Category Archives: Politics

Illinois Voters Make No Sense

Today is the day where I pull my hair out trying to make sense of the myriad contradictions in the patterns of what I assume are generally smartish people.  I know I shouldn’t do this.  It’s bad for my health.  But I can’t help myself.  Here we go.

There were a lot of ballot measures to vote for and they are quite telling of the dichotomy of how voters think and how voters feel.  This election, I think, shows that Illinoisans’ thinking is pretty Democratic given the results of the ballot measures.  But then they let their feelings get in the way and vote for Republicans who will invariably vote against any bill that comes up in support of the same ballot measures that voters overwhelmingly support.  Why?  This makes no sense.

Let’s take the Voter’s Rights Amendment as an example.  It amends the Illinois Constitution to basically say that you can’t discriminate when signing up people to vote or against people actually voting.  What it really boils down to, and was sold as, is an anti-voter ID law amendment.  It passed overwhelmingly garnering 72% of the vote.  This is a very solid Democratic amendment and hundreds of thousands of people who otherwise voted Republican voted in favor of it.

The list goes on.  There was a measure to call for the increase of the minimum wage in Illinois to $10/hour.  It passed with 67% of the vote.  The measure calling for health insurance plans to cover birth control?  It passed with 66% of the vote.  The measure calling for incomes of over $1M to be taxed an extra 3% to cover school funding?  Passed with 64% of the vote.

All of these measures are distinctly Democratic in nature.  If I were to give you just the above information to go on, what would you think the results of the races would be?  Did you say Democrats pretty much sweeping ultra-blue Illinois?  Yeah, not so much.

Bruce Rauner, our new Republican Governor, won every county except Cook, which is still counting the votes and the only reason why Quinn hasn’t conceded yet.  The U.S. House was fairly evenly split with a 10-8 Democratic/Republican split.  Career Politician and Democrat Dick Durbin pretty handily beat Career Also-Ran Jim Oberweis.  And, in State politics, Democrats still retain supermajorities in both the House and the Senate thanks to some legendary gerrymandering shenanigans.

It will be interesting to see what Rauner does when bills supporting the ballot initiatives cross his desk.  He has claimed to be for raising the minimum wage, but with the huge caveat that it must be packaged with a plethora of “business friendly” attachments.  I haven’t been able to find much information on how he stands with the others.

So yeah, Illinois is pretty weird politically.  We seem to be a very blue state where state politics is concerned but we veer frighteningly rightward in our national politics.  What ever could be the cause of such a dichotomy?

Vote For Judges!

It’s that time of year again where I harangue all of my friends about the importance of getting out to vote, if only just for the judges.  My Chicago area peeps have it easy.  They can just go to the Chicago Appleseed Fund for Justice’s handy-dandy recommendations page.  Local elections are very important and often overlooked with all the national election noise machines in full effect.  Don’t believe me?  Well maybe you will listen to John Oliver:

Spread the word!

 

Whither Scotland?

I really don’t have much to say about the subject, I just think that anytime you can find an excuse to use “whither” in a post you should take it.

Scotland is voting for independence from the United Kingdom today.  This makes Scotland the first country in decades to not be bombed into independence by the United States.

There are lots of good reasons for independence and lots of good reasons for remaining in the union.  The best reason for Scotland going its own way is that Scotland’s official animal is the unicorn.  It’s even on their seal.  We totally need more unicorns on flags.  There is also the fact that England treats them like the red-headed step-child of the family.  Hmm, I wonder if that term actually came from England’s treatment of Scotland…  As for staying, Scotland is basically the left wing of Parliament.  If Scotland leaves, it would make the United Kingdoms veer more heavily to the right than they already are.  There’s also the whole “your economy will collapse if you leave” thing, but you know, whatevs.

The economic question is actually quite interesting.  Scotland has oil, but all signs point to it already being past its prime in oil producing capacity.  There’s certainly enough there still to help it through the initial hard times they are likely to encounter once they go independent.  Then there’s the currency.  What do they do there?  Stay on the British Pound?  Unlikely.  You don’t want your economy to be tied to the currency of the lover you just spurned.  Go with the Euro?  A better choice, but still there’s the whole not having control of your own currency problem.  Create your own currency?  If they are going to have unicorns on it, yes!  Being able to control your own currency is very important in riding out economic hardships, but Scotland’s not terribly large and there’s the danger that the international community could sink the new currency.  It’s not an easy choice.

Whichever Scotland chooses, I wish them the best.  They’ve gotten short shrift for too long.  I, personally, hope they stay because of the whole England turning righter than the Republican party thing.

More Ideas In Radical Democracy

When last we left our hero, he was definitively solving the problem of elections in the United States.  You’re welcome.  Today, I’d like to talk about another serious threat to Democracy: Capitalism.

Now, before you get all bent out of shape about how Capitalism is awesome and is responsible for a lot of the inventions and progress we as humans have made so far, let me say that I agree with you.  Mostly.  There should be a very fine dividing line between Capitalism and Government if a Democracy is to thrive.  Capitalism has a way of perverting Government to the point where the wants of the few end up outweighing the promotion of the general Welfare our Constitution calls for.  Much of this perversion comes from the outlandish amounts of money corporations can throw at our politicians.  It is high time for a partial schism between Capitalism and Government.

Corporate taxes should be 0%:  Corporations should not pay taxes on income.  Other taxes would still apply.  This, like most other suggestions that will follow has to do with keeping corporations as far removed as possible from governmental activities.  It would also require a restructuring of the individual income tax system and would require all individual income to be taxed equally and would necessitate more high income tax brackets to make up for the loss in corporate taxes.

Corporations should pay for everything an employee needs:  Corporations will pay a salary of some sort.  They should also have to pay a stipend for any activity or expense an employee might run into during employment hours.  Dress code?  Corporations pay for it.  Lunch hour?  Corporations pay for it.  On the job injuries?  Corporations pay for it.

Corporations are not people:  Corporations should not be given personhood.  Given various Supreme Court rulings qualifying corporations as people, this will likely require a Constitutional Amendment.  And speaking of the Constitution, the Constitution should not apply to corporations.  They are simply a governmental creation which is entitled to the rights that the government allows them to have.  So there should also be a Corporate Bill of Rights.

Money is not speech:  This is probably one of the biggest ones.  Again, given various Supreme Court rulings, this will likely require a Constitutional Amendment to fix.  The government makes the money.  The government distributes the money.  The government can dictate where and how the money can flow if it so chooses.  Yes, this means that the government can force you to buy health care or broccoli.

Governmental regulations still apply:  Yeah, these aren’t going anywhere.  The government still has a huge part to play in keeping its citizenry safe and corporations are by far the largest malefactors in that.  Water, air, land, it’s all worth protecting and we can not rely on corporations to protect it.

Have we achieved nirvana yet?  I can’t solve all the world’s problems myself.  What are your ideas?

Here’s A Litmus Test For Obama Derangement Syndrome

Forbes Magazine has an article out showing that President Obama’s term in office has economically outperformed President Reagan’s in pretty much every category.  Oh, and he also has shrunk the deficit and reduced government.  The deficit grew dramatically under Reagan and the size of government increased as well.  I don’t see this as a “take that Reagan lovers!” article as much as it’s a “take that imaginary history!” article.

Here’s the problem with idols; your image of them is grossly distorted from their reality.  In fact, your image of them is more a reflection on yourself than reality.  Reagan is the epitome of this.  Everything good under the sun is attributed to Reagan even though a very simple analysis of the data would show that he wasn’t really that great.  Lots of bad stuff happened under his watch.  Unforgivable stuff.  Some good stuff happened too, but most of the good stuff is made up from whole cloth.

Maybe twenty years from now, the image of Obama will be like that of Reagan today.  Who knows?  I doubt it, though.  Obama will likely go down in history as the perfectly adequate politician that he was.  A pragmatist to Reagan’s idealism.  And that’s the story of Republicanism in the United States these days.  Idealism divorced from reality.  It works wonderfully for short-term gains.  Everyone loves people who pretend to be idealists.  The next Presidential election will be full of them.  Pretty much everyone that is expected to run for the Republican ticket is a pretender and so is likely next POTUS Hillary Clinton.  Sadly, that’s how you win elections.  Even Obama ran on a very idealist platform while all the time showing himself to be a pragmatist’s pragmatist.  The results have been mostly good with some bad thrown in.  Seriously, ignore the faux-scandals and make a list of all the stuff that was accomplished.  You know, stuff that was passed.  Here, let me help you (caution, swears).  List them in two columns, ones that are good and ones that are bad.  You would be hard pressed to come up with a list containing more bad than good.

Everything You Wanted To Know About The Ukranian Crisis*

*But were afraid to ask…

Max Fisher over at Vox has a pretty good summary of what’s going on in Ukraine and who all the players are.  I’m in the “Putin’s dug a hole he can’t get himself out of” camp myself.  Things in Russia have been pretty crappy since the Great Recession and there’s nothing like a little nationalism and a bit of war to distract the people from their problems.  Putin’s approval ratings are through the roof since Russia “annexed” the Crimean Peninsula.  It’s kind of creepy how easily world leaders can use unabashed nationalism to get citizens to completely ignore facts and fall in line with what the leaders want to accomplish. *cough* Iraq War *cough*

Ideas In Radical Democracy

There are two things wrong with our system of elections; the people who run for office and the people who vote the people into office.  The former is true because it is an almost universal truth that anyone who puts so much effort into seeking power is distinctly unsuited to hold such power.  The latter because it is impossible for a member of the general public to make an educated decision on which candidate is truly qualified to hold a position.  The answer is usually “none of them” but we have to go with the system we have.  Or do we?

I am a much higher information voter than the general public and I am woefully unqualified to pick a good candidate for, I would say, 80% of the votes that I cast.  Judges?  Forget it.  Metropolitan Water Reclamation District?  Pshhht.  President of the United States?  Please!  Ok, I’m joking about that last one, but I do seriously believe that the sheer act of running for President of the United States automatically makes you one of the worst people to be allowed to be President.  

But if the people who run suck and the people who vote suck, what’s a Democracy to do?  How about we stop having candidates and stop having votes?  If we want a truly representative democracy, we need a larger pool of potential office holders.  And by larger pool, I mean everyone who is constitutionally qualified to hold that specific office.  You say you’re from Illinois, are 30+ years old, and a citizen of the U.S. for at least 9 years?  Guess what?  You have a chance to become the next junior Senator from Illinois.  How in the world would we manage voting for such a large pool of candidates?  Simple.  We don’t vote.  We hold a lottery.  Your name gets picked, you’re elected.  

Holding office should be a burden, but it should be a burden that everyone is willing to accept if called.  In this way, it would be similar to another burden we all must bear as upright citizens; jury duty.  Jury duty is wholly necessary to our justice system and its one major flaw is that it’s ridiculously easy for people to get out of doing it if they so choose.  With this new system of elections, it would be nigh impossible to shirk the duty.  In fact, I’d change jury duty to be the same way as elections.

Goodbye two party system!  So long good ole boys network!  Ta ta money’s corrupting influence on elections!  See ya dynastic political families!  Au revoir voter suppression.

Sure, there will still be corruption.  Yes, there is a chance that you may get some bad apples elected as a result.  But I believe those odds would be dramatically lowered with this new system.  And with an almost zero chance of being re-elected, those bad apples will be able to cause much less damage than your 18 term Congresspersons of today.

It would certainly be a hard sell.  Voting is so ingrained in our mind as a necessary component of a thriving democracy that people will rail against the idea just on principle.  It would require changing the Constitution at both the Federal and State level and likely also require additional prerequisites for certain positions like judges.  In the end, it all boils down to one idea: A person who has power thrust upon her for a period of time is much more likely to use that power to achieve what they believe in than they are to abuse it to achieve their own ends.

Here Comes The BOOM!

ACASignups.net, which has been absolutely awesome at projecting Affordable Care Act sign ups, and the Obama administration are showing that over 7 million people have signed up for individual insurance through the exchanges as of the March 31st deadline.  That surpasses the Congressional Budget Office’s original 7 million person projection by a hair or two.  The grand total of private individual insurance sign ups is somewhere between 14.6 M and 22.1 M.

This can not be seen as anything other than an amazing success.  Of course, you have the usual nay-sayers, the same people who kept on insisting that Mitt Romney was going to win the last election despite an overwhelming amount of evidence that he wasn’t, who exclaim very loudly and often that the numbers are all wrong.  To be fair, there are still some legitimate questions, but they are minor and will do nothing to take away from the awesomeness of hitting this milestone.

This must be the worst April Fool’s joke ever for ACA naysayers, those that called it a disaster, that said it would bankrupt the country, those that vigorously attempted to thwart the legislation at every turn.  April 1st, 2014 marks the beginning of tens of millions of Americans having affordable, comprehensive healthcare for the first time ever.  No longer can they be driven to bankruptcy because of an accident or a disease.  No longer will they have to decide between getting the healthcare they desperately need and the food they must eat.  No longer will people be tied down to their jobs because of the health care it provides.  Goodbye and good riddance to those barbarous days and hello to a still flawed but markedly better future.

I Totally Voted For Myself

One of the judicial vacancies (Reyes if you’re interested) had two people running who both had a few “not recommended” decisions by various bar associations and, for some reason, had a write in spot, so of course I wrote myself in!  Many of the other vacancy spots didn’t have a write in so I’m not sure why this one was special.  The vagaries of the voting ballot.

If I were a little more forward thinking, I could have had all of my friends vote for me as well.  Given that I was the 47th person to vote for my precinct today, I don’t think it would have taken that many votes to put me in contention.  Yep, that’s right, I was 47th in a pool of around 1000.  The workers joked to me that they bet that they can hit 50 before the night is done.  Ah, democracy.

Vote For Judges!

It’s that time again where I harangue my measly Chicago audience and remind them to get out there on Tuesday, March 18th and perform one of the most critical civil duties.  Voting.  Yes, this primary has selections for Governor and Attorney General and Treasurer and blah blah blah, but they are far from the most important offices on the ballot.  The most important would be judges.

Judges are the one elected officials you are most likely to run into in a professional capacity in your everyday lives.  And it likely won’t be for a fun reason.  Rarely is it said, “Yay, I get to go before a judge today!”  For this reason, it is vitally important that we get good judges on the bench and even more important to remove the bad ones.

You are ill-equipped to decide which judges are good and which are trash.  Thus you must trust the opinions of those who interact with judges on a daily basis; lawyers.  Lucky for us, the Alliance of Bar Associations for judicial Screening (ABAJS?) produces a pdf document that you can print out and take with you to your polling station.  The document is a conglomeration of various bar associations’ recommendations on whether a judge is qualified or not.  If you have your favorite bar association (and who doesn’t?), you can follow their recommendations.  I tend to look for even one unqualified rating by any of the bar associations and vote down that judge if one exists.

Now go do your duty on Tuesday.