The Sixteen Percent

Registered voters in the city of Los Angeles comes to 1.8 million. Voter turnout for the most recent March 5th, 2013, election was 16%. That's 288,000 people that have made major decisions that effect your future.* Even if the numbers are off by a few thousand, or even hundreds of thousands, I can confidently proclaim my utter disappointment with non-voting Angelenos.

This election will directly effect my neighbors lives. Top positions were up for grabs in this city ranging from mayor and city council candidates to the board of education. If you have a child in a public school. If you drive on a street with pot holes. If you live in a city where you question development projects and the allocation of money. If you complain about your home town in anyway, and didn't vote, then please take a look in the mirror before you start bitching to the rest of us.

How difficult is voting? Mail in ballots ensures even the laziest of voters can do their civic duty. Polling places are abundant, and open for thirteen hours on election day. News can be obtained from a variety of sources. Voting guides are sent to all who are registered. That's not even taking into account the barrage of advertisement accomplished by the candidates.

Los Angeles mayor candidates: Only two remain. 

Local politics have a greater impact on your day-to-day lives then anyone in Washington. Fire. Police. Medical emergency response. Water and power. Construction. Education.** These are civic services we all see or use frequently. Why wouldn't you want a say in how they operate, and vote for the local leaders of these organizations?

Personally I think it's pretty pathetic given how important this city is to the nation and the world at large. Perhaps we're too cool for school. Too hip for politics. Or maybe we just don't give a fuck. Either way this city has numerous problems, and the leaders of tomorrow have been dictated by 16% of the voting populace. Democracy for the few at the expense of the many.***




*Throughout this post the use of "you," "your,", and "we," refer to registered voters in the city of Los Angeles.

**From NPR: "The results are worse for the two educational races -- LAUSD and L.A. Community College District -- the turnout there hovered in the 6 to 7 percent range."

***Almost feels like a self-fulfilling prophecy for the conspiracy minded individual. 

Whitman vs. Brown @ UC Davis

Yesterday, Meg Whitman of the Republican party and Jerry Brown of the Democratic party squared off in their first televised debate. The two candidates are running for Governor of California. This post will highlight my opinoins about the debate. It will be based on television ads, the debate, and NPR.

Before the debate I was undecided. Afterwards  I saw my choices clearly. Do I want Mrs. Whitman who is Arnold Part Deux? Or do I want to give Mr. Brown another term? The former is the independent businesswoman who will run the state like Ebay, and show those career politicians how it is done. The later has held the Governors seat twice, and his public record has many failures. Meg has great fiscal ideas (awesome), but seems to follow party lines on social issues (bummer). John has a sense of humor (super), but as mentioned before has many failures (doh).

Mrs. Whitman stated many great ideas. I loved her plan for a two year state budget. It makes sense. A two year budget will grant the state significant time to work on non-fiscal issues. I also agree with her notion to stream line the business red tape, and the tax cut to manufacturers. My only concern is a lack of environmental oversight if  more manufacturers make California their home. I'm also not convinced she has any genuine plans that will actually cut out the red tape for businesses.

Mr. Brown also had some great ideas. He mentioned that the state government should "live within its means." He wants to reduce the salary of top state officials, and close the back room deals of previous budgets. He stresses his experience, and ensures the public that he can trim down the costs of government. BUT (and that's a big one) he hasn't had the best fiscal track record. He has come into office with a surplus to leave with a deficit. That's a hard sale to a populace experiencing a recession.

Besides the money each honey illustrated their character. Jerry was a charismatic career politician. He had a sense of humor, and provided ample evidence that he understood state politics. When asked about state pensions he mentioned that if everyone worked as long as he did the pension program would have a surplus. When confronted about his past ambitions he mentioned his settled down life with his wife, and his desire to remain in California till he meets his maker.

Meg dotted every "i" and crossed each "t". She threw down tons of statistics in an attempt to discredit the status quo. Her tone was robotic, and she never drew a reaction from the crowd. You combine this with her campaigning, and the comparison to Mr. Schwarzenegger is remarkably close. She's the outsider. The one to shake up Sacramento. She was a successful CEO (actor), and she'll run her government like she ran her career.

Soon it will be time for California to pick their poison. Do they want the career politician, or the CEO of Ebay? Neither seems to have any relevant solutions to the states problem. The one elected will still have to manage the states legislator (the asshats who really screw things up), and convince the population to vote on many new reforms. As of this post I'm leaning towards Jerry Brown. The previous outsider hasn't done jack shit. Maybe this state needs that old crazy man who has nothing left to lose.