Between the local and national news, print and social media, we are constantly bombarded with opinions on our country's politicians. These opinions range between judgement on specific legislation, general support of certain causes or special interests, and on a very personal level. I cannot help but say that some of these opinions are warranted. After all, when an individual makes the conscious decision to enter the public arena, they need to expect and embrace the dissent that is sure to follow.
I think it is fair to say that the general public has become jaded as to the motivations of individuals who enter politics. If we were to take a scientific poll and ask people why we think people (in general) enter politics I would bet that "to help the general public" would rank behind such options as "personal financial gain", "gain influence" or "ego". If my assumption is at least reasonable, than why would anyone ever vote for anyone?
This is where we need to use some self-reflection. We can talk about special interests and lobbyists buying influence and we can point to a biased media... pick your excuse. Have you ever thought that the electorate, or you and me, have the ultimate say if we would only consistently participate in the elective process? All we have to do is look at the voting trends from last years elections to understand why certain politicians have gained the power they have.
In the 2012 elections, all 435 House seats were contested. There were 42 incumbents who retired, leaving 393 seats to be contested by incumbents.
- 13 incumbents were defeated in the primary elections.
- 22 incumbents were defeated in the general election, 10 Democrats and 12 Republicans.
That makes for 358 incumbents reelected of the 393 who were running (or 35 House incumbent losses, depending on how you want to look at it), making a reelection rate for 2012 of 91%. This is about 2% lower than the historical average since 1954.
In the 2012 elections, 33 U.S. Senate seats were contested. Ten of these were open seats due to incumbent retirements. That leaves 23 seats that an incumbent contested. One incumbent was defeated in the primaries: Richard Lugar (R) of Indiana. One incumbent lost the general election: Scott Brown (R) of Massachusetts. All other incumbents were reelected.
That makes 21 of 23 incumbents reelected to the Senate in the 2012 election, (or 2 incumbent Senate losses, depending on your perspective), making for a 2012 Senate reelection rate of 91%. This is slightly higher than historical standards (where the average is right around 85% for the Senate), but not out of the ordinary.
By my quick tabulations, New York State Election Results:
NYS Assembly
127 incumbent members were re-elected
2 incumbent members lost
21 member were elected to open seats
NYS Senate
53 incumbent members were re-elected
1 incumbent members lost
8 member were elected to open seats
I could go into the details about the political careers of politicians like Joe Bruno, Michael McNulty, Ron Canesterari, Henery Zwack and Steve Dworsky... but that is not my point. We, the electorate, continue to put these people back in power. As each year and each successive election passes, we create future generations of supporters who blindly support certain politicians and/or parties only because these were our parents choices. Yet we disagree with something an elected official does and heap the blame on them or their party only to re-elect them the very next election.
Allow me to kick aside my soapbox for a moment and issue a challenge to anyone who reads this blog... listen, think, apply critical analysis and then judge. Voice your approval or disapproval, but don't forget about it when the next election cycle rolls around. The incumbent politician does not fear the general public... they have proven this by and large by their behaviors and actions while in office. Politicians fear the media (negative press) and lobbyists. You want to see an incumbent politician jump, give him or her some negative press or send your contributions to his or her opponent.
The statistics above say everything that needs to be said. The one statistic that I didn't show but is the saddest of all is overall voter turnout. It is an outright embarrassment as a nation to see the number of voters seems to shrink every year.Why do you ask? Apathy, lack of a real alternative? Neither are an excuse. I always enjoy the Wednesday after the election when people who didn't vote have the nerve to state their opinion on the outcome of the elections. That, to me, is the height of hypocrisy. the one thing we have that isn't bought and sold by MOST politicians or special interests in your vote. Why do you think so many politician risk their careers to steal votes? I believe if more people took a personal interest in their privilege and obligation to vote, I believe voter fraud situations will virtually disappear.
I am a stronger advocate of a multi-party system now than I have ever been in my life. It is the biggest farce in politics to believe or to say that the Independence Party is independent! The same can be said for the Conservative, Liberal, Green and Working Families Parties as well. One of the biggest turnoffs of any alternate party affiliation is its direct ties to either of the major parties. I believe that the time is right for a rise of a true political revolution. The Tea Party, philosophy aside, has fired a shot over the bow of the two-party system nationally, but additional, more independent parties are needed to see a real impact.
So, what is the alternative? Short term, I believe we need to show politicians that incumbency is not a free ticket. It is time we send career politicians back out into the "real world" wrought with regular work hours, barely affordable medical insurance, a reliance on a up and down stock market for their retirement, and a future of social security and medicare reliance. You see, entrenched politicians are insulated from the "real world" and the ONLY way to reacquaint them with the "real world" it you return them back to it.
Term limits are not the answer either because if we held elected officials responsible for their actions (or non-action), we would limit their time in office through the ballot box. So, next time you feel the need to attack an elected official for their actions, use that energy to participate in the process and send them packing. Remember, any politician's future rests in the vote of their constituents, in other words, you and me. Every movement starts somewhere. It may be an event, a group of people, or an individual that lights that fire... but it needs a spark! What side of history will you be on? Are you a spectator or are you a participant? Happy Reading!
Thursday, January 17, 2013
Sunday, January 13, 2013
The Gun Debate and Where I Stand
I was going to wait to address this topic but now seems as good a time as any. This piece will be based both in fact and opinion. I looked up information on the Internet and did my best to verify secondary sources. I am an avid reader and believer in the Bill of Rights. The Founding Fathers had the foresight to look down the line, into the future, and understood the need to address limits on the Federal Government and that the states, in their individual sovereignty, not disregard the Constitution when crafting its own laws.
The 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as set forth in the U.S. Bill of Rights provides for and clearly protects the rights of people to keep and bear arms. The United States Supreme Court has ruled on numerous occasions that an individual's right to possess and carry firearms in fact is a right under the 2nd Amendment. Let's look at two relatively recent Supreme Court cases to further establish this right.
In 2008 the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision addressing the longstanding argument made against an individual's right to possess and carry firearms as a non-member of a state's militia. In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 US, 570 (2008), the Court ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia (states National Guard) and to use that firearm for traditional lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
In 2010 the case of McDonald v. Chicago, 561 US, 3025 (2010), citing District of Columbia v. Heller, defined what the term "state militia" meant in the 2nd Amendment. Numerous other cases were also cited in this decision, and outlined that a "state militia" is made up of able-bodied citizenry who would report for service to their state and were expected to provided their own arms. It is important to note, however, although both decisions cited above upheld an individual's right to possess and carry firearms, they also upheld individual state's rights to make laws addressing the lawful ownership and possession of a firearm.
All that being said, and as promised, I will give my opinion on the matter. This caveat first... I am not a Constitutional Attorney or Scholar. I am a fairly educated American who served in the United States Marine Corps. I am a believer in traditional values but also recognizes and believes in progress. I will not repeat right-wing conspiracy theories here, nor will I give credence to any of the left-wing's "scholarly interpretations" of what our Founding Father's meant when they wrote these founding documents. You see, I think the Founding Fathers left behind volumes of literature that clearly delineates what they intended their words to mean. Clearly there was dissent between the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist during the drafting and subsequent passage of the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution and the Bill of Rights... but they were able to reach a consensus. Something that is painfully obvious our politicians cannot do today!
I believe that history is our guide for the future. Not withstanding all the supporting literature written by the Founding Fathers during that time, we should also look at the unstable history of Europe and the great civilizations over the Milenas for guidance. The adage "those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it" is not just an adage in my eyes... it has been proven through the wrinkled pages of time. It is simple concept to me that the Federal Government does not have the right to take away the individual right to own firearms. Literature, laws, and times should not have the ability to change that. Further, states cannot unfairly abridge these rights that were first granted by the Federal Government. What states like New York, Illinois and the District of Columbia have done to limit these right are criminal and a direct violation of our rights!
I will save my opinion on the situation in Connecticut for a later post. I will leave you with this though first... when will we address the real route of this issue... the way our society sees and deals with mental health issues. What New York is doing doing now is a knee-jerk reaction to a truly tragic situation. The President of the United States, in the same vein as New York, is attempting to address the means of this situation, and not the ends. The means beings the guns... the means could have been a car driven at high speeds through a school yard, or a firebomb in a school cafeteria, or poison in the school lunches. And of course, the ends being the clear demonstration by a troubled youth of mental health issues that were not properly addressed. I do not blame only the school in this instance, but they certainly share in the responsibility. Again, I will address this issue in more depth in the future... until then, Happy Reading!
The 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution as set forth in the U.S. Bill of Rights provides for and clearly protects the rights of people to keep and bear arms. The United States Supreme Court has ruled on numerous occasions that an individual's right to possess and carry firearms in fact is a right under the 2nd Amendment. Let's look at two relatively recent Supreme Court cases to further establish this right.
In 2008 the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision addressing the longstanding argument made against an individual's right to possess and carry firearms as a non-member of a state's militia. In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 US, 570 (2008), the Court ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia (states National Guard) and to use that firearm for traditional lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
In 2010 the case of McDonald v. Chicago, 561 US, 3025 (2010), citing District of Columbia v. Heller, defined what the term "state militia" meant in the 2nd Amendment. Numerous other cases were also cited in this decision, and outlined that a "state militia" is made up of able-bodied citizenry who would report for service to their state and were expected to provided their own arms. It is important to note, however, although both decisions cited above upheld an individual's right to possess and carry firearms, they also upheld individual state's rights to make laws addressing the lawful ownership and possession of a firearm.
All that being said, and as promised, I will give my opinion on the matter. This caveat first... I am not a Constitutional Attorney or Scholar. I am a fairly educated American who served in the United States Marine Corps. I am a believer in traditional values but also recognizes and believes in progress. I will not repeat right-wing conspiracy theories here, nor will I give credence to any of the left-wing's "scholarly interpretations" of what our Founding Father's meant when they wrote these founding documents. You see, I think the Founding Fathers left behind volumes of literature that clearly delineates what they intended their words to mean. Clearly there was dissent between the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist during the drafting and subsequent passage of the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution and the Bill of Rights... but they were able to reach a consensus. Something that is painfully obvious our politicians cannot do today!
I believe that history is our guide for the future. Not withstanding all the supporting literature written by the Founding Fathers during that time, we should also look at the unstable history of Europe and the great civilizations over the Milenas for guidance. The adage "those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it" is not just an adage in my eyes... it has been proven through the wrinkled pages of time. It is simple concept to me that the Federal Government does not have the right to take away the individual right to own firearms. Literature, laws, and times should not have the ability to change that. Further, states cannot unfairly abridge these rights that were first granted by the Federal Government. What states like New York, Illinois and the District of Columbia have done to limit these right are criminal and a direct violation of our rights!
I will save my opinion on the situation in Connecticut for a later post. I will leave you with this though first... when will we address the real route of this issue... the way our society sees and deals with mental health issues. What New York is doing doing now is a knee-jerk reaction to a truly tragic situation. The President of the United States, in the same vein as New York, is attempting to address the means of this situation, and not the ends. The means beings the guns... the means could have been a car driven at high speeds through a school yard, or a firebomb in a school cafeteria, or poison in the school lunches. And of course, the ends being the clear demonstration by a troubled youth of mental health issues that were not properly addressed. I do not blame only the school in this instance, but they certainly share in the responsibility. Again, I will address this issue in more depth in the future... until then, Happy Reading!
Thursday, January 10, 2013
Words of Wisdom
I will dedicate this topic to a great friend that not so recently took his act down south.
Have you ever found yourself in a situation at work or home or in one of your other lives (organizations) where you attempt to explain something to your audience and they just don't seem to get it? In your mind the answer is just so simple... you think the answer is as obvious as the time on the clock. But, the time on the clock is different in New York than it is in California. In other words, not everybody sees what we see or, more importantly, thinks the way we think.
I have found that this concept is critical to successful and healthy life. I think back to my life since I turned 18 years old. My perspectives on many things changed since those formative years. My attention and interests were pretty typical for a young adult who was about to enter the "real world". I knew I had much to learn, but had unconsciously arrived to a point in my thought that entrenched me in a perspective that I accepted as "truth".
I entered the United States Marine Corps at 20 years old. During my time in the Marine Corps my perspectives changed and, to a degree, intensified. The military, and specifically the Marine Corps, tend to do this to people. I also had the good fortune to have a strong and opinionated family whose sometimes opposing views provided a safe landscape to examine my views. My wife of 17+ years was also an important part of my "re-education" while still in my early 20's. Factor in my diverse and vast (and expensive) education, I thought I finally had life all figured out. Key concept here is THOUGHT!
Too late in my life I was introduced to the concept of "not everyone thinks the way I do" in a common-sense, congestible form. I have to thank TR, who is the person I dedicate this first blog post to for that. I have to say that this lesson is perhaps the most important and painful life lesson I've learned. It has made me a more compassionate and well-rounded person. I feel this approach has made me a better son, husband, father, brother, friend, employee, and advocate for others.
Please understand that this perspective is not something that you arrive at and the work is done. Quite to the contrary... this is a daily struggle, a struggle that I continue to embrace because I know the positive affects this thinking has had on my life. So, put the shoe on the other foot once in a while and see how it feels... you may be surprised how it feels. You may realize that the shoe fits better than you thought it would.
On a broader note, I want to thank everyone in my life, past and present, who helped to make me into the responsible person that I have become. (you'll have to take my word for it here :-)) I am not naive enough to believe that I have gotten this far in 41 years on my own. However, I do not discount the time, effort, and commitment on my own part.
I don't enter the blogging community with any pre-conceived notions or expectations. Some will read this blog, other will not. As long as you read, I will post. I believe I have a few nuggets of knowledge to share, but they are only my perspectives and my perspectives and $1 will barely buy you a Coke. Feel free to hit me back and questions my thoughts... and shoot them full of holes. I will even listen to direct attacks of me... but only ask that you limits your barbs to me. That said, Happy Reading!!!
Matt Washock
Have you ever found yourself in a situation at work or home or in one of your other lives (organizations) where you attempt to explain something to your audience and they just don't seem to get it? In your mind the answer is just so simple... you think the answer is as obvious as the time on the clock. But, the time on the clock is different in New York than it is in California. In other words, not everybody sees what we see or, more importantly, thinks the way we think.
I have found that this concept is critical to successful and healthy life. I think back to my life since I turned 18 years old. My perspectives on many things changed since those formative years. My attention and interests were pretty typical for a young adult who was about to enter the "real world". I knew I had much to learn, but had unconsciously arrived to a point in my thought that entrenched me in a perspective that I accepted as "truth".
I entered the United States Marine Corps at 20 years old. During my time in the Marine Corps my perspectives changed and, to a degree, intensified. The military, and specifically the Marine Corps, tend to do this to people. I also had the good fortune to have a strong and opinionated family whose sometimes opposing views provided a safe landscape to examine my views. My wife of 17+ years was also an important part of my "re-education" while still in my early 20's. Factor in my diverse and vast (and expensive) education, I thought I finally had life all figured out. Key concept here is THOUGHT!
Too late in my life I was introduced to the concept of "not everyone thinks the way I do" in a common-sense, congestible form. I have to thank TR, who is the person I dedicate this first blog post to for that. I have to say that this lesson is perhaps the most important and painful life lesson I've learned. It has made me a more compassionate and well-rounded person. I feel this approach has made me a better son, husband, father, brother, friend, employee, and advocate for others.
Please understand that this perspective is not something that you arrive at and the work is done. Quite to the contrary... this is a daily struggle, a struggle that I continue to embrace because I know the positive affects this thinking has had on my life. So, put the shoe on the other foot once in a while and see how it feels... you may be surprised how it feels. You may realize that the shoe fits better than you thought it would.
On a broader note, I want to thank everyone in my life, past and present, who helped to make me into the responsible person that I have become. (you'll have to take my word for it here :-)) I am not naive enough to believe that I have gotten this far in 41 years on my own. However, I do not discount the time, effort, and commitment on my own part.
I don't enter the blogging community with any pre-conceived notions or expectations. Some will read this blog, other will not. As long as you read, I will post. I believe I have a few nuggets of knowledge to share, but they are only my perspectives and my perspectives and $1 will barely buy you a Coke. Feel free to hit me back and questions my thoughts... and shoot them full of holes. I will even listen to direct attacks of me... but only ask that you limits your barbs to me. That said, Happy Reading!!!
Matt Washock
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)