Over at The Corner’s “Ricochet,” (which only sounds like a Western-themed gay bar on Santa Monica Boulevard), Pat Sajak, (whose surname only sounds like the catch phrase of a character from TV’s What’s Happenin’?) has the courage to point out the worm in America’s apple of freedom: in 1960, the United States Congress passed an amendment to the Communications Act of 1934, making it illegal to “fix” quiz shows, but they have consistently failed since then to apply those same exacting standards to American democracy.
None of my family and friends is allowed to appear on Wheel of Fortune. Same goes for my kids’ teachers or the guys who rotate my tires. If there’s not a real conflict of interest, there is, at least, the appearance of one…So should state workers be able to vote in state elections on matters that would benefit them directly? The same question goes for federal workers in federal elections.
Pat makes a good point. While the right to appear on a game show is a fundamental liberty enshrined in the Constitution, the right to vote is granted at the sole discretion of Merv Griffin Enterprises, and King World Productions.
I’m not suggesting that public employees should be denied the right to vote, but that there are certain cases in which their stake in the matter may be too great.
…to allow them to vote.
Of course we all have a stake in one way or another in most elections, and many of us tend to vote in favor of our own interests.
Unless we’re working class white people living in a red state and employed in an industry suitable for outsourcing.
However, if, for example, a ballot initiative appears that might cap the benefits of a certain group of state workers, should those workers be able to vote on the matter?
No, they should just lay down and take it. If we start letting people defend their interests through the ballot box, it might depress ammunition sales.
Plainly, their interests as direct recipients of the benefits are far greater than the interests of others whose taxes support such benefits.
Of course, the workers in Pat’s example also pay taxes, so presumably they ought to have the same right to say how that money is spent as any other citizen — except when they themselves might benefit. Which is why I recuse myself from voting on bond issues for schools, because I directly benefit from not being surrounded by idiots, and I never vote on gas tax initiatives, because I have a clear conflict of interest, what with how I drive and walk and ride bikes and cross bridges and basically just gorge myself on paved surfaces like a Roman emperor at a decadent feast. Where they happened to be serving asphalt. (I probably should have pulled out of that metaphor a little earlier.)
When you think about it, the only voter qualified to render an honest, disinterested judgment on government services is one who doesn’t use them; someone who doesn’t live in a city or unincorporated town, and who doesn’t benefit from sewers, roads, rural electrification, minimum wage laws, food and drug inspections, or national defense. So basically, the only person who’s really entitled to vote in Pat Sajak’s America is the Unibomber.
I hope he remembered to fill out an absentee ballot, or Western Civilization is screwed.
Other things that annoyed me, since I’ve got a headache and feel crabby today:
The Washington Post hosted an online chat with Dan Savage about the project, and his efforts to decrease the terrible suicide rate of LGBT teens. I would applaud a major newspaper for giving some much needed exposure to this cause, except nobody pays any attention to WaPo’s online Q&As; and because they want to “cover both sides” of the issue, they gave a column to Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council in which to defend the objectively pro teen suicide position. For those who’d prefer not to get out of the boat, his argument essentially boils down to this: ”Bullying has nothing to do with it. These sodomites are just tormented by thoughts of my manroot — and how they can never have it! — so naturally they go crazy. I would too, in their place. Look on my batch, ye homos, and despair!”
And finally, there’s this:
Which a friend of mine says is evidence that the End Times are upon us, but which I regard as a sign that the world is clearly not ending fast enough.
Attaturk also posted about this – I’ll repeat (more or less) what I said there:
As a federal employee, if I am on a project to enact some piece of legislation, I don’t get more than my current salary to do so. I am working on a recovery act program right now that I guarantee has no direct monetary benefit to me. Although it may be of benefit down the road due to improved health care for all Americans
Left by acrannymint on October 14th, 2010