Archive for the 'politics' Category
February 13th, 2008 by Progressive Wednesday
Problem:
As the polls closed on Election Day 2004, I watched the state-by-state results eek in from the Renaissance Hotel in downtown Columbus with a thousand other volunteers, including Jerry Springer, the former mayor of Cincinnati, and Eric, who'd road-raged his way down from Rochester, New York, in his rusty and rust-colored – ˜86 Monte Carlo, to lend a hand for the final few days. I bit my nails to the quick and pulled and twisted at my goatee. The news seemed grim.
And so, the war would rage on. And the poor would increasingly fight it. And our broken health care system would cause more bankruptcies. And monolithic business would rule instead of wise environmental stewardship. And I felt too guilty to sleep. But it was that night, and deep into the morning, that Eric and I came up with the idea of Progressive Wednesday, a new way to empower people when there weren't elections, and hell, even when there were. And it was that night we decided that helping to fix the election process would be at the top of our Wednesday list.
Two weeks later, I attended a public hearing with sworn testimony by Franklin County residents reporting voter suppression, fraud, and the inequitable distribution of voting machines in both poor and predominately African-American districts, which made 2004 Ohio seem a little too much like 1960 Mississippi.
Since I'm not a Democrat, I now deeply question why I didn't just support a so-called “third-party– candidate like Michael Badnarik, the Libertarian candidate, or David Cobb, the Green candidate. But my experience helped me question, even more, the process by which we select our elected officials and the ways we decide whom to give our vote. I imagine I'm not alone.
- – – – -
Make Progress:
We'll definitely be returning to this topic time and time again, because it's intensely complicated and similarly significant to not just our rights as Americans, but to what we value as a human right. What follows, then, is a beginning. Consider the starter's pistol fired.
Bookmark:
It's a little bit difficult to describe Project Vote Smart in 304 words, but here goes:
- This non-profit uses oodles of volunteers (from the right and the left) to examine “voting records, campaign contributions, public statements, biographical data (including their work history) and evaluations of them generated by over 100 competing special interest groups.–
- In addition, they “test each candidate’s willingness to provide citizens with their positions on the issues they will most likely face if elected through the National Political Awareness Test.– In other words, they see if candidates will openly, directly explain what they stand for — a tall order in some instances.
- You can also use Project Vote Smart to learn about judges, congressional legislation, voter registration, polling locales, ballot measures, and lots and lots of accurate et cetera.
- The Project also offers up a Voter's Self-Defense Manual, a must-read for progressives of any political ilk. The booklet can be downloaded as an Acrobat file, or you can order one by giving them a jingle: 1-888-868-3762.
- They are truly bipartisan: “No one can join the Project’s board without a political opposite.– And whose served on the board? Carter, Ford, Dukakis, McCain, McGovern, and Goldwater, to name a few.
- They don't take cash money from special interests. To quote: “We do not accept contributions from any corporations, labor unions, or other organizations that lobby, support or oppose candidates or issues.” The money comes only in the form of donations by individuals (70%) and philanthropic foundation grants (30%). Plus, 83% of their funds go directly into their programs and content.
- U.S. News and World Report has this to say: “Project Vote Smart would make the Founders weep with joy.– The New York Times pointed out that the Project kicks so much tail that “even the Federal Government recommends it.–
- This service — this wonderful, wonderful service — is completely free.
Want to read more? Go check it out for yourself. Then bookmark it. You'll want it down the road: we guarantee it.
We'd also like to ask you to give some love in the form of greenbacks to this incredibly worthy, dare we say essential (okay, we dare), this essential cause. Even if giving means three bucks. Here's the beauty of your generosity: not only do you help out this organization whose sole purpose is to help you as a voter, but your gift is tax-deductible, and you can choose how the money is spent. So give a little and have them spend it wisely.
But remember to bookmark it, baby, remember to bookmark it.
.
Call:
This sucker might come as a shock, but the Constitution does not guarantee American citizens the right to vote.
We'll give you a second to reread that sentence. Okay, now that we've got your attention we'll give you all the support we need to prove it to you. In the Supreme Court decision Bush v. Gore, the Court ruled: “The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States.– We think, well, we think this is a load of crap, and not cute little rabbit pellets– ¦ no, we're talking a dump truck full of nasty elephant waste.
We'd like you to take five minutes right now, immediately after reading this, and call your Senators (take a peek and make sure your boss ain't lingering around). Just click this sentence to find a list of all the Senators with phone numbers for each. Here's what we'd recommend saying:
- “I'm a voter from [name your state], and I'm outraged that there's no Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing my right to vote. If Senator [last name] wants my vote the next time [he or she] is up for reelection, then [he or she] will introduce or support legislation that would guarantee this basic American right.–
Be sure to thank them for their time.
If such an Amendment existed, folks could sue states for voter fraud, suppression, a lack of equal protection, and faulty machines or a lack of functioning ones. There are 7,800 different election jurisdictions. This adds a lot of variables. If there was a Constitutional Amendment, there could be a universal voting system for all elections. Fairness. That's what we're talking about here. Accountability. Equality. A more perfect union.
.
Write:
Even though we're far, far away from the next national elections, we think it’s more apropos to deal with this topic well before November, which is, of course, National Pomegranate Month.
Okay, here's the main idea of our letter-to-the-editor campaign: Our fellow Americans, Election Day should be a national holiday.
Now, it's hard to argue with a day off (though we're sure the workaholics out there could give it a shot). But we think for the sake of the U.S. of A., voters deserve a greater opportunity to choose what goes down.
Here are some talking points for ya to use and morph and personalize and localize to your heart's content:
- Election Day is an excellent way to emphasize the importance of community.
- As a holiday, we'd be reaffirming the cultural significance of voting.
- Voting was a central catalyst behind the founding of the country.
- Voter turnout in the United State for presidential elections ranks 65th in the world. Democracy deserves better. Common sense dictates that a holiday would raise voter turnout.
- Most workers paid hourly can't afford to take time off work to vote.
- Polls in some states close as early as 7 p.m., further limiting turnout.
- Long lines wouldn't seem as daunting since folks wouldn't need to hustle back to work.
- Election Day is already a holiday in Puerto Rico.
Here's a link to the newspapers throughout the country to help you find the address and specific requirements to the daily “Extra, extra, read all about it!” in your community. You can always check out our How to Read Newspapers tool. Also, you might want to take a gander at our How to Write Letters to the Editor tool, both in brief and in full.
Read:
Adopting Election Day as a national holiday and banging out a Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing the right to vote seem like two it's-about-time steps in the right direction.
There's got to be more we can do to help out so-called “third parties– and their very qualified candidates. Third parties deserve a greater voice in our country, and having more voices, more opinions, and options seems incredibly American to us. Two-party domination seems a bit archaic, a bit undemocratic.
There are several suggestions out there for ways to change the ways we vote and the ways third party candidates get treated on ballots. These ideas include:
We'll be returning to the topic of election fixes in the future, and we're curious what your thoughts are about each of the various options. After you read about each, let us know what you think by leaving a comment or by contacting us. Let us know which you prefer, which you have questions about. Your comments will help us decide which ones to support down ye ole road. So, thanks in advance.
.
Wear:
Okay, this one's easy enough. We'd like to encourage you to plunk down a few bucks, snag yourself this t-shirt, and wear it around all year long (taking it off occasionally to shower, make the love, and maybe even wash it here and there). Sport it when you head to the grocery, the gym, the Grand Canyon. (Speaking of the Grand Canyon– ¦.)
This is a way to send an honest and constant message. Plus the word “vote– is bad-ass as Mr. T and drop-dead gorgeous as Rita Hayworth. Since you're reading Progressive Wednesday, we're confident you're a little bit of both, too.
February 4th, 2008 by Eric
Last week, after the President’s State of the Union address, there was a photo taken of Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama. She is reaching over either to shake his or Ted Kennedy’s hand. He turns away just as the picture is being taken, making it look as though he is rejecting her handshake.
But you know that already. The reason I know that you know that is because you are reading this blog which means that you are probably interested enough in world events that you turned on the tube sometime that week, and regardless of whether you were watching FOX, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, or Nickelodeon (OK, maybe not that one), you saw pundits discussing it, analyzing it, and doing whatever else they could do to it for nearly three days. It was Christmas in January for the media.
If you’re like me, you were more than a little irritated that this got so much press coverage. That 99% of voting-age Americans knew about the “handshake snub,” but hardly any could tell me about the differences in their health care plans, is enough to make me want to throw my 38″, 300-pound television through my window. But instead, I decided to even those numbers out, if only a little bit. So below are the health care plans of Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Take a minute to read them over.
But most importantly, VOTE! And when you do, base your decision on who you think has a better health care plan, who will strengthen America’s middle and lower classes, and who will improve our standing in the world. Don’t make it based on a picture of a handshake.
.
This pretty much sums up how I feel about the whole thing.
September 27th, 2007 by Eric
One of the things that bothers me most about our current political system, or at least many of our current politicians, is how little they ask of their constituents. We spend trillions on a war of choice, all while cutting taxes, especially for upper income households, without providing adequate equipment for our troops. We re-up a Farm Bill that over-subsidizes corn even though our government knows about its enormous negative impact on our environment, health, and economy. We are encouraged to indulge in huge vehicles and drive as much as we want in spite of the fact that gas prices are outrageous and we are destroying our environment with each firing of a piston.
I'm not one to wait for my government to tell me what to do and neither should you be. But it would be nice if a politician took a stance on an issue, even or especially one that is unpopular, because they knew it was right, rather than because it would get them reelected.
Politicians in other countries do it. Sometimes they even get reelected. In Norway, for instance, they not only require that their cars be more fuel efficient and ask that their citizens be more environmentally conscious, but, according to Reuters:
No car can be “green,” “clean” or “environmentally friendly,” according to some of the world’s strictest advertising guidelines set to enter into force in Norway next month.
“Cars cannot do anything good for the environment except less damage than others,” said Bente Oeverli, a senior official at the office of the state-run Consumer Ombudsman.
Well said, Bente.
So you can't even advertise a vehicle as “environmentally-friendly– in Norway. The article lists several more reasons; most of them even make sense. But the point is that they are taking action based on something that they believe to be right, rather than worrying about who they might upset.
So what can we do about it? Well, first, don't wait for your government to tell you to do the right thing. And next time someone holds an opinion different than you own, keep an open mind. If enough people do it, we might get some sensible progressive political solutions rather than just sycophantic pandering. Heck, you might even be able to tell one politician from another.
Photo by this Norwegian.
September 6th, 2007 by Matt
I’m done watching the Presidential debates. It’s not that I don’t care who wins, ’cause I do. I’m actually a bit obsessed with politics, even though we shy away from politicians on Progressive Wednesday. In fact, I’ll probably end up working on a campaign for a third party candidate. If I do, for the sake of full disclosure, I’ll let you know who and maybe even why. But here’s why I’m done with the debates: most of these folks are blow-hards and wannabes who’d have you and I believe that if we don’t watch our backs, well, the terrorists are gonna get us, and if we don’t elect them, well, then we’re not really watching our backs.
The problem with this ridiculous argument is two-fold:
- Superman they ain’t. Superman kicks serious tail. I know Superman, and none of them are Superman.
- They’d all like it if we kept this on the down-low, but here goes: you don’t need to be afraid of terrorism.
I’d say that the proof is in the pudding, but I don’t really dig on pudding. I’m a cheesecake kind of guy, so, for the sake of this argument, the proof’s in the cheesecake.
According to the Global Terrorism Database, which is connected to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, between September 12, 2001 and January 1, 2005, exactly five Americans died on U.S. soil as a result of terrorist attacks.
In other words, my sisters and brothers, terrorism isn’t really something we ought to be fearing during our daily lives. Consider some of these comparative statistics:
So put the golf clubs away when the cumulonimbus clouds come calling. Double-check your ladders, and help your octogenarian grandmother down the porch steps. Maybe consider a flu shot, or, I don’t know, washing your hands on occasion. For crying out loud, 11 people died in 2003 because of fireworks.
One last thing on terrorism, because I know folks might be thinking, Well, Mr. Zambito, what about 9/11? First, please, call me Matt. Second, I care deeply about the the tragedy of 9/11, because 2,356 people died, because it filled us with a gut-wrenching feeling of the unknown. That date and the images from that day will always remind us of a huge loss of innocent human life, and what can result from a tremendous act of cowardly, unprovoked violence. But just consider for a moment that about 3,000 people die every month from the flu. That’s a tragedy, too, and an easily preventable one at that.
What I’m getting at is that we needn’t fret thinking that the terrorists are going to “follow us home.” Odds are, even if they do (which they don’t seem to be doing), we’ll be safe because the vast majority of terrorist attacks result in zero fatalities. And if we demanded that our government spent more of our money and resources protecting our borders, our ports, our food and water sources, and increasing our global intelligence, well, then we’d be all the safer.
(Please Note: If you’re planning on serving me cheesecake (hint, hint), hold the cherries, okay?)
July 22nd, 2007 by Matt
On Wednesday May 30, we wrote about the U.S. occupation of Iraq. Since that day 156 servicemen and servicewomen have lost their lives.
So what can you do?
We'd like you to take three minutes out of your day and call your representative in Congress. They've only got a two-year shelf-life so you're guaranteed that they'll be a little more concerned about losing their sweet gig than your Senators. If you're not sure who your representative is, first go to the U.S. Postal Service to find your full 9-digit zip code, then head on over to Project Vote Smart and find out the name of your lucky representative. If you click on their name, you'll find their contact information.
And what would we like you to tell them? Here’s a little script to make your life that much easier:
I'm a registered voter in Representative [Congressperson's Last Name] district. Every day [he/she] doesn’t introduce or sign onto legislation mandating a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, Representative [Congressperson's Last Name] is telling me overtly, not tacitly, that [he/she] approves of our occupation of Iraq. This was a so-called “war– built on lies and waged without regard for innocent lives with a staggering price tag to taxpayers like me. If Representative [Congressperson's Last Name] hopes to receive my vote in two years, [he/she] will promptly propose new legislation that will de-authorize our obscene occupation of Iraq. Congress authorized the invasion under the War Powers Act and that authorization can be revoked. Representative [Congressperson's Name] should not wait and let more American soldiers and innocent Iraqis die.
That’s it. That’s one thing we can all do to try to bring our valiant and victimized troops home.
July 6th, 2007 by Eric
Two weeks ago, we asked you to sign the petition by the Union of Concerned Scientists asking Congress to raise the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. It worked in the Senate, who passed an energy bill last week that, among other things, raised the average fuel efficiency of cars and SUVs from 27mpg to 35mpg by the year 2020.
Congresswoman, Diane Feinstein has put the effects of the bill in terms we can understand. With the new guidelines, our nation would:
- Save between 2.0 and 2.5 million barrels of oil per day, nearly the amount of oil imported today from the Persian Gulf.
- Achieve up to 18 percent reduction of carbon dioxide emissions from anticipated levels, or the equivalent of taking 60 million cars off the road in one year.
- Save consumers $79-98 billion at the pump, based on a $3.00 gas price.
The bill now goes to the House, the less deliberative body, whose members have closer ties to those in their community, given that they represent fewer people. In that light, the Union of Concerned Scientists have come up with something a little different for sharing your concerns with your representative. They have started a campaign asking you and I to send our gas receipts to our representatives.
This is a brilliant way to make your concern known to your most personal of elected federal officials. It gives them a sense of reality; it says, “This is what I have to pay to fill my tank. This is how I spend my hard-earned dough. I want that tank to go further.– You can get more information on the program, including your representative's information and short messages too send in along with your receipts by clicking this sentence.
I am not encouraging people to wait for the government to fix this problem, however. The next time you are in the market for a vehicle, check out the list of most fuel-efficient cars on the market and start paying a little more attention to the mileage on the window. In the meantime, here is a handy list of ways to reduce the gas mileage on the vehicle that is sitting in your driveway right now. Let's start doing them today. Do them for the environment, national security, and for your own pocketbook.
May 30th, 2007 by Progressive Wednesday
End:
We want this occupation to end. Making a phone call is one way we can make that happen. So, we’d like you to take three minutes out of your day and call your representative in Congress about the aforementioned war-spending bill. They’ve only got a two-year shelf-life so you’re guaranteed that they’ll be a little more concerned about losing their sweet gig than your Senators. If you’re not sure who your representative is, first go to the U.S. Postal Service to find your full 9-digit zip code, then head on over to Project Vote Smart and find out the name of your lucky representative. If you click on their name, you’ll find their contact information.
Before you call, you’ll want to first check this list to see how your rep voted to know which of the following to read when you call.
If they vote to continue funding without a timetable, you can read this when you dial their digits:
I’m a registered voter in Representative [Congressperson's Last Name] district, and I’m disgusted with their recent vote on the Iraq spending bill. By not mandating a timetable for withdrawal, Representative [Congressperson's Last Name] essentially is telling me overtly, not tacitly, that [he/she] approves of our occupation of Iraq. This was a so-called “war” built on lies and waged without regard for innocent lives with a staggering price tag to taxpayers like me. Representative [Congressperson's Last Name] has just upped the cost. If [he/she] hopes to receive my vote in two years, [he/she] will promptly propose new legislation that will de-authorize our obscene occupation of Iraq. Congress authorized the invasion under the War Powers Act and that authorization can be revoked. [Congressperson's Name] should not wait and let more American soldiers and innocent Iraqis die.
If your representative, by some small miracle, voted against the bill, use this when you give a concerned pissed-off jingle:
I�m a registered voter in Representative [Congressperson's Last Name] district, and I’m pleased [he/she] voted against the recent war-funding bill. But if [he/she] hopes to receive my vote in two years, [he/she] will promptly propose new legislation that will de-authorize our obscene occupation of Iraq. Congress authorized the invasion under the War Powers Act and that authorization can be revoked. Representative [Congressperson's Last Name] should not wait and let more American soldiers and innocent Iraqis die.
Sometimes dialing 10-digits can make all the difference.
Make this your homepage 
Add this to your favorites