Wednesday, November 09, 2005
Ohio: "progressive reforms" defeated
Four major ballot issues failed in Ohio yesterday, providing an indication that there is no "Democratic" or leftward groundswell at the grassroots level in this state.
Like most "progressive reforms", the four ballot issues in Ohio were aimed at "taking the politics out of politics". Funded largely by out-of-state organizations (MoveOn, for example) and big labor, the measures would have put the redrawing of electoral districts and the management of elections in Ohio into the hands of non-elected committees of appointed members (retired judges, party hacks, depending on the specific proposal), allowed unrestricted advance absentee voting and imposed further campaign finance restrictions.
The problem with all such measures is that, while "taking the politics out of the process" of drawing electoral districts, running elections, etc. might initially sound like a good idea, it in effect tries to remove the functions of government from elected officials. Power then becomes concentrated in the hands of bureaucrats who are answerable to NOBODY, including the voters.
Trying to take the politics out of what are political functions is ultimately counterproductive. Elections are supposed to have consequences. We are supposed toget the government we elect, and be able to throw them out if we aren't happy.
Oh, one last thing... take a closer look at the four Ohio ballot issues. Clearly, the real intent wasn't "reform", it was to try and make it possible to STEAL elections in Ohio, as was done in the Washington governor's race and the Presidential election in Wisconsin in 2004.
Why did Kerry lose in places like Ohio and Missouri? One reason is that, unlike the masses living in the anthills of the big cities, folks spread out across the midwest seem to have a sort of internal "BS meter". They generally seem to know when they're being hoodwinked. Those meters were buzzing yesterday, like they did every time Kerry pretended to go goose hunting or compared the economic situation to the Great Depression. Or tried to explain for the fifteenth time why he didn't really mean what he said any of the last fourteeen times on any given issue, or told yet another version of the "Christmas in Cambodia" fable.
Like most "progressive reforms", the four ballot issues in Ohio were aimed at "taking the politics out of politics". Funded largely by out-of-state organizations (MoveOn, for example) and big labor, the measures would have put the redrawing of electoral districts and the management of elections in Ohio into the hands of non-elected committees of appointed members (retired judges, party hacks, depending on the specific proposal), allowed unrestricted advance absentee voting and imposed further campaign finance restrictions.
The problem with all such measures is that, while "taking the politics out of the process" of drawing electoral districts, running elections, etc. might initially sound like a good idea, it in effect tries to remove the functions of government from elected officials. Power then becomes concentrated in the hands of bureaucrats who are answerable to NOBODY, including the voters.
Trying to take the politics out of what are political functions is ultimately counterproductive. Elections are supposed to have consequences. We are supposed toget the government we elect, and be able to throw them out if we aren't happy.
Oh, one last thing... take a closer look at the four Ohio ballot issues. Clearly, the real intent wasn't "reform", it was to try and make it possible to STEAL elections in Ohio, as was done in the Washington governor's race and the Presidential election in Wisconsin in 2004.
Why did Kerry lose in places like Ohio and Missouri? One reason is that, unlike the masses living in the anthills of the big cities, folks spread out across the midwest seem to have a sort of internal "BS meter". They generally seem to know when they're being hoodwinked. Those meters were buzzing yesterday, like they did every time Kerry pretended to go goose hunting or compared the economic situation to the Great Depression. Or tried to explain for the fifteenth time why he didn't really mean what he said any of the last fourteeen times on any given issue, or told yet another version of the "Christmas in Cambodia" fable.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]