I've been watching the Republican convention. So far, it has been in all respects conventional.
I confess, I miss the conventions of my youth, where nominations were actually made and the presidential election didn't get started until after Labor Day. In general, I don't think the takeover of the nominating process by primaries has improved the functioning of democracy. On the other hand, certain reforms in both parties have opened up the nominating process to groups (women, African Americans, Hispanics, Asian Americans) formerly left out of the smoke-filled rooms.
This convention has been particularly marked by homilies about individualism, self-reliance, education, and building small businesses.
I have been struck by the number of speakers extolling their immigrant grandparents who arrived with nothing and built businesses.
I don't have a statistical breakdown, but I noticed that many of those who worked hard to complete their education did so under the GI Bill or various government grants. Those who started businesses often borrowed money from the SBA. Or from parents or uncles. Or used other government programs.
I don't recall much specific mention of land grant colleges or federal and state roles in creating our railroad system, ports and waterways. These were all essential to the opportunities our immigrant ancestors found when they arrived.
Why elevate our small businessmen to a pedestal and pay no attention to the craftsmen, teachers, salesmen, soldiers, sailors, nurses, physician's assistants, union members and others whose interest is doing a good day's work for a fair wage and raising a good family?
Just saying.
Showing posts with label democracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label democracy. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
Dump The Runoff II
Two years ago I suggested that NC should join 42 other states in the union and abolish the runoff primary. I haven't changed my mind.
Some reasons:
a. Runoff primaries are expensive. They cost nearly as much to administer as a regular primary, nearly doubling the cost to taxpayers of administering the party nomination process (which is what the primary is);
b. Turnout is abysmal. In Pamlico County, turnout for this year's second primary was three percent of registered voters; across the state it was three and a half percent;
c. Runoff primaries are a holdover from the time when southern states had only one effective political party - the Democratic party, and whoever won the primary had won the election. That is no longer the case;
d. Runoff primaries seldom change the outcome - the leader after round one usually wins, anyhow;
e. A runoff primary delays the election process - results aren't final until after canvass. This year, County Boards will canvass on July 24 and State Board a week after that, delaying the start of down-ballot campaigns;
f. It isn't more democratic to have a tiny fraction of the electorate determine the outcome.
One way to accomplish the same purpose as a runoff is to hold some sort of instant runoff vote by ranking voter choices. We tried that for a judicial race two years ago. Voters found it confusing, our voting machines aren't certified for such a procedure, and the state board had to develop a work around.
Other states just award the nomination to the candidate with the most votes on primary day. Simple and effective.
While we are on the subject of primaries, I have also concluded it is inappropriate to vote on ballot measures during a primary. Ballot measures should be voted on at a general or municipal election, not an election designed for nominating party candidates.
Some reasons:
a. Runoff primaries are expensive. They cost nearly as much to administer as a regular primary, nearly doubling the cost to taxpayers of administering the party nomination process (which is what the primary is);
b. Turnout is abysmal. In Pamlico County, turnout for this year's second primary was three percent of registered voters; across the state it was three and a half percent;
c. Runoff primaries are a holdover from the time when southern states had only one effective political party - the Democratic party, and whoever won the primary had won the election. That is no longer the case;
d. Runoff primaries seldom change the outcome - the leader after round one usually wins, anyhow;
e. A runoff primary delays the election process - results aren't final until after canvass. This year, County Boards will canvass on July 24 and State Board a week after that, delaying the start of down-ballot campaigns;
f. It isn't more democratic to have a tiny fraction of the electorate determine the outcome.
One way to accomplish the same purpose as a runoff is to hold some sort of instant runoff vote by ranking voter choices. We tried that for a judicial race two years ago. Voters found it confusing, our voting machines aren't certified for such a procedure, and the state board had to develop a work around.
Other states just award the nomination to the candidate with the most votes on primary day. Simple and effective.
While we are on the subject of primaries, I have also concluded it is inappropriate to vote on ballot measures during a primary. Ballot measures should be voted on at a general or municipal election, not an election designed for nominating party candidates.
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
Second Primary Results
All across Pamlico County, alarms went off at what military veterans refer to as "Oh Dark Hundred," meaning very early in the morning. No sign of dawn.
Election officials: Chief Judges, Judges, Director of Elections, Board of Elections and other officials washed their faces, dressed, ate a quick bite and found their way to their respective assignments at Pamlico County's ten voting precincts.
They turned on the voting machines, posted the required signs, made final arrangements of chairs, tables and other equipment, and at 0630 Monday, July 17, 2012, one of the judges opened the front door and announced: "the polls are now open."
At Oriental precinct, the announcement was heard by two voters already waiting outside to cast their ballots. At other precincts, the announcement was heard only by a passing mockingbird or cardinal.
The occasion: phase two of the party nomination primary election of May 8. In a handful of races, no candidate received 40% of the votes cast. In those cases, a second or runoff primary must be held.
The runoff has now been held and all nominees for the November general election have now been chosen. Here are the results.
Three percent of Pamlico County's registered voters cast ballots.
Election officials: Chief Judges, Judges, Director of Elections, Board of Elections and other officials washed their faces, dressed, ate a quick bite and found their way to their respective assignments at Pamlico County's ten voting precincts.
They turned on the voting machines, posted the required signs, made final arrangements of chairs, tables and other equipment, and at 0630 Monday, July 17, 2012, one of the judges opened the front door and announced: "the polls are now open."
At Oriental precinct, the announcement was heard by two voters already waiting outside to cast their ballots. At other precincts, the announcement was heard only by a passing mockingbird or cardinal.
The occasion: phase two of the party nomination primary election of May 8. In a handful of races, no candidate received 40% of the votes cast. In those cases, a second or runoff primary must be held.
The runoff has now been held and all nominees for the November general election have now been chosen. Here are the results.
Three percent of Pamlico County's registered voters cast ballots.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
Friday, July 6, 2012
Special Meeting Oriental Town Board Mon. 5:30
Posted this afternoon at the Town of Oriental Web site:
The manager is requested to distribute this notice to all appropriate parties.
"I hereby call a special meeting of
the Board of Commissioners of Oriental for 5:30PM on Monday, July 9,
2012 to First Baptist Church Fellowship Hall on Broad Street. The
purpose of the meeting is to consult with counsel concerning the South
Avenue Street end transactions and the Fulcher contract with the Town.
The Board may go into closed session during this meeting."
"Bill Sage, Mayor"
We have no idea what the meeting intends to accomplish.
Worth remembering: The Town has already held the required public hearing. The Board can close the street at any time.
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
Elections Are Expensive
Last week, the North Carolina state legislature removed $664,000 from the state budget for maintaining and improving the state's election system. That $664,000 would have triggered receipt of $4 million from the federal government under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA).
Much of the money would have been shared by the state with counties. The funds are very important for small counties like Pamlico.
But the legislature can't find seven cents per resident to protect elections.
Much of the money would have been shared by the state with counties. The funds are very important for small counties like Pamlico.
But the legislature can't find seven cents per resident to protect elections.
Saturday, June 23, 2012
The Golden Rule
He who has the gold, rules.
That's certainly a commonplace, but it seems to be true of politics in River City. We'll see how well it plays out in the next few days.
That's certainly a commonplace, but it seems to be true of politics in River City. We'll see how well it plays out in the next few days.
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
What Are Political Parties For?
for the past year, I have been expressing my skepticism about third party presidential candidates. Most recently, I reported the admitted failure earlier this month of Americans Elect, the most recent delusional party.
In fact, third parties make little sense in a winner-take-all political system. In 1948, two parties broke off of the national democratic party, and Harry Truman won despite their defection.
The last time a third party candidate came close to winning was a century ago, when Teddy Roosevelt was the candidate of the Progressive (or Bull Moose) party. Roosevelt's showing only served to split the Republican vote and bring about the election of Woodrow Wilson.
Some say that Ralph Nader had the same effect by depriving Al Gore of a win in Florida in 2000. A post-election recount of the entire state by a consortium of journalists, though, determined that more Floridians cast votes for Gore than for Bush. This would only have become clear, however, with a complete recount.
There is a new blog that addresses the questions surrounding parties: themischiefsoffaction.com. It is run by a trio of political scientists with a particular interest and background in political parties. I commend it to your attention.
In fact, third parties make little sense in a winner-take-all political system. In 1948, two parties broke off of the national democratic party, and Harry Truman won despite their defection.
The last time a third party candidate came close to winning was a century ago, when Teddy Roosevelt was the candidate of the Progressive (or Bull Moose) party. Roosevelt's showing only served to split the Republican vote and bring about the election of Woodrow Wilson.
Some say that Ralph Nader had the same effect by depriving Al Gore of a win in Florida in 2000. A post-election recount of the entire state by a consortium of journalists, though, determined that more Floridians cast votes for Gore than for Bush. This would only have become clear, however, with a complete recount.
There is a new blog that addresses the questions surrounding parties: themischiefsoffaction.com. It is run by a trio of political scientists with a particular interest and background in political parties. I commend it to your attention.
Sunday, May 27, 2012
Military Experience And Politics
The Washington Post printed an interesting opinion piece a couple of days ago by retired army colonel John Nagl, "Does Military Service Still Matter For The Presidency?"
"In every presidential election since 1992," Nagle observes, "the candidate with the less distinguished military résumé has triumphed" (I would add 1972 and 1980 as well). Nagl sees this as a dramatic change, pointing out that "The crucible of combat not only created these United States but has also given us many of our most successful presidents." He lists some of those presidents with their military service.
Nagle might have pointed out, but did not, that twelve of the twenty-three presidents who served in the nineteenth century had previously served as army generals. But an even more interesting factoid is that none of the presidents who led the nation during five of our major wars had any significant military service:
1. James Madison (War of 1812);
2. James Knox Polk (War with Mexico);
3. Abraham Lincoln (Civil War - not declared);
4. Woodrow Wilson (World War I);
5. Franklin Delano Roosevelt (World War II)
Only President McKinley (Spanish American War) had significant military service. He had been a major during the Civil War.
On the face of it, then, lack of military service does not seem to have prevented past presidents from being effective leaders during our greatest wars. I am more disturbed by the fact that in today's America, only one percent of adults have served in the military. I mentioned a while ago my discomfort that service to the nation in a cause greater than one's own prosperity has become rare, rather than commonplace.
Last month, Thomas Ricks suggested in the Washington Post a concrete measure to address this problem: toss out the all-volunteer military. Reluctantly, my own thinking has been evolving in that direction.
Ricks explains: "Resuming conscription is the best way to reconnect the people with the armed services. Yes, reestablishing a draft, with all its Vietnam-era connotations, would cause problems for the military, but those could never be as painful and expensive as fighting an unnecessary war in Iraq for almost nine years. A draft would be good for our nation and ultimately for our military."
I think this is a conversation worth having.
"In every presidential election since 1992," Nagle observes, "the candidate with the less distinguished military résumé has triumphed" (I would add 1972 and 1980 as well). Nagl sees this as a dramatic change, pointing out that "The crucible of combat not only created these United States but has also given us many of our most successful presidents." He lists some of those presidents with their military service.
Nagle might have pointed out, but did not, that twelve of the twenty-three presidents who served in the nineteenth century had previously served as army generals. But an even more interesting factoid is that none of the presidents who led the nation during five of our major wars had any significant military service:
1. James Madison (War of 1812);
2. James Knox Polk (War with Mexico);
3. Abraham Lincoln (Civil War - not declared);
4. Woodrow Wilson (World War I);
5. Franklin Delano Roosevelt (World War II)
Only President McKinley (Spanish American War) had significant military service. He had been a major during the Civil War.
On the face of it, then, lack of military service does not seem to have prevented past presidents from being effective leaders during our greatest wars. I am more disturbed by the fact that in today's America, only one percent of adults have served in the military. I mentioned a while ago my discomfort that service to the nation in a cause greater than one's own prosperity has become rare, rather than commonplace.
Last month, Thomas Ricks suggested in the Washington Post a concrete measure to address this problem: toss out the all-volunteer military. Reluctantly, my own thinking has been evolving in that direction.
Ricks explains: "Resuming conscription is the best way to reconnect the people with the armed services. Yes, reestablishing a draft, with all its Vietnam-era connotations, would cause problems for the military, but those could never be as painful and expensive as fighting an unnecessary war in Iraq for almost nine years. A draft would be good for our nation and ultimately for our military."
I think this is a conversation worth having.
Monday, May 21, 2012
Second Primary
Last Tuesday was the official canvass of the North Carolina 2012 primary election. Candidates eligible to request a second primary election when the leading candidate received less than 40% of the vote, or candidates eligible to request a recount, had to submit their requests by lat Friday.
The second primary is scheduled for July 17. Here are the contests for which there will be a second primary or a recount:
Pursuant to GS 163-111 the following candidates have requested a 2nd Primary to be held on July 17, 2012: (Deadline for 2nd Primary requests is 05/17/2012 at 12 noon.)
Candidate Name - Office (date request received)
Scott Keadle - US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 8 - REP (05/10/2012)
Jim Pendergraph - US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 9 - REP (05/14/2012)
Vance Patterson - US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 11 - REP (05/11/2012)
Tony Gurley - NC LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR - REP (05/11/2012)*
Mike Causey - NC COMMISSIONER OF INSURANCE - REP (05/15/2012)*
Marlowe Foster - NC COMMISSIONER OF LABOR - DEM (05/14/2012)*
Kenn Gardner - NC SECRETARY OF STATE - REP (05/14/2012)*
Richard Alexander - NC SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION - REP (05/10/2012)*
Ronald Rabin - NC STATE SENATE DISTRICT 12 - REP (05/14/2012)
Robert B. Clark III - NC STATE SENATE DISTRICT 21 - DEM (05/09/2012)
David Curtis - NC STATE SENATE DISTRICT 44 - REP (05/14/2012)
Arthur Williams - NC HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 6 - REP (05/14/2012)
Jim Crawford - NC HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 32 - DEM (05/17/2012)
Wil Neumann - NC HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 109 - REP (05/10/2012)
Pursuant to GS 163-182.7 the following candidates have requested a recount:
Larry Shaw - NC STATE SENATE DISTRICT 21 - DEM (05/16/2012)
Stephen LaRoque - NC HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 10 - REP (05/16/2012)
Richard Johnson - NC HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 55 - REP (05/09/2012)
Danny E. Davis - NC HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 119 - DEM (05/16/2012)
* Contests in second primary in Pamlico County: (1 Dem and 4 Rep)
The second primary is scheduled for July 17. Here are the contests for which there will be a second primary or a recount:
Pursuant to GS 163-111 the following candidates have requested a 2nd Primary to be held on July 17, 2012: (Deadline for 2nd Primary requests is 05/17/2012 at 12 noon.)
Candidate Name - Office (date request received)
Scott Keadle - US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 8 - REP (05/10/2012)
Jim Pendergraph - US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 9 - REP (05/14/2012)
Vance Patterson - US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 11 - REP (05/11/2012)
Tony Gurley - NC LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR - REP (05/11/2012)*
Mike Causey - NC COMMISSIONER OF INSURANCE - REP (05/15/2012)*
Marlowe Foster - NC COMMISSIONER OF LABOR - DEM (05/14/2012)*
Kenn Gardner - NC SECRETARY OF STATE - REP (05/14/2012)*
Richard Alexander - NC SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION - REP (05/10/2012)*
Ronald Rabin - NC STATE SENATE DISTRICT 12 - REP (05/14/2012)
Robert B. Clark III - NC STATE SENATE DISTRICT 21 - DEM (05/09/2012)
David Curtis - NC STATE SENATE DISTRICT 44 - REP (05/14/2012)
Arthur Williams - NC HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 6 - REP (05/14/2012)
Jim Crawford - NC HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 32 - DEM (05/17/2012)
Wil Neumann - NC HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 109 - REP (05/10/2012)
Pursuant to GS 163-182.7 the following candidates have requested a recount:
Larry Shaw - NC STATE SENATE DISTRICT 21 - DEM (05/16/2012)
Stephen LaRoque - NC HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 10 - REP (05/16/2012)
Richard Johnson - NC HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 55 - REP (05/09/2012)
Danny E. Davis - NC HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DISTRICT 119 - DEM (05/16/2012)
* Contests in second primary in Pamlico County: (1 Dem and 4 Rep)
Thursday, May 17, 2012
White Births In Minority
In the twelve-month period ending last July, according to the US Census Bureau, there were fewer white babies born in America than those of non white minorities.
Demographers had long expected this to occur, but weren't certain when.
I looked outside this morning. The sky has not yet fallen.
Demographers had long expected this to occur, but weren't certain when.
I looked outside this morning. The sky has not yet fallen.
Monday, May 14, 2012
Germany Update
Even Germany isn't immune to political upheavals.
This last weekend's parliamentary elections in Germany's largest state, North Rhine-Westphalia, led to a substantial victory for the Social Democrats and defeat of Chancellor Angela Merkel's party, the Christian Democrats. Although many observers emphasize that this election was only local, The Christian Democratic party leader in North-Rhine/Westphalia had claimed during the campaign, that the election is a "referendum" on Angela Merkel's policies.
If so, Merkel lost the referendum.
The Christian Democrats also lost the previous weekend's election in Schleswig-Holstein.
The next scheduled German election is September 2013, but there is speculation Merkel may have to call early elections.
This last weekend's parliamentary elections in Germany's largest state, North Rhine-Westphalia, led to a substantial victory for the Social Democrats and defeat of Chancellor Angela Merkel's party, the Christian Democrats. Although many observers emphasize that this election was only local, The Christian Democratic party leader in North-Rhine/Westphalia had claimed during the campaign, that the election is a "referendum" on Angela Merkel's policies.
If so, Merkel lost the referendum.
The Christian Democrats also lost the previous weekend's election in Schleswig-Holstein.
The next scheduled German election is September 2013, but there is speculation Merkel may have to call early elections.
Friday, May 11, 2012
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Primary Election May 8
Don't forget to vote today.
Let every citizen vote.
Let every vote be counted.
Let every citizen vote.
Let every vote be counted.
Monday, April 30, 2012
Is America Exceptional? "Not So Much"- E.L. Doctorow
Here are today's thoughts by the author E.L. Doctorow on the issue of American Exceptionalism. Or how to achieve unexceptionalism. He seems to think we have already accomplished that.
Sunday, April 29, 2012
Republicans
Thomas Mann of the Brookings Institution and Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute have penned a very interesting article in last Friday's Washington Post examining causes of the vicious partisanship and gridlock in Washington. The article's title telegraphs their conclusions: "Let's Just Say It: The Republicans Are The Problem."
The article opens with a quote from Florida Congressman West asserting that "78 to 81" Democratic congressmen are members of the Communist Party. Shades of Joe McCarthy! But when Senator McCarthy was censured by the Senate, senators of both parties joined in the censure. As did Republican President Dwight David Eisenhower.
But that was then. Mann and Ornstein observe: "We have been studying Washington politics and Congress for more than 40 years, and never have we seen them this dysfunctional. In our past writings, we have criticized both parties when we believed it was warranted. Today, however, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party."
They continue: "The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition."
These observations are not made by partisan operatives, but by serious scholars with a longstanding reputation as objective observers of our political processes.
We should all take them seriously.
The article opens with a quote from Florida Congressman West asserting that "78 to 81" Democratic congressmen are members of the Communist Party. Shades of Joe McCarthy! But when Senator McCarthy was censured by the Senate, senators of both parties joined in the censure. As did Republican President Dwight David Eisenhower.
But that was then. Mann and Ornstein observe: "We have been studying Washington politics and Congress for more than 40 years, and never have we seen them this dysfunctional. In our past writings, we have criticized both parties when we believed it was warranted. Today, however, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party."
They continue: "The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition."
These observations are not made by partisan operatives, but by serious scholars with a longstanding reputation as objective observers of our political processes.
We should all take them seriously.
On Service
I don't remember when it started, but I was startled the first time someone, on finding that I was retired military, said: "thank you for your service."
I understood that the person who said it was sincere, and meant it respectfully, but it made me uncomfortable all the same. Ever since, I have tried to understand the source of my discomfort.
I just finished reading Drift by Rachel Maddow, and I think I now understand why such statements make me uncomfortable. It implies that military service or, perhaps more broadly any kind of public service is an extraordinary thing. According to Ms. Maddow, in today's America, only one percent of adults have served in the military.
It was not that way in the America in which I grew up. Service was taken for granted. Every young man was subject to military service, and public service in general was viewed in a positive light. A half century ago, President Kennedy told an entering class at the Naval Academy, "I can imagine a no more rewarding career. And any man who may be asked in this century what he did to make his life worth while, I think can respond with a good deal of pride and satisfaction: 'I served in the United States Navy.'"
But America's youth in those days were inspired to serve their fellow citizens in other ways as well. Young people flocked to the newly-created Peace Corps and recent college graduates actively sought positions in government service.
Like their predecessors who struggled to bring America out of the Great Depression and who served victoriously in World War II (Tom Brokaw called them the Greatest Generation), this new generation chose to serve in a cause greater than themselves.
Would that those of us who remember those times can inspire our latest generation of Americans to such service.
I understood that the person who said it was sincere, and meant it respectfully, but it made me uncomfortable all the same. Ever since, I have tried to understand the source of my discomfort.
I just finished reading Drift by Rachel Maddow, and I think I now understand why such statements make me uncomfortable. It implies that military service or, perhaps more broadly any kind of public service is an extraordinary thing. According to Ms. Maddow, in today's America, only one percent of adults have served in the military.
It was not that way in the America in which I grew up. Service was taken for granted. Every young man was subject to military service, and public service in general was viewed in a positive light. A half century ago, President Kennedy told an entering class at the Naval Academy, "I can imagine a no more rewarding career. And any man who may be asked in this century what he did to make his life worth while, I think can respond with a good deal of pride and satisfaction: 'I served in the United States Navy.'"
But America's youth in those days were inspired to serve their fellow citizens in other ways as well. Young people flocked to the newly-created Peace Corps and recent college graduates actively sought positions in government service.
Like their predecessors who struggled to bring America out of the Great Depression and who served victoriously in World War II (Tom Brokaw called them the Greatest Generation), this new generation chose to serve in a cause greater than themselves.
Would that those of us who remember those times can inspire our latest generation of Americans to such service.
Monday, April 9, 2012
Election Preparations
Voters don't need to know how much work goes into preparing for an election. They just need to show up and vote. It should be comforting, though, to know that great effort goes into insuring that their votes are accurately recorded and counted.
Today, and for several more days, the Pamlico County Board of Elections is conducting logic and accuracy testing of our voting machines. The state requires us to test 10% of our machines. In Pamlico County, we test every machine used in the election.
Testing pays off. We have never had a calibration problem with any of our voting machines on election day.
Today, and for several more days, the Pamlico County Board of Elections is conducting logic and accuracy testing of our voting machines. The state requires us to test 10% of our machines. In Pamlico County, we test every machine used in the election.
Testing pays off. We have never had a calibration problem with any of our voting machines on election day.
Saturday, April 7, 2012
Get Out And Register - Then Get Out And Vote
Is voting a right or a privilege?
By law, it is a right. Every American citizen has the right to vote. One can also view it as a privilege, but it is a privilege that belongs to every citizen.
More importantly, it is a duty. In a democracy, if you don't take the trouble to vote, you are arguably a freeloader.
Don't be a freeloader. Do your duty and vote.
The first step in voting is to make sure you are registered and that the information is up to date.
How to register? You can do it when you get a driver's license or at any public service agency. But in Pamlico County, it is most convenient to drop by the Board of Elections office the next time you are in Bayboro.
The next election is the May 8 primary. Voter registration for that election closes at 5:00 PM April 13. If you miss that deadline, you can still vote using same-day registration during one-stop, but you can't change any previous party registration after April 13.
If you have questions, call the Board of Elections and ask our Elections Director, Ms. Lisa Bennett. She'll walk you through it.
By law, it is a right. Every American citizen has the right to vote. One can also view it as a privilege, but it is a privilege that belongs to every citizen.
More importantly, it is a duty. In a democracy, if you don't take the trouble to vote, you are arguably a freeloader.
Don't be a freeloader. Do your duty and vote.
The first step in voting is to make sure you are registered and that the information is up to date.
How to register? You can do it when you get a driver's license or at any public service agency. But in Pamlico County, it is most convenient to drop by the Board of Elections office the next time you are in Bayboro.
The next election is the May 8 primary. Voter registration for that election closes at 5:00 PM April 13. If you miss that deadline, you can still vote using same-day registration during one-stop, but you can't change any previous party registration after April 13.
If you have questions, call the Board of Elections and ask our Elections Director, Ms. Lisa Bennett. She'll walk you through it.
Friday, April 6, 2012
Rights And Obligations
Our public discourse might be greatly improved if each of us were to give greater effort and support to the rights of others than to our own. And if we were to give greater emphasis to our own duties and obligations than to those of others; that would also be a good thing.
Just a thought.
Just a thought.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
