The Devil Went Down to Georgia

Out of the frying pan and into the fire.
And so endeth the transition period.

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Trust me, I'm a doctor

Election Day in a Red State. A Democratic gubernatorial (goobernatorial, really--hahaha Georgia humor!) candidate who apparently had no issues to call his own. A rainy Tuesday in November. Yet, as I stood in line to cast my vote, I still thought, "this is awesome."

Then I got to the ballot. Like most of you, I had to vote on several amendments. However, a few of them were almost completely incomprehensible. I have a doctorate in the English language (although you can't always tell given how fast I write these little morsels, I know) and I had to stand in the faux booth and perform a goddamn close reading on one of these suckers. It was an amendment to ban something in order that something else wouldn't happen. At one point I just started counting "not" to see whether the old mathematical principle of multiplying negatives held up.

"Well, if I don't want this to not happen, does that mean I want it to happen?"

I actually had a moment where I thought, "I need a Claven Voter Guide for Georgia." I'm a reasonably educated voter, here. I knew where I stood on farm subsidies, an amendment supporting hunting and fishing, subsidized housing for the surviving spouses of cops and firefighters killed on the job, and so on. This one was harder. I have to confess I tried pretty hard to research my issues before voting (not so easy outside the beltway, fyi! I got spoiled in DC!), but this one got past me.

I went to teach afterwards, squishing into class in my wet shoes, and went ahead with my policy of offering extra credit points to students who voted. One of my kids asked me what I thought of the aforementioned amendment, and I made some crack about my PhD meaning nothing in the voting booth. He nodded enthusiastically and said, "Dr. Megarita, if you can't make heads or tails of this thing, and I'm having trouble and I'm a senior majoring in English, what is everyone else doing?" The wisecracking girl across the room said "skipping it or faking it." The boy shook his head and said, "that's just wrong. I'm going to write someone."

Of course I was ecstatic that one of my students had been infected with my political fervor--such as it is--but then I offered up for consideration Jefferson et al's belief that only the educated classes would be/should be voting anyhow. Had that changed with increased enfranchisement? Or are those of us who apparently can't parse poorly written amendments to an ungrammatical constitution simply faking a kind of ghetto democracy while those "in the know" got to make the real change?

Voting still rules, even though my vote went straight in the garbage. I'd like to give a big HOORAY to Maryland, too, who pulled out the Democratic goodness in the Senate AND in the race for cutest governor. I luv O'Malley.

8 Comments:

At 9:43 AM, Blogger m.a. said...

In the grand scheme of things, your vote still matters. I'm sure of that. I can't wait to see what happens in Maryland.

 
At 8:01 PM, Blogger Claven said...

Careful with political crushes. The chicks and gays of SF elected our mayor solely on his looks. In my opinion, that jerk handed Bush a second term. Still very grumpy about Gavin.

Thanks for the props. Do not worry about being educated enough to vote. Those measures aren't written for smarty-pants people. Granted they are ocassionally written in crayon because the people writing them are complete morons. But they are often written in certain ways for strategeric reasons. If they over-simplify complicated legal issues, they are written that way to get passed (although these often get overturned in the courts). If they play on ignorance, they are written that way to get passed. If they are deliberately confusing, they are written to lose. Yep, you read that correctly. There's tons of evidence that when voters don't understand a measure, they simply vote "no."

In 2000, there was a pair of accompanying measures on the California ballot. A group wanted to overturn two pieces of recently enacted legislation. Had they written a ballot measure to re-write the law, they would have needed "yes" votes. Knowing that voters choose "no" when confused, they wrote referendum ballot measures. In this case a "yes" vote affirmed the new laws and a "no" vote removed the new laws. The "no" side ran a bunch of wierd commercials suggesting the proponenets of the "yes" side wanted to eat babies. Even though the "no" side got the measure on the ballot. The Noes carried the day, but sponsors won.

 
At 11:57 PM, Blogger Lord Chimmy said...

Virginia is for dummies. I was hoping there was going to be an amendment to ban stupid people from living within the Commonwealth, but no such luck.

 
At 1:50 AM, Blogger Megan said...

Wow, students who are interested in elections...talk about a foreign concept in my class. Of the four students who can legally vote, only two made it to the polls. Of the two who didn't vote, one said she didn't because she just didn't understand (translate: lazy) and the other didn't because she "just didn't have time." I then proceeded to fake a heart attack and told them that they were killing my spirit. (What, me a drama queen?) The conversation ended with another student asking which governor I voted for. When I responded, her look of disgust was palpable. Great way to end the day!

I quit.

 
At 7:19 AM, Blogger Megarita said...

MA--Oh, fear not, I love voting and do believe that we must vote regardless. BUt I now understand why people want to ditch the electoral college. It's fine when a state decides what it wants for itself, but I'm over this national business.

Claven--that business about the "vote no when you don't know" is both funny and chilling. I think I finally figured it, so I might have ruined the curve.

Chimmy--Yeah, you guys sure screwed the pooch. God help you if the GOP dude gets that seat.

Megan--Whoa. Will totally stop bitching now. Nice to hear from you, though? Eek?

 
At 8:35 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Uhh, your doctorate, it was EASL, right?

but big plusses for voting, even when it seems pointless

 
At 8:55 AM, Blogger JordanBaker said...

I can never decide whether Jeffersonian meritocracy is a really good bad idea or a really bad good idea.

 
At 8:30 PM, Blogger Buffalo said...

Only damned yankee lawyers are supposed to vote. They planned it that way.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home