Tuesday, May 31, 2005

Redistricting Nightmares

Under our current system of redistricting, in most states the political party in power has near Godlike authority to redraw voting precincts.  As the 2003 redistricting in Texas showed, the marriage of majority authority for redistricting can combine with door-by-door maps of political affiliation and powerful computers to gerrymander so that a Democratic home could literally be in a different Congressional District than both of their neighbors.  And the federal courts, against all reason, permitted the 2003 redistricting in Texas to stand based on the idea that the Constitution doesn’t say you CAN’T redistrict more often than once every 10 years, so you can if you want to.  Sure, the courts said that it wasn’t a good idea, but since when have the two major political parties ever missed a chance to be short-sighted in their attempts to grab power?  So now the Repugnicans and Demoncrats are trying to consolidate their power in other states using the Texas model.

Ultimately, this egregious abuse of power will get both parties in serious trouble with their electorates, and seriously pissed-off voters will strip the power of redistricting from the state legislatures on a state-by-state basis.

However, there is another option – have Congress require that the states redistrict in a reasonable fashion.  Now, since the various Congresscritters in charge would have to willingly give up their power for this to happen, it’ll be a cold day in Hell before this happens (I’m thinking cold enough for a banana to hammer a 6-inch spike through a 2x4 – liquid nitrogen cold).  But it’s still a good idea.  That’s why I suggest that everyone in a state where gerrymandering can happen write their Senators and Representatives to ask that they support Congressman John Tanner’s Fair Redistricting Bill.

This bill would require that all states use nonpartisan commissions to redraw Congressional districts, that the commissions not use partisan affiliation to draw district boundaries, and that commissions draw the boundaries in as contiguous a fashion as possible.  This just might make more than 5% of the Congressional districts truly competitive and force our politicians to be moderates and pragmatists instead of right or left-wing ideologues, hyper-partisans, and extremists who are unwilling to compromise.  Maybe we’d end up with more people like McCain or Salazar (Yes, I realize they’re both Senators, so this discussion doesn’t apply to them.  The fact that I can’t think of any truly moderate Reps is actually part of the problem) and fewer people like Tom DeLay.

Editors Note: If you like what you’re reading here, there is an even better source of intelligent analysis on the web.  The LiveJournal community The 5th Estate exists to track down the issues of the day, analyze them, and discuss them among a group of intelligent people.  We generally reject the artificial dichotomy promulgated by both Republicans and Democrats and, while we may occasionally skewer the current administration, it’s not because we’re all liberals (although some of us are), but because the current administration is worthy of being skewered.

Please, take a look over the next few days.  If you like what you see, please forward the link on to your friends and on your own BBS’s, forums, etc.  The more people who find The 5th Estate, the greater the impact it will have.  Enough people, in enough places, with the right ears and eyeballs, and we can change the screwed up system to something that is dramatically less screwed up.  So please, spend some time, read some of the posts and the comments, and then forward the site on if you find it worthy of a few electrons.

[Crossposted to The 5th Estate]

Monday, May 30, 2005

The Miscreant’s Dictionary:  “Decay”

decay

a decline from an exalted state to an inferior state that, from an alternate perspective, may in fact be a sign of progress

Sunday, May 29, 2005

The Micro-Pundit:  All-Volunteer Military

There is a lot to be said for the all-volunteer military.  You only have to look at college education to see the difference in energy and interest between the students who want to learn what you’re teaching and those that are there for the beer.  The same is generally true for a military force - you’ll get a more professional soldier from someone who volunteers than from someone who is conscripted.

But it only works if you support the soldiers.  It only works if you follow your own rules.  It only works if you actually get sucked into conflicts that you truly can’t avoid.  And that’s not what’s happening today in Iraq, Afghanistan, and generally in the so-called War on Terror.  So our armed forces are having a bitch of a time recruiting new soldiers and retaining the current ones.  And unless all the President’s men (and the President too) pull their heads out of their collective asses and start thinking clearly, our military may be screwed for quite some time.

(FYI, Paul Krugman’s commentary is what got me going on this one.)

Saturday, May 28, 2005

The Daily Mantra:  Drinking Water

If you don’t have to pee, you’re not drinking enough water.

Friday, May 27, 2005

The Miscreant’s Dictionary:  “Capitalism”

capitalism

the mistaken theory that personal ownership of property will make people happy, politicians less corrupt, and cure all of society’s ills (see also “communism”)

Thursday, May 26, 2005

The Daily Mantra:  Family Gatherings

Don’t try to host a major family gathering soon after moving into your new house.

Wednesday, May 25, 2005

The Micro-Pundit:  Gary Bauer and Hypocrisy

I found an interesting article in the Christian Science Monitor today (Beyond the Stem Cell Showdown).  It was all about how the House and Senate have finally got some guts and are pushing a bill to authorize the federal government to fund stem cell research over Bush II’s objections.  It’s certain to be vetoed, and a snowball has a better chance in a blast furnace in Hell than the Congress has at overriding Bush II’s first veto, but it’s still a change from the usual boot-licking.

But I found one paragraph in particular to be quite amusing, in a gallows humor sort of way.  Gary Bauer, current president of the group American Values and former head of the Family Research Council, was quoted as saying:

The only thing we’re arguing is whether Americans who are deeply morally offended by [stem-cell] research are going to be required to pay for it.

Now wait just a damn minute.  You mean to tell me that Americans who are deeply morally offended by something can opt out of paying for it?  You mean, I can tell the Feds to not use my copious taxes to pay for Iraq, or abstinence-only sex-ed, or No Child Left Behind because I’m “deeply morally offended?” Holy shit, sign me up!

Oh, wait – my party and my cronies aren’t currently in power in Congress or the Presidency, so I’m SOL.

Regardless, I smell hypocrisy, and it stinks worse than a roadkill skunk on a 105 degree day.

[Crossposted to The 5th Estate]

Tuesday, May 24, 2005

The Micro-Pundit:  Blogs in China et al

Time for my increasingly common list of interesting news items/links you may have missed over the last who-knows-how-long.

First, the NYTimes today has a commentary by Nicholas D. Kristof about how blogs in China are doing what their press cannot – actually reporting on state corruption and crime (and generally getting away with it).  Check out Death by a Thousand Blogs if you’re interested.

Yesterday, the NYTimes ran an article about the Supreme Court throwing out the case of Jose Medellin, a Mexican national who was convicted without having consular access according to international law (that the U.S. signed).  One interesting quote here is “President Bush in February ordered new state court hearings for the 51 Mexicans, and the court cited that order on Monday.” My opinion is that Bush really, REALLY didn’t want the Supreme Court to set a precedent that the rulings of the International Court of Justice (which ruled that the U.S. was in violation of its treaty obligations on this issue) has bearing on the U.S. legal system (here’s the link:  Supreme Court Dismisses Death Row Rights Appeal).

Also yesterday, Paul Krugman of the NYTimes commented (America Wants Security) that the ultra-conservative agenda has been faring quite poorly around the country.  In his commentary, he pointed out an interesting analogy that I can only hope is right:

Everyone loves historical analogies. Here’s my thought: maybe 2004 was 1928. During the 1920’s, the national government followed doctrinaire conservative policies, but reformist policies that presaged the New Deal were already bubbling up in the states, especially in New York.

In 1928 Al Smith, the governor of New York, was defeated in an ugly presidential campaign in which Protestant preachers warned their flocks that a vote for the Catholic Smith was a vote for the devil. But four years later F.D.R. took office, and the New Deal began.

Of course, the coming of the New Deal was hastened by a severe national depression. Strange to say, we may be working on that, too.

Sunday’s NYTimes had a commentary by Frank Rich (It’s All Newsweek’s Fault) that talks about how this administration is treating the press as its enemy.  Now, every president probably hates the press for one reason or another, and at one point or another.  But Bush II is trying to systematically destroy the press’ credibility with the public, successfully thus far.  Maybe, if Rich is right, Bush II has finally overreached.  Wouldn’t that be nice?

Finally, yet another NYTimes commentary, this one about a potentially novel approach to solving our health care problems – convince corporate CEOs to get involved and push the legislation themselves.  Interesting idea, I must say.  Check it out:  Waiting for CEO’s to Go ‘Nuclear’.

Monday, May 23, 2005

The Miscreant’s Dictionary:  “Bright”

bright

intelligent in a global fashion, ie having common sense

Sunday, May 22, 2005

The Daily Mantra:  Babysitting Sick Kids

Try not to rely too much on the grandparents to babysit when the child is sick.