tags 2008, civic participation, liberty, primaries

General

Wrinkles In Iowa

I have read two stories now from the New York Times about questionable practices in the Iowa Caucuses. One on Iowa’s Student Vote and another on the reporting of the Democratic Caucus results. In regard to the student vote I was disappointed to learn that:

. . . political operatives often try to suppress the student vote . . . [using] a variety of tactics over the years to keep students from voting. There are often too few voting machines, so lines stretch for hours. Sometimes, students are falsely told that they will lose financial aid, health care or even car insurance if they vote while attending school.

In Iowa, the suppression has been rhetorical. With Barack Obama’s campaign, in particular, urging students to come out for him, other campaigns have tried to put up roadblocks. . . Clinton said during a campaign stop that the process should be reserved for “people who live here, people who pay taxes here.” Chris Dodd seemed to imply that people who were “paying out-of-state tuition” and participating in the process were somehow being deceptive and unfairly casting themselves as Iowan.

Student are rightly up in arms about these statements. The law in Iowa is crystal clear: students who attend school in the state are entitled to register to vote in the state as long they are not registered anywhere else.

For myself, I would be happy with any vote where voter turnout was above 70% even if I absolutely hated the person who got elected. At least I would know that the person who got elected was elected by an active electorate who disagreed with me.

With regard to the results of the Democratic Caucuses I was surprised to learn that the actual vote count was never made public. In the words of the article:

Under the formulas used to apportion delegates, it is possible that the candidate with the highest percentage of delegate equivalents — that is, the headline “winner” — did not really lead in the “popular vote” at the caucuses. Further, it is possible that a second or third-tier candidate could garner a surprising 10 percent or 12 percent of the popular vote statewide and get zero delegates. . .

The press invests months in covering the caucuses. It and the public it serves are entitled at the end of the exercise to an unambiguous vote count, instead of delegate numbers that camouflage how much popular support each candidate earned.

Such practices serve as extra fodder for those who argue that Iowa is not representative of the nation and does not deserve to always take the lead in the process of selecting our president.

Tags civic participation, elections, media, voting machines