Showing posts with label election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label election. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

Tired (The Day After...)

I went to bed early Monday night. I'm not really a morning person. The idea of getting up at 4am so I could be at a polling place at 5am didn't really add to the excitement of Election Day...

Monday evening I picked up the voting machines for my polling place. As polling chief for my precinct it was my responsibility to getting them to the voting site. I left them in my Explorer overnight to avoid loading and unloading the car in the dark. But I worried about being on CNN if my vehicle got broken into over night and I woke up and checked on it twice that night.

I've worked at my precinct a couple of times now. I've never seen this kind of turnout before. A little over 80% of our registered voters turned out. In my county, 33% of the votes went to Obama, 65% to McCain. IN my precinct it was a little better - 37% Obama to 61% McCain. (Remember there were several independents on the ballot.)

The US Senate race was about the opposite. Just over 57% of the votes from Tazewell County in that race when to Mark Warner. Gilmore pulled just over 41%. Warner pulled almost 66% of the vote in my precinct.

When the day was over I drove my voting machines back to the county courthouse. I listened on the radio as NPR called Pennsylvania for Obama. I knew enough to know that just that probably meant Obama had won the election.

On my way home I stopped in town at the Obama Campaign Headquarters. I wanted to see what it felt like there, to breathe the air. It was a room mostly full of tired people anxious about the results in Virginia, where McCain was leading at the time. I spent ten minutes, maybe, and went home.

I wasn’t supposed to eat or drink anything but water after 8pm in preparation for a blood test today. I drank tap water from a champagne flute with golden filigree on the lip while I watched the news.




Today I took a day off work and I went to see my doctor. Routine stuff I've been putting off. My good cholesterol is up three points (and is among the highest he's ever seen, which he says is good). Today or tomorrow his office will call and tell me the results of my liver enzyme test. I take a medicine that can stress my liver, and I've been on it a long time. My bad cholesterol is down a point. My triglycerides are 41, and I'm suppose to keep them below 50.

I left his office and when to Big Daddy's restaurant for a late breakfast: scrambled eggs, buttered toast, fried potatoes, and country ham.

Update: My doctor called and said my liver is fine...

Saturday, November 1, 2008

Dailing Phones...

I spent a little time in town today at the Obama Campaign's office in Tazewell. I made phone calls for about an hour. Most were to people in the county's Northern District, where I live.

I must admit that my mostive was somewhat selfish. I wanted the experience, wanted to be able to say I contributed (at least a little).

I called 30 or so phone numbers. The list I worked from was supposed to be undecided voters. No one was undecided. I got one or two disconnected numbers, 10 or 12 calls where no one answered and I maybe got to talk to an answering machine, a few strong Obama supporters, and few Democrats who said they were going ot vote for Obama because, well, after all they were Democrats. And I spoke to one nice lady who supports McCain and said she'd pray for my soul... Oh,well

After my 45 or 50 minutes I handed the phone to someone else and went about my business in town, which mostly involved buying groceries...

Saturday, July 14, 2007

The Reincarnation of Bobby Kennedy?

Could John Edwards be the reincarnation of Bobby Kennedy?

I don't actually believe in reincarnation (not many Baptists do). Plus the math doesn't work: John Edwards was a few days shy of being 15 years old when Robert Kennedy was assassinated. But Kennedy succeeded in 1968 in convincing America that a man can be rich and still care about the poor. And he did it partly with a campaign trip that took him through the heart of Appalachia.

Edwards will spend three days on a poverty tour not unlike Kennedy's trip. The "Road to One America Tour" will leave New Orleans Monday morning and travel 1800 miles through some of America's poorest cities and rural counties. And Edwards plans to end his journey where Kennedy did 40 years ago, in Prestonsburg, Kentucky.

The Edwards tour starts tomorrow night in New Orleans, in the Lower Ninth Ward. Hurricane Katrina left that area of the city particularly devastated and recovery efforts have not been very successful there.

Edwards will also stop in
  • Marks, Mississippi, where Martin Luther King Jr. began his 1968 Poor People's March to Washington.
  • Helena and West Helena, Arkansas
  • Memphis, Tennessee
  • Cleveland, Ohio
  • Youngstown, Ohio
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
  • Wise, Virginia
  • And Whitesburg, Kentucky
The tour will end Wednesday with a visit a health care clinic in Wise, Va., and meeting in Whitesburg where Edwards will talk with area youth about economic opportunity, and finally a speech at the Floyd County, Kentucky, Courthouse where Robert Kennedy spoke.



"It's time to be patriotic about something
other than the war in Iraq
." - John Edwards

Monday, July 9, 2007

Rudy Giuliani Gets Booed on Taxes

On Saturday, GOP Presidential hopefully Rudy Giuliani was in Florida where we served as Grand Marshall for NASCAR's Pepsi 400 in Daytona. Before the race he attended a town hall meeting in Jacksonville, Florida, where about 500 people listened to him answer questions for half and hour or so. One of his answers brought jeers and boos from some people in the crowd. Giuliani was asked if he would support a flat tax proposal (proponents are using the euphemism "fair tax").

Giuliani said "no." People in the crowd (a couple of dozen or so of them, at least) made those same nasty noises in response to Giuliani's answer that many race fans make during driver introductions when Jeff Gordon gets introduced.

GOP hopeful Rudy GiulianiI found it interesting that, in a crowd of 500 people, only 25 to 50 of them vocalized negative feelings about his answer. That means that only five or ten percent of the people there felt strongly about the "flat tax" question. I also found it interesting that the Associated Press headlined a story based on the incident; but they did. Go figure...



If you're looking for something to think about that will make your head hurt, try taxes. The issue is complicated beyond words. There's no sense discussing it much with someone unless you have at least a vague level of agreement with them about what governments should do -- by which I mean the sorts of things a governments should dabble in more than exactly which course of action governments should take on something. After all, taxation is how government pays for what it does.

Most people don't have a firm grip on the number of different governments and taxes there are that have some effect on their daily lives. If you live in a town in Virginia you almost definitely pay taxes to the town (even if you don't own property), taxes to the county the town is in, taxes to the Commonwealth of Virginia, and taxes to the Federal government. Among my favorites is the prepared food tax that most Virginia local governments charge when you buy cooked food; that tax adds an additional five or six percent to the price of your hamburger at a Wendy's or Shoney's and that money stays with the locality where the restaurant is located.

If you live in some other state, there's a good chance your county taxes you twice - once through your county commission and once through your school board. In Virginia school boards don't have that power.

I looked up the term "flat tax" online and found that not everyone agrees what a flat tax even is. On the one hand, a flat tax is technically a tax where everyone pays the same amount - like the $10 tax I pay to put a county sticker on the windshield of my car. Poor or rich, whether it's for your 30 year old Pinto or your Dodge Viper, ten bucks is what it costs. But most people mean a flat rate or percentage when they talk about a flat tax - everyone would pay something different because they earned (or spent) a different amount.

Of course, we haven't talked about what to tax yet. Some flat taxers want to tax income, some want to tax only earned income, and some what to tax spending (instead of income). That last proposal is what people mean most of the time what they talk about the so-called "fair tax." They want a national sales tax of some sort to replace income tax in America.

I've always struggled with the definition of the word "fair." I can't give you a definition of that term that satisfies me. Most people think of everyone being treated the same.

We don't treat all kids the same at the school where I work:

  • Some of them we make pay for their lunch; others we give lunch to for free.
  • Most have to take their math tests in silence and have half an hour; a few, though, get 45 minutes and some help reading the test.
  • Some students at my school we make read their books without any sort of devices to help them; others we let wear glasses.
What's "fair" mean?

The "fair tax" proposal is attributed in large part to radio personality Neal Boortz, promoted by the organization Americans for Fair Taxation, and embodied in a bill in committee in the U.S. House of Representatives called H.R. 25.

Common question number one is how a flat tax is fair to the poor (since they have less of an ability to pay)? Not to worry; the poor will go into the grocery store and pay the new 23% sales tax on milk and bread (just like everyone else), but then they'll get a check from the government called a "prebate" to compensate them for money they spend on basic necessities (just like everyone else).

Like the old (current) tax system, there's no effort to allow for the fact that the cost of basic necessities is different in Los Angeles than it is in, say, Newberry, South Carolina. Still, proponents say the "fair tax" is "progressive." I don't know how that's "fair," but I'm not sure what they mean by the word.

One minor detail that bothers me some about the proposal that Americans for Fair Taxation has online is simple. Right now poor people don't have to do any paperwork to escape income tax. If their income is less than the amount of their deduction and exemptions, they don't have to file. Under the proposal I looked at online, poor people would have to file paperwork to get their tax rebate - they'd have to fill out a new form to get back money the government shouldn't have taken. The amount of paperwork rich people have to do would decline sharply and the amount of paperwork poor people (who generally have less education) have to do would go up. That strikes me as being less than progressive; my experience with poor people leads me to suspect that many would miss out because they wouldn’t do the paperwork.

I do know this: poor people (and many in the lower half of the middle class) generally spend every penny they get just to make it from month to month. Rich people don't have that problem. So under the new "fair tax," a couple in their thirties raising two point four children in the burbs will pay taxes on almost every penny they make just because they spend it while the doctors and lawyers in more affluent neighborhoods, even if they pay more in actually taxes, could get by with paying tax on half or less of their income. Then when you look at the government's money and you talk about what portion of it came from the wealthy and what part of it came from the average American who's just try to make ends meet while they raise their kids, you'd find that the "fair tax" reduced the percentage of the Federal budget that was paid for by the more well to do. Rich people will be happy about that.

I'll ask rhetorically, "how is that fair?" And I expect that someone will explain it to me whether the question is intended to be rhetorical or not...

Tuesday, May 29, 2007

Leading in Iowa: John Edwards

John Edwards is the Democratic Party's frontrunner in Iowa, according to a recent poll by the Des Moines Sunday Register. A win in Iowa could move Edwards up in the polls nationally. But the Iowa Caucuses are still about eight months away.

At the moment, 29% of likely voters in Iowa would vote for Edwards. Illinois Sen. Barack Obama is second with 23% and Hillary Clinton is in third place with 21% of the vote.