Please Vote This Election

In the election, it is vitally important that all eligible voters participate in the democratic process.  In this election, and in all elections, please make sure that your voice is heard, and no matter who you support, exercise your right and duty to vote.

Even though the voter turnout has risen in recent elections, it is still at historically lower proportions.  We need our citizens to take an active role and participate, especially the young people who are less likely to vote. In order to prepare for the important decisions regarding our future, we need everyone we can to help decide our new elected officials.

New Voter ID Laws Jeopardize Individual Rights

The new voter identification laws, pushed by conservative legislatures in states around the country are severely limiting one of the most basic constitutional protected rights for all citizens above the age of 18: the right to cast votes in elections.  This right is in serious jeopardy as ID laws have become the vogue.  The laws are proposed under the proposition that it would limit the amount of voter fraud and thus lead to more accurate voting, but this is simply not true.

Yes, this process can lead to lower voter fraud, but voter fraud is not the problem.  According to News21 voting rights database, the number of voter identification fraud in elections in all 50 states since 2000 equal a mere 10.  Given that during that span 146 million votes were cast, resulting in false identification affecting an alleged .000007% of all votes cast, the assertion that voter ID fraud is a problem is simply a nonstarter.

However, this does severely limit the ability of people to vote.  By some estimates, around 9% of currently legal voters in Pennsylvania will not be able to vote because they do not have a government issued ID.  But Pennsylvania is just one state.  Four others have similar laws (Indiana, Tennessee, Georgia, and Kansas) and 12 more have other requirements for presenting photo ID. Strict voter ID policies limit the amount of votes cast while trying to solve a nonexistent problem.  

Illogical Electoral Math

Consider the following:

Say, as a hypothetical, that candidate X wins the state of California by only 1,000 votes.  California is the nation's largest state, so it accordingly has the most electoral votes, in this case 55.  Yet if Candidate X doesn't have a very good ground game in some other state(s), for example, New York, Massachusetts, and North Carolina, they could very well lose in a landslide to another candidate, say candidate Y, albeit only in those states.  However, if we add up the electoral votes in the 3 states candidate X lost big in we get (29+11+15) = 55 electoral votes.

That means, even though candidate X lost big to candidate Yin the popular vote over these 4 states, perhaps by hundreds of thousands of votes, the net electoral college loss is zero.  This situation is unlikely to happen, but far from impossible.  The way the electoral college is set up means that instead of trying to increase voter turnout everywhere they can, candidates concentrate on big swing states to help them get over the magic number of 270 electoral votes, the amount needed for a majority.  The victory in California gave candidate X over 20% of that total.  This math works accords other states as well.  Small wins in larger states can outweigh huge losses in small ones, even if the margin of victory is as small as 1 vote.

Do you want to sit on the sidelines while only a few states really vote for president?

More Efficient Governance

The bureaucratic United States Government must undergo an evolution.  This is no longer the time to be a big, slow, thundering giant in the world.  In order to better serve its citizens, the United States government must be fast and efficient, delivering the needs of its people more rapidly.  Globalization has changed our world to where it is no longer the largest, most powerful countries that win.  Now, efficiency, speed, and quality are rewarded in the world markets.  The government can harness to power of the internet to speed up services that have taken nearly forever previously.  Why stand in line so long at the DMV or other local government agency when you can do it at home on your computer?  Why must government projects take so long to attain approval and begin work?  By utilizing current and future technologies, we can create a more efficient government in our country.

For reference, here is a breakdown of how the Federal Government spends its money:

Harnessing Creativity

In this new age following the Cold War, it is imperative that the United States and other countries harness all the creative capital they have in their nations to enhance economic productivity.  In the US, we have the knowledge and the innovative spirit to solve numerous problems, if we only knew about it.  The US government and companies that operate here need to realize this and tap into the power of their own people.

A Fast Company poll

Yes on Prop 29

California Proposition 29 proposes a $1.00 increase in taxes per pack of cigarettes.  The money from this new tax would go to funding cancer research, tobacco reduction programs, and law enforcement against the improper use of tobacco.

If it is passed at all.

The money of big tobacco is ardently against Prop 29, which will appear on California's June 5 ballot.  Phillip Morris and RJ Reynolds tobacco companies have committed over $30 million to stop this measure.  They know that this proposition has the potential to significantly reduce their profits.  If enacted, Prop 29 will help reduce incidences of smoking and improve cancer research.  We need funds for this now more than ever because of the fiscal crisis in California, making it impossible to use other state funds for Prop 29 target areas.  Therefore, we must pay for it in other ways.  In having the smokers themselves pay for it, we make cigarettes more expensive and fund health programs relating to tobacco use.

With the passage of Proposition 29, we can look forward to a healthier population.

We Need Fair Elections

With the Citizen's United v. Federal Election Commission, Corporations can give unlimited money to Super PACs.  In this election year, we are now seeing that this means a future of auctioning of elected positions.  Money wins elections, and with the unlimited spending of special interests groups, the people have much less of a say now in elections.  Those who run the most commercials and get the most press coverage are those with the most money, and they are more likely to win.  We need spending caps on elections to ensure that all candidates have a chance to compete for a spot in government.  We need the people's representatives in government, not the special interests' representatives.

Economic Climate

Instead of the government picking winners and losers in the entrepreneurship field, they should foster a climate that promotes entrepreneurship.  The relationship with the government and businesses should not be one of conflict.  The economy can be private and public sector collaboration with both doing their part to ensure strong and sustainable growth.  The private sector will do the bulk of the growth, while a role for the public sector would be to maintain sustainability in that growth.  This cooperative relationship should facilitate growth and promote growth, not impede it.  In forming a sustainable plan, it is important to note that sustainability does not mean “restrict growth” but instead planning and coordinating growth in a way that that increase can be sustained.

Below, for reference, is the White House plan for sustainable growth:

General Economic Principles

Throughout history, economic growth has gone hand in hand with a strong and industrious middle class.  Efforts must be made to strengthen and enlarge the middle class, by bringing people up rather than bringing people down.

In recent decades, the size of the middle class has fallen, which must change, for the economic vitality of this country is strongly dependent on the vitality of the middle class.

Bobbing and Weaving

It is unfortunate that politicians have to contort themselves in order to gain reelection.  The rigidity in our party system leads politicians to have to lean left or lean right just in order to win their primaries.  Then, come the general election, they must swing back to the center.  We would be much better off if our leaders could just run honestly, they way they actually would govern, from start to finish, instead of bobbing and weaving all over the map.