« November 2007 | Main | January 2008 »
This morning, former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto was assassinated by a suicide bomber in Northeast Pakistan.
As a politico, we are always interested in election dynamics in any country. Yet, we can't help but be thankful that we live here in America, where elections occur peacefully, not with assassination attempts.
There is no uglier occurrence in politics than a close election, and in recent memory, every major occurrence has had the same script. If the Republican initially led, the Democrats call for for incessant recounts until enough "votes are counted" to give the Democrat victory. Unfortunately, several times the Democrats have led these close races under the cloud of improper electioneering (a.k.a. voter fraud). Democrats counter that all they want is to count votes; Republicans, they say, only want votes thrown away.
We've seen these scripts before: Florida in 2000, Washington state's governor's race in 2007. Now, Indiana Democrats want to add a new chapter: Muncie 2007.
The names in this story are not important, as it is so stereotypical of close elections. A tight race ended on Election Night with the Democrat candidate for mayor with a dozen or so vote lead over the Republican Candidate. in a race that close, most any candidate would request a recount to ensure accuracy, which the GOP candidate did.
In the course of the recount two peculiarities were discovered: several absentee ballots were processed without the proper signatures, and other absentee ballots may have been submitted improperly (if not illegally). The Indiana Democrat bloggers have posted to set the stage for this to be a stolen election, with the evil Republicans disenfranchising voters at any cost to achieve menial victory. Lets not be that shrill and instead look at some facts.
First, the issue of improperly processed absentee ballots, which our Democrat friends call a technicality which should be overlooked. 19 absentee ballots in this race were processed but not signed by a Election Board member from each party. Such a check is important, so as one party does not just add ballots into the mix that are fake, or even switch ballots when no one is watching. The dual certification keeps things honest.
Second, and we will learn more about this in the coming days, is that there are very suspicious absentee ballots coming from a heavily Democrat precinct. From what our sources tell us, many voters who had absentee ballots in this precinct were asked to sign ballots by Democrat operatives, but never filled them out themselves and, in some cases, had no clue what they were even signing. Republicans supposedly have affidavits documenting this, and, according to the Democrat blogs, Democrats supposedly have affidavits from the same folks stating there was no problem. To cut the story short, something here reeks of voter intimidation.
All accounts are that the arbiters of election law in these cases will be throwing out improper ballots from heavily Democrat precincts. The Republican candidate will most likely be certified the winner. Democrats will say the GOP stole another election, but in Muncie in 2007, the facts speak to the exact opposite, with the system working to ensure the person voters elected will be sworn in.
If you talk to an "old school" fiscal conservative (not a budget hawk or a libertarian but a Buckley-type), they have probably read Adam Smith, one of the first great economists. Smith stated that government should be designed to operate on a deficit, as it prevents arbitrary decisions to spend, borrow, or tax.
Smith probably never comprehended the social welfare state adopted by twentieth century governments. The fiscal conservatives of the 1990s had their solution to keeping under control on the state and local levels: requiring balanced budgets year after year in state constitutions and city charters.
Fast-forward to the 2008 presidential primaries. The recent adage has been that the nation prefers to elect Governors over Senators and Congressmen, although that is much more of a political calculation. Congressmen have voting records. Governors historically do not.
We have recently seen former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee ascend to the top or near the top of many polls, including those in early states like Iowa and New Hampshire. He seemed to fit the mold of a conservative candidate for that portion of Republican primary voters who didn't see someone in the field meeting that definition. Now, Huckabee is being hit with ads in the early states and on national cable news with nasty portrayals of his record.
Where did Huckabee's opponents and detractors get the fodder? Old Arkansas "State of the State" addresses where Huckabee is open about what tax increases are needed to balance budgets. And Huckabee's "tax and spend Republican" title has been earned by governors from Ohio to Colorado. What do they have in common? They are from states requiring balanced budgets, and it is always easier to balance a budget by increasing revenue than cutting spending.
Huckabee could survive in the primaries and be the nominees, but much like Howard Dean in 2004, he could end up back in the pack. If so, Senators and Congressmen may well welcome Governors from Balanced Budget States to the list of people who cannot win the presidency.
Want to know what Washington is seeing regarding the late Julia Carson and her vacant congressional seat? Here is Politico.com's piece on the race and the congresswoman.
Julia Carson was only elected to Congress in 1996, but it almost seems much longer. This blog has not existed long enough to have engaged the late Congresswoman very much, a sign of her absence from the stage in 2007. Carson worked her way up through the ranks, earning the fierce loyalty of her supporters. The Republican landslide of 1994 gave her mentor, Andy Jacobs, cause to not seek reelection in 1996, and thus gave Carson her opening to be a Congresswoman. She won in a crowded primary and subsequent general election, but soon fell ill with a heart condition. Perhaps it was her status in an entrenched Democrat minority or her poor health that her star never rose too high in Washington. She never was much of a demagogue or played a major role with the CBC, but she took care of her constituents back home in Indianapolis.
And that is where Carson's legacy lies. National, her obituaries may have been paltry compared to other congressmen (one even claimed she represented Illinois), but she was loved by her loyal factions here in Indy. She has her Center on Fall Creek, and other memorials will come. She may not have been much on the national scene, but she indeed made her mark on Indianapolis, who will spend the next week in memoriam.
Governor Daniels is having outpatient surgery this afternoon for an abdominal hernia. Minor procedure, but still keep him in your thoughts and prayers.
Tuesday evening, the GOP held onto two seats up for special election due to the passing of the previous officeholders. State legislators Rob Wittman (R-VA) and Bob Latta (R-OH) won their special elections by margins normal for those districts. While both districts were GOP-leaning to begin with, closer than normal results or wider margins of victory, especially in Latta's race, would have been telling indicators about voters' moods.
What does it mean? That national opinions of President Bush and recent gains by Democrats statewide in Virginia and Ohio did not filter into these races. With the GOP on the downswing after their disastrous 2006 performance, these results can only be good for Republicans, as the political baseline may be normalizing.
That said, there is much time between now and November of 2008.
The Kernan-Shepard Commission issued its report with the following recommendations for reducing property taxes and making government more efficient:
As you probably have read, fellow Indianapolis blog Indy Undercover has written its last post. Among the reasons for ending the blog, IndyU listed needing a break, the rise of other like-minded local blogs, and helping make a difference in holding the likes of Bart Peterson and Monroe Gray to task. Essentially, it could not see itself o on successfully in Indy's new political climate.
When blogs have a singular purpose that gets accomplished, they will either end (like IndyU) or morph into something bigger than that sole cause. The most famous example of this was a blog started by a few liberals who could not believe congress was considering impeaching President Bill Clinton for the matters arising from the Lewinsky/Paula Jones scandals. Their site, MoveOn.org, had the purpose of rallying like minded individuals to rail against conservatives who favored impeachment. Once impeachment came and went, the liberals united by MoveOn.org turned their attentions to the 2000 elections, and in each subsequent year other congressional races and President Bush in general. MoveOn.org was able to morph. IndyU could not see itself doing so.
Could other devoted to calling out the Peterson Administration morph as well? Most have slowed significantly. The infamous BartLies.com may be the best candidate to morph, as it has turned its attention to Julia Carson's health-watch while still continuing its tracking of Indianapolis homicides.
We shall see.
After weeks of seclusion that could only make a Julia Carson handler proud, Indianapolis Mayor Bart Peterson seems to be making a public appearance, one of very few since his embarrassing loss to Greg Ballard on November 6th.
Wonder what he read in his tea leaves?
