Month: January 2008

Categories
National politics

Primary Season

The New York Times has a prime example of voters approaching elections the wrong way:

Senator John McCain has long aroused almost unanimous opposition from the leaders of the right. Accusing him of crimes against conservative orthodoxy like voting against a big tax cut and opposing a federal ban on same-sex marriage, conservative activists have agitated for months to thwart his Republican presidential primary campaign.

That, however, was before he emerged this week as the party’s front-runner.

Since his victory in the Florida primary, the growing possibility that Mr. McCain may carry the Republican banner in November is causing anguish to the right. Some, including James C. Dobson and Rush Limbaugh, say it is far too late for forgiveness.

But others, faced with the prospect of either a Democrat sitting in the White House or a Republican elected without them, are beginning to look at Mr. McCain’s record in a new light.

Once the parties have chosen their nominees (meaning not yet) it is important for voters who lean toward one party or another to look at the candidate for their chosen party and decided if that candidate represents them enough to earn their vote. The problem in the above example is that this should not be happening before the nominee is chosen. During the primary elections is the nest time to go vote your conscience. That is the time to speak up and cast your vote for someone you can support. If the eventual nominee was not someone you could support in the primaries then it is time to take another look and decide if they might be “good enough.”

Settling for good enough too early is what leads to elections where 60% of voters feel like they are choosing the lesser of two evils when they go to the ballot box.

I don’t have to hate John McCain (and I don’t) to oppose him in the primary election. He does not represent me close enough to earn my primary vote. That does not mean that I could not vote for him in November if he is the nominee (that depends on who his opponent is) but my vote is wasted if I give up now. If I vote for the front runner in the primary contest when only 10% of the delegates have been awarded merely because they are the front runner then I am guilty of letting other people choose how I will vote. If I am not going to choose how I vote then I have no business participating in the political process.

Categories
National politics

A Voters Guide

I know everyone has been waiting anxiously for me to offer a voters guide to Utah’s presidential primary next week. Here it is.

First and most importantly – go vote. Even if you have no particular interest in politics you should get into the habit of participating in this “government by the people.”

Second – if you are going to  vote you need to pick a single candidate because we don’t have instant runoff voting. For those who still need to pick a candidate – here are your four candidates and two dividing issues to help you choose. (If you don’t want to vote for one of these four you should have already made your choice.)

The two choice issues are party compatibility and change vs status quo.

If you prefer the Republican view your choices are Mitt Romney or John McCain. If you lean Democratic you may choose Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. If you want to see a change you can choose Mitt Romney or Barack Obama (not that the change of Mitt Romney is the same change as you would find with Barack Obama). If you like the status quo you can select John McCain or Hillary Clinton. So now, in alphabetical order, here are the individual candidates and what they offer.

Hillary Clinton – she would bring all the advantages of having a woman in power (I don’t see what advantages are related to one gender over the other, but that’s what she offers). Her baggage includes her husband who has demonstrated a willingness to insert himself into the public discussion and a penchant for breeding divisiveness (as if we didn’t have enough divisiveness already). Hillary not only represents the status quo, but she guarantees – by virtue of her name – that most of the country won’t leave the partisan rancor that we have seen for more than a decade.

John McCain – he brings the advantage of serving 26 years in federal office. He knows how our political system currently works. His baggage is that he has spent 26 years in Washington D.C. Chances are pretty good that he has friends there who are invested in keeping the current system.

Barack Obama –  he has the advantage of not serving 26 years in federal office. He also has an impressive ability to inspire people and look towards the future. His baggage is that “he doesn’t have enough experience.” He has been a U.S. Senator for only four years. I’m not sure why the senate is such a guaranteed training ground for a president other than it gets you close to the action to know how things work. It seems to me that if you can’t figure it out within four years I have no confidence that you can figure it out in 8 years, or 26 years either. By the way, I think that the way Barack Obama canceled his campaign appearance in deference to president Hinckley’s funeral and personally offered his condolences to President Monson was very dignified. Many candidates would have simply expected a smaller crowd or silently called of their event.

Mitt Romney – he has the advantage of a wide variety of experience with positions of authority and no excess of experience in government. His baggage is that some people don’t trust him, some people associate him with the current administration (based on party affiliation), and some people dislike him for both of the preceding reasons.

There you have it. Make your choice. I think it’s obvious that I favor change over the status quo. I hope you do too. It would be a nice change if we had high voter turnout on Tuesday.

Categories
National politics State

And Then There Were Two (Each)

The results of Florida’s primary have functionally whittled the Republican field to two candidates. no longer is there the possibility that Giuliani will suddenly jump back into the front runners circle. No matter what other candidates may hang around there are really only two candidates among the Republicans – Romney and McCain – who have a reasonable expectation of getting the nomination. Similarly, the Democrats buried any hopes of Edwards rising as a contender after his dismal third place finish in South Carolina leaving only two candidates – Obama and Clinton – with any legitimate shot at the nomination.

It’s time to start pushing for Obama here in Utah since there is no Republican contest in Utah’s primary.

Categories
politics State

Educational Spectrum

I like the idea behind SB36 which proposes allowing home school and charter school students to participate in extracurricular activities at public schools with what appear to be some reasonable restrictions. (hat tip – Daily Herald) This bills seems to illustrate one common problem that seems to plague any education debate. We treat education as an either/or proposition. Either we support/participate in public school or private school, or charter school, or homeschool. Instead we should be looking at an educational spectrum where parents have the option to make use of a reasonable cross-section of the various approaches to education based on the needs of their child. I does not have to be a free-for-all, but why should we not allow for home schooled students to integrate to a degree with their public school counterparts in extracurricular activities, drama classes, or auto shop?

Why should public education be a black box where you put your student in and let the teachers, district officials, and legislature define the objectives and methods or else keep your children out of public school and not be allowed to use any of the services that your tax dollars are still paying for. Public education should be a service where parents are allowed to make use of as much or as little of the service as they deem necessary so long as their choices are granular enough to not interfere with the service being provided.

Categories
life

President Hinckley

I was surprised to happen upon the news that President Gordon B. Hinckley died 2 hours ago. Considering that he was 97 and that his wife had passed away already, I can’t see this as an unhappy event. Having worked so hard for so long in the service of the Savior, I can’t imagine any man more deserving of the greeting on the other side that Enos expected to receive:

I soon go to the place of my rest, which is with my Redeemer; for I know that in him I shall rest. And I rejoice in the day when my mortal shall put on immortality, and shall stand before him; then shall I see his face with pleasure, and he will say unto me: Come unto me, ye blessed, there is a place prepared for you in the mansions of my Father. (Enos 1:27)

I have little to say except that President Hinckley was one of the most influential of the general church leaders for me personally – certainly the most influential president of the church for me.

UPDATE 1/28: The thought just struck me that there is some poetic beauty in the fact that President Hinckley returned to his heavenly home on Sunday – a day of rest.

Categories
National politics

Democratic Primary Done Right

Congratulations to Barack Obama – hands down the best candidate among the Democrats. This is what all the democratic contests should look like.

South Carolina results - democratic primary

Categories
National politics

Nobody Seems Impressed

I chuckled as I returned to an article from early December by Paul Krugman about how:

In past financial crises — the stock market crash of 1987, the aftermath of Russia’s default in 1998 — the Fed has been able to wave its magic wand and make market turmoil disappear. But this time the magic isn’t working.

I thought he was right about that in December and I thought that the same could be said of our new stimulus package. It’s funny how this urgent bipartisan action has not made anyone very happy. The liberal Paul Krugman asks Who gets stimulated? while conservative Frank Staheli says:

A $150 billion “stimulus package” is to America’s economy nothing but a light snack. It will stomp this “stimulus package” dead in a couple of weeks and then move on, undaunted, toward oblivion, its $53 trillion of unfunded expenditures gallantly in tow.

I have heard arguments that the money is less important than the boost in consumer confidence – from the sound of things it’s not likely to be much of a boost.

Categories
National politics

Let It Die

The temporary law allowing warrant-less wiretapping is set to expire on February 1st. Congress is hurriedly trying to devise an appropriate update. If you want to know how government grows, it’s by passing temporary laws and then reauthorizing them forever. Eventually we forget that they were temporary and then we end up with a cabinet position which controls a department that is based on a law that would expire in five years or less. (That’s the real life story of the Secretary of Education and the law that grew into NCLB).

I don’t think that we will have a Secretary of Eavesdropping, but I do believe that congress should set a precedent and let this expire. If we really need a bill like this it should not be rushed through to meet a deadline. It should be approached carefully so that it is not full of holes like the current law.

Categories
politics

Downsize D.C.

KVNU had a post today about a movement to let the Protect America Act (PAA) expire. That caught my attention and led me to DownsizeDC.org. This is the kind of site that would attract any self-proclaimed Constitutionalist, Ron Paul supporter, or advocate for limited government. Among the various things they advocate for is a bill to require that members of congress have a chance to read any bill before they cast votes on it. That just makes sense. Anytime one of our senators or representatives votes on a bill they have not read it is like signing  a contract (for their constituents no less) without reading the fine print. Worse yet, it’s like my one-year-old raising his hand to sustain someone in sacrament meeting when he has no concept of what is happening – he just raises his hand because the people he knows are raising their hands which is a lot like a game we play at home called “Isaac Says.”

Categories
politics State

One Party State

Most people are probably not yet aware that the state legislature is in session yet and already our unbalanced government is drawing flack from both sides of the political spectrum. From the left we get complaints about a task force to study merit pay for teachers. I like the idea of merit pay, but the task force being proposed is highly questionable as it is overwhelmingly composed of legislators rather than educators and citizens. It goes so far as to pay the legislators on the task force, but not the other members of the task force. It is so loaded with legislators that if they were to split the legislators proportional to the makeup of the legislature they would have 9 Republican legislators and one (likely Republican) governor’s designee who can simply dictate the outcome of the study against the other 3 Democratic legislators and 6 professional educators – this assumes that they put 3 Democrats on the task force – which is not guaranteed.

From the right we have complaints that our state laws governing the use of campaign funds are too lax. It seems like the simplest of common sense that campaign donations should not be used on other campaigns or for personal use unrelated to active campaigning. It’s nice that we have laws to require full disclosure of any gift over $50, but that’s no excuse to allow campaigning to be used as a source of personal income.

You really should visit the original articles to get the full extent of both issues. Nice start to the political year.