Author Archives: tom

The Morning After: More Relieved Than Anything Else

Posted on by
Reply

7:00 PM Pacific Time
This is the most daunting part of this blog, but I’m going to attempt to create a table to show how successful my vote is. I have to confess that peer pressure has never made much sense to me, and I actually enjoy being in the minority, but when it comes to voting I like being in the majority. Yesterday was a good day for me.

Candidate My Vote Winner
President President Obama President Obama
US Senator Diane Feinstein Diane Feinstein
US Representative Scott Peters Scott Peters
State Senator Marty Block Marty Block
State Assembly Toni Atkins Toni Atkins
San Diego Mayor Bob Fillner Bob Fillner
San Diego City Council Sherri Lightner Sherri Lightner
Prop 30 (funding schools) Yes Yes
Prop 31 (state budget) No No
Prop 32 (ban on corporate donations from labor unions) No No
Prop 33 (car insurance reform) No No
Prop 34 (repeals the death penalty) Yes No
Prop 35 (increases penalties for human trafficking) Yes Yes
Prop 36 (amends the 3 strikes rule) Yes Yes
Prop 37 (requires labeling for genetically engineered food) Yes No
Prop 38 (school funding: this was really a smokescreen to confuse supporters of prop 30) No No
Prop 39 (requires multistate corporations who are here to pay taxes based on sales) Yes Yes
Prop 40 (keeps the current redistricting plan) Yes Yes
Prop Z (school funding bonds) Yes Yes

5:30 PM Pacific Time
As I look over my ballot, there is one race still too close to call. With redistricting after the 2010 census we became part of the 52nd Congressional district and our representative changed from Susan Davis (D) to Brian Bilbray (R). Brian was challenged for his seat by Scott Peters. As of right now, 20 1/2 hours after the polls closed, the race is too close to call. Scott has 103,878 votes to Brian’s 103,193: that’s a difference of 685 votes. This may be a while.

As long as I’ve lived in San Diego I’ve started the day reading the San Diego Union Tribune. San Diego is a Republican town and I’ve accepted that the newspaper is going to slant right. Last year Doug Manchester, a local developer, purchased the paper and turned it into his own Twitter feed. Earlier in the year he started endorsing his candidates on the front page. In an op-ed piece in August he predicted Governor Romney would win “in a landslide.” Wonder how he’s feeling about that now. Our subscription expired on September 16th and I didn’t renew, but we kept getting the paper. As I was writing this I got a call from someone from the paper asking about renewing. When I explained that I had no intention of renewing until Doug sold the paper or started having respect for print journalism, the caller told me: “OK, that’s fine. Your balance due is $42.81.” I’m assuming she meant the cost of the paper between September 16th and today. Of course, since I never consented to getting the paper, I don’t owe them anything. We’ll see what happens with this.

5:00 PM Pacific Time
Just home from work. The events of the last 24 hours continue to swim through my head, but hey I still have to make a living.

In addition to the Senate races I spoke about this morning, I am also rejoicing that Maine, Maryland and Washington passed ballot measures allowing for same sex marriage. These three states now join the District of Columbia, Vermont, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and New York. A similar measure failed in Minnesota, and 30 states (including my state of California) have constitutional bans on same sex marriage (I’m getting this information from the LA Times). Eleven other states have laws banning same sex marriage. We’re not done battling homophobia, but last night was a good night.

6:00 AM Pacific Time (9:00 AM on the East Coast, 1400 GMT)
I’m writing this on about 4 hours sleep so be advised. It’s Wednesday morning and there’s reason to be hopeful in America. Not only did President Obama win reelection, several other races went well.

  • In Virginia Tim Kaine (D) beat George Allen (R). Allen had been a US Senator from 2000 to 2006 but lost his reelection to Jim Webb in part because he referred to a man of Indian descent as a “macaca.” I talked about this on my blog on September 4, 2006. Allen ran again and lost again.
  • In Massachusetts Elizabeth Warren (D) unseated Scott Brown (R). Brown was elected in 2010 to finish Ted Kennedy’s term. It’s nice to have it back in Democratic hands
  • In Missouri Claire McCaskill (D) defeated Scott Akin (R). Scott was supposed to win, until he announced that women cannot become pregnant from a “legitimate” rape. Time to head back to your cave Scott
  • In Indiana Joe Donnelly (D) defeated Richard Mourdock. Last month Mourdock stated that if a women becomes pregnant from rape, she should see the child as a gift from God. To be fair, he described rape as a “horrible situation” and never claimed God intended it. But I still can’t wrap my mind around him telling a rape survivor that she’s just looking at the pregnancy in the wrong way.

More later, no doubt.

And So the Counting Begins

Posted on by
Reply

This has become a tradition on my part, but I’m going to be here blogging until the election is set, or until I fall asleep in my seat. My primary concern is the Presidential election, but I’ll also be looking at other important local races, as well as returns in San Diego, where I live.

9:55 Pacific Time (1:55AM on the East Coast, 0555 GMT):
My thanks to Governor Romney for his gracious concession speech. It’s been a long night and I’m ready for bed and I’m grateful for his call to reach across the aisles and work for our future. And I’m grateful for his prayers.

9:30 Pacific Time (1:30AM on the East Coast, 0530 GMT):
Still waiting to hear from Governor Romney. I can’t go to bed until I hear his concession, but I have to work tomorrow.

9:00 Pacific Time (1:00AM on the East Coast, 0500 GMT):
We’re still waiting for the concession speech from Governor Romney. I’m not wishing for a repeat of the 2000 election.

8:25 Pacific Time (12:25 on the East Coast, 0425 GMT):
Even Faux News is projecting President Obama the winner. How cool is that?

8:15 Pacific Time (12:15 on the East Coast, 0415 GMT)
CNN is now projecting that President Obama the winner in Ohio. If it’s true, it puts the President over the 270 mark. I’m not going to stop watching (and blogging) until the concession speech, so stay tuned.

8:00PM Pacific Time (Midnight on the East Coast, 0400 GMT)
The polls just closed here in California. It’s no surprise, but it looks like President Obama carried it and our 55 electoral votes are a boost. PBS now projects that the President can claim 225 electoral votes. I’m pleased to see that in my home state of Virginia has elected Tim Kane (D) over George Allen (R).

7:00PM Pacific Time (10:00 East Coast, 0300 GMT)
The polls continue to close going west. The PBS web page is loading slowly and it’s making it harder to get fast results. The best news for me is the race for Senator in Missouri: Claire McCaskill has apparently beaten Todd Akin: he was the person who claimed that women can’t get pregnant from a “legitimate” rape. My complaint with him wasn’t just that he was wrong, it’s that he was stupid. If someone tells me something that unbelievably stupid, I’m not going to listen, and I’m certainly not going to repeat it. The fact that he was so willing to believe something that stupid because it was politically convenient tells me all I need to know about him. Congratulations Claire!

PBS is saying now that the President is leading the electoral college map 173 to 163.

6:30PM Pacific Time (9:30PM East Coast, 0230 GMT)
Governor Romney is still ahead in the projections, 153 to 123. It appears that President Obama should carry Pennsylvania with its 20 electoral votes, and Wisconsin with its 10 electoral votes. I appreciate PBS’s caution, but I’m also elated at the idea that Governor Romney and Congressman Ryan with both loose their states.

6:00PM Pacific Time (9PM East Coast, 2AM GMT)
As a Democrat, I’m getting a little concerned. At this point 4 years ago, Senator Obama was leading Senator McCain 175 electoral votes to 76. Right now Governor Romney leads President Obama 138 to 109. Here’s the optimistic part: Polls have closed in the Midwest, which is the Governor’s stronghold. It may be that he’s already gotten most of the electoral votes he’s going to get; Texas has already gone for him and at 38 electoral votes, it’s likely the largest state he’s going to get. California polls don’t close for another few hours and it will bring 55 votes for the President. As I look at the numbers there’s reason to be hopeful about Ohio. As I write this, 33% of the votes have been counted and President Obama leads 54% to 45%.

5:00PM Pacific Time (8PM East Coast, 1AM GMT)
I’m actually writing this at 5:10PM. Polls have already closed in several states and the votes are being counted. As I write this the projections on PBS are coming in. Right now President Obama leads the electoral vote race 64 to 40. The states line up like this: President Obama should win in Maine, Vermont, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Maryland, Delaware, and Illinois. Governor Romney is projected to win South Carolina, West Virginia, Kentucky, Indiana, and Oklahoma. Other networks have made bolder predictions, but I’d rather be right than fast, and PBS clearly agrees.

The Election is Tomorrow: Do You Know Where Your Vote Is?

Posted on by
Reply

Everyone knows this, but tomorrow we go to the polls and cast our votes. I have strong political leanings but tonight is not the night to share them.

Let me just say this: If you are able to vote in this election and don’t, please don’t tell me. I won’t take it well.

A large percentage of people in our world don’t have this opportunity. It’s easy (though not pleasant or respectful) to live in a totalitarian regime: all you have to do is keep your mouth shut and hope things go well for you. Maybe they will, maybe they won’t.

It’s harder to live in a democracy because our leadership works for us, not the other way around. It means we have to listen, evaluate, judge, and ultimately vote. It means we have to take the time to read through platforms, have difficult and perhaps painful discussions with people we like and love, and show up on election day.

My parents gave me innumerable gifts, and voting was one of them. When they went to vote they took me with them. I watched them go into the voting booth, and they made the connection between what they were doing, field trips to Mount Vernon and Monticello, and my role. When I turned 18 I couldn’t wait to register to vote and I’ve never taken it for granted.

In the past 236 years countless men and women have sacrificed convenience, liberty, and their lives for your right to vote. Make them proud.

The Justice Chronicles Volume 9: There He Goes Again

Posted on by
Reply

Governor Romney has proven once again that (1) He still doesn’t get it, and (2) There are no limits on his ability to shop for a moral compass.

A few weeks ago the Governor was interviewed on 60 Minutes and, as you might expect, he was asked about health care. Scott Pelley asked him this question: “Do you think the government has a responsibility to provide health care to the 50 million Americans who don’t have it today?” He responded:

Well, we do provide care for people who don’t have insurance. If someone has a heart attack, they don’t sit in their apartment and die. We pick them up in an ambulance, and take them to the hospital and give them care. And different states have different ways of providing for that care.

His implication is clear: If you don’t have health insurance you don’t have to worry. Just go to the emergency room and you’ll be taken care of. That’s fine, but it’s just not true. The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act requires that anyone who comes to a hospital emergency room be provided an examination and needed stabilizing treatment. In other words, if you show up in an emergency room with chest pain, they have to make sure you are stable. In that sense Governor Romney is correct that emergency room has to stop your chest pain.

But they don’t need to stop your heart disease. They only need to stop your symptoms. So what if your symptoms aren’t cardiac? Glad you asked. There is an article in the today’s Los Angeles Times about Jode Towe.

On the surface, he is living the Republican dream. He started a business (as truck driver), but he couldn’t afford to buy health insurance on his own. His only option was to hope he didn’t get sick or injured. Things were going well until he noticed increased fatigue and “something” in the back of his throat. He paid out of pocket to see a doctor, and the results were not good. He’s not sure what is in his throat, but there is at least a chance it’s cancer. A biopsy would be the next logical step but that (and a tonsilectomy) would likely cost $4,000; if there is cancer any treatment would cost thousands of dollars, well beyond Mr. Towe’s ability to pay.

So what if he takes Governor Romney’s advice and go to the emergency room? All they are required to do is stabilize his symptoms (essentially a throat lozenge). Mr. Towe would also be responsible for any charges. In many ways that’s the worst part of Mr. Romney’s advice. If someone goes to the emergency room and can’t afford to pay, the hospital ends up eating the cost, but the hospital can still try to collect the money. They are counting on you mortgaging your house, selling your blood, hitting up your family, etc. If that doesn’t work they turn the case over to a collection agency that trashes your credit score. Nobody wins: the hospital doesn’t get their money and your financial future is compromised.

When the Affordable Care Act is fully implemented in 2014, Mr. Towe will be offered affordable health insurance, even with his pre-existing condition. Hopefully he’ll still be around then.

Hopefully Governor Romney won’t have a chance to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

Republicans and Rape: Really?

Posted on by
Reply

Yes, they are at it again. The Republican Party, or at least one of their members, has once again shown just how tone deaf you can be when you really try. Richard Mourdock is running for Senate from Indiana. He, like all Republicans, needs to prove his anti abortion credentials while giving the illusion of caring about women.

Most of the time it’s easy, until someone asks about favoring abortion of a pregnancy that results from rape. No woman (or any man worth the air he breathes) wants to think about this possibility, and the idea of carrying a child conceived from this act of hate is horrible beyond words.

So what do you do if you need to pander to the far right while appearing to care about women?

You have a few choices. In August Representative Todd Akin (R-MO) was asked this question and this was his response:

Well you know, people always want to try to make that as one of those things, well how do you, how do you slice this particularly tough sort of ethical question. First of all, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something. I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child.

All women (and men worth the air they breathe) immediately focused on the most important part of this quotation: legitimate rape. This allows him to respond to a woman impregnated by rape by saying that since this is impossible, you must have consented. It wasn’t a legitimate rape.

To be fair, many Republicans repudiated this, and Mr. Akin lost a great deal of national Republican funding. But it’s worth asking if they did this because they honestly disagree, or if he committed the sin of saying something in public that they all believe in private but dare not say.

OK, fast forward to now. Mr. Mourdock was asked the same question. Here is his answer:

I struggled with it myself for a long time, and I realized that life is a gift from God, and I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something God intended to happen.

Really? OK, I’m assuming Mr. Mourdock is a devout Christian and wanted to communicate a belief that God can (and does) create good out of evil. As a Christian I believe this. But as a man worthy of the air I breathe, I can’t believe the callousness of this statement. Does he not get the implications of this statement? Does he not know that if a woman is impregnated by rape (that Todd Akins says can’t happen) she will be told that she has a moral obligation to carry the child to term because God “intended that to happen?”

Vote Republican at your own risk.

Rest in Peace Senator McGovern

Posted on by
Reply

Yesterday we got the sad news that Senator George McGovern died at 90 years old. His was a voice of my generation: though he lost badly, he ran for President against Richard Nixon and his wisdom persists.

He was an unabashed liberal in an era where it was often considered a dirty word. He was a gentleman who served in the House of Representatives from 1956 to 1960 and the Senate from 1962 to 1980. He ran for President in large part because he wanted an end to the war in Vietnam. He knew the dangers of war as he served in the USAAF during World War II. On December 15, 1944 while flying a mission over Austria he was struck by shrapnel and nearly killed. He was later awarded the Air Medal.

He came home and devoted himself to public service. He was an example of the best of the Greatest Generation. He opposed the war in Vietnam because, as he said, “I’m fed up to the ears with old men dreaming up wars for young men to die in.”

OK, here’s my favorite:

Every program that ever helped working people — from rural electrification to Medicare — was enacted by liberals over the opposition of conservatives. When people tell me they don’t like liberals, I ask, ‘Do you like Social Security? If so, then shut up!

On that quotation: my thanks to John Sheirer. He writes a blog on Real American Liberal. I needed to make sure the quotation was real and he responded in a matter of hours.

The Justice Chronicles Volume 8: Maybe now DOMA is Doomed

Posted on by
Reply

With all the attention given to the Presidential campaign, an important story isn’t getting as much publicity as it should. On October 18, 2012 the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit handed down a ruling in the case of Windsor v. US that the Defense of Marriage Act or DOMA is unconstitutional.

In 1996 the Congress passed, and President Clinton signed, DOMA. Among other things DOMA prohibits the Internal Revenue Service from recognizing same sex marriages, even if the couple were legally married.

I’m taking the facts of the case from the opinion itself. Edith (Edie) Windsor and Thea Spyer were legally married in Canada in 2007 (though they had been a couple for 44 years). Thea died in 2009 in New York, and had they been a heterosexual couple, Edie would have been classified as the surviving spouse for tax purposes. Because of DOMA their marriage wasn’t recognized by the IRS and Edie owed $363,053 in taxes to inherit Thea’s estate. Under federal tax law, a spouse who dies can leave assets, including the family home, to the other spouse without incurring estate taxes, but because of DOMA Edie was not considered Thea’s spouse and is responsible for those taxes. Edie sued in federal court to return the $363,053, arguing that she was Thea’s spouse; in 2011 New York began allowing same sex marriages and the state recognized their union.

There are many nuances to this case, but essentially the court found that DOMA is “an unprecedented intrusion into an area of traditional state regulation” as the states grant marriage licenses.

Clearly the issue of gay marriage is going to the Supreme Court in either this session or the next. But I have to confess a chuckle over this case as it’s decided on the basis of federal intrusion while the Republican Party consistently reminds us that they are the party to “get government off our backs.” I’m guessing they don’t want government off our backs on this one.

Personal note: DOMA claims to protect traditional marriage. As a heterosexual married man, can anyone tell me how gay marriage threatens my marriage? If so, I’m happy to support DOMA. In the meantime I’m on the side of opposing homophobia.

A Rare Union Victory; It's Nice to See

Posted on by
Reply

Football has always been an interest of mine. For as long as I can remember the Washington Redskins were a staple on Sunday TV. My memory goes back to the 1968 season when Otto Graham coached the Redskins to a 5-9 season, and was fired for his troubles.

In the last 44 years I’ve seen countless games and while not all my memories are good, I have to say that the referees have done an outstanding job. They don’t get it right 100% of the time, but it’s pretty close.

This year the NFL locked them out over a labor dispute. It was pretty silly and the lockout had more to do with intimidation than money. The NFL decided that they could employ “replacement referees” and none of us would notice. We did. The replacements came from small colleges and high schools and frankly, they couldn’t keep up. On national TV we saw that it’s not as easy to referee a professional NFL game as it looks.

On September 24th the game between the Green Bay Packers and the Seattle Seahawks was marred by a call none of us could defend. Suffice it to say that the Packers’ season could go down on this play. The next day the real referees were back in place.

For those of us who favor labor unions this is a good day. Workers with skills who group together with others with the same skills know that management always think that their skills are not as valuable. In truth I’ve never belonged to a union, but I had a job where my boss told me that “any idiot” could do my job. When I quit he hired any idiot. He lasted almost a year and they had to hire two people to replace me.

Look around you. If you think the person who picks your crops or bathes your grandmother in the nursing home, or washes your dishes in your favorite restaurant is unskilled, think again. They may make less money that you, but their labor is every bit as skilled as yours.

You may not notice until they don’t show up for the job, but when they do show up, you should notice. None of us are going to suffer because the real referees weren’t there for the first few weeks of the season, but it should remind us that union workers improve our lives every day.

Vote union.

The Money Chronicles, Volume 7: Reflections on the 47% vs. the 53%

Posted on by
Reply

Last week a video surfaced of Governor Romney speaking at a recent private fundraiser. This is what he said:

There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. … These are people who pay no income tax. My job is is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.

I lifted this quotation from Yahoo; please tell me if it’s not accurate.

Several things trouble me about this quotation, and I’ll list a few here (and perhaps add to it as I think more about it).

  • Governor Romney was speaking at an event where he assumed everyone there supported him and he didn’t think it was being taped. It’s an old adage that character is developed when we think nobody is watching us. This quotation is dramatically different from what he says in public and it tells us a great deal about his character.
  • The 47% draw from a large and diverse group of people, and Governor Romney wants to put them all in one camp: they are dependent on the government, they believe they are victims, they believe someone else is responsible for their care, and they are entitled to health care, food, and housing. The meaning is clear: they are doing nothing productive and expect the 53% (of whom I belong) to care for them.
  • They believe that they only way they can keep this cushy arrangement is to vote for the President and nothing will convince them to take responsibility for their lives.
  • Lastly, it is not his job to to worry about these people.

OK, so who are these 47%? Good question. Governor Romney acquired this number from the Tax Policy Center; there are those who think it has a liberal bias, but Governor Romney must not as he quotes them. They describe the 47% here:

  • The poor: In 2011 if a family of four made $26,400 or less, their income was too low to pay taxes. To be fair, I can’t imagine them putting food on the table, let alone paying taxes. They don’t sound like freeloaders to me, and I’d guess they’d give anything to make enough money to pay taxes. They are half of the 47%: I’m guessing they’re not heartened to learn that Governor Romney’s job is to not worry about them because they are freeloaders.
  • The elderly: If you and your spouse receive less than $32,000 in Social Security benefits ($2666.67 per month) or other income, you don’t pay taxes. If you live on that much money and pay taxes, you have a point. Otherwise, move on because these are people who worked hard for their entire career, paid into Social Security, and don’t have pensions, 401(k)’s, or 403(b)’s and they are not freeloaders.
  • The disabled: Again, if you are disabled and poor, you don’t pay federal taxes. Think this is a free ride? Talk to someone who depends on this. Ask him or her if he or she would rather be able to work and pay taxes. Nearly 100% would like to be productive.

You can’t read this blog without knowing my political views. But let’s face it: Mitt is choosing the path of pandering to the wealthy. Vote for him at your own risk.