<$BlogRSDUrl$>
This Is A Very Strange Place
1) Bush proposes cuts to Medicare, apparently as part of a plan to not just punish the elderly for being old, but to reward campaign contributors by issuing a no-bid contract. Why is this strange, you ask? Not because Bush thinks this is a good idea, but because he does this in the run-up to an election. It's not really smart politics. How much easier could it be than for Democrats to say that the Republicans are selling out the elderly in corrupt back-room deal?
2) A bunch of wealthy philanthropists give money to a Democratic umbrella organization in order to build a liberal infrastructure. The result? They are accused to discriminating against centrist groups and of being a shadowy, secret organization with little public accountability. Did I miss something, or hasn't the DLC been getting corporate contributions for years? Do they just want all the money? And why not more scrutiny about the billions that Scaife and his ilk have been pouring into the right since the late 70's? Hey guys, I'll make a deal with you. If the right stops funding conservative groups, we'll stop funding liberal ones. Deal?
3) Arizona is making the voting process a lottery system. That's right - if you vote, your name is automatically entered for a million-dollar prize. I'm of 2 minds about this. I'm so desperate to improve turnout that I'm almost willing to try anything. But to reduce the vote to something so crass? What does this say about democracy? I do disagree with those that think it violates the bribery laws. Those statutes are clearly designed to prevent money from influencing who people vote for, not whether they vote. Still, I don't know. It seems kind of icky.
2 Comments:
-
From a strictly partisan perspective it would probably help Democrats. The D's do better among poor people, poor people are the most likely to play the lottery, ergo....
By
Arbitrista, at 3:12 PM
-
Since I am originally from AZ (Tucson), I should comment on this development. I think it is a brilliant idea if implemented because the worst part of our democracy is the low turnout. We shouldn't romanticize democracy, we should functionalize it. We should provide as many incentives as possible for people to come out and vote. This is based on reality. Hardly anyone ever votes anymore out of "civic duty", or because they want to be part of the process. They vote because they must. This is why turnout increases dramatically during critical elections (war time elections, or recession elections). Without some compelling external factor people don't vote because they are spending so much time working for corporations. If we really wanted to turn voting into an act of civic participation, we would turn election day into a national holiday, or, barring that, always have election day on a Saturday. Arizona was also the first state to allow Internet voting. http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,34844,00.html So, this effort to provide incentives for voting is merely the latest in a long line of innovations from Arizona. In 1999, the state elected the first all female slate of office-holders. In 1981, Sandra Day O'Conner became the first female Supreme Court Justice, after serving in the AZ senate. So, AZ is, and always has been, a rather progressive state when it comes to expanding the franchise.
By Marriah, at 4:42 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home
:: permalink
