Mid-Term Elections

VotingTomorrow we vote, and to be honest, this is a sad day for me. You see, the numbers of people who actually go to the polls is dismal. On top of that, here in California, most of the “races,” aren’t! So we have a candidate who has been indicted for corruption, another from a notoriously corrupt family, and another who is from a “famous” political family. Those will all probably win, even though they don’t deserve it and/or are up against someone far more qualified.

Add to that the fact that we vote for a number of propositions—something that has felt very democratic in the past. Until the courts overturn the stuff we vote for that the politicians don’t want.

In this upcoming election we are voting for a couple propositions that have obviously been written by top notch political schemers. One has three parts to it: test doctors for drugs, check a national database when there’s a prescription for a regulated substance, and change the dollar figure allowable in malpractice suits.

So all the commercials telling people to vote yes are about doctors who are staggering drunk into the operating room. But of course it’s trial lawyers who are funding those commercials because they can see dollar signs ahead of them if they get to sue for more and more money.

Then there’s the proposition that the health insurance companies are paying big bucks to stop. This one is couched as a “political power grab.” A caring doctor comes on in one commercial saying how awful the proposition is because it would allow a politician to determine not only the amount of money you’d be covered for but the kind of treatment the doctor can give. And after all, such things should be between a doctor and her patient only.

Sounds good, but what the proposition is saying is that the insurance commissioner will review the insurance companies’ proposed changes to coverage and that they’ll have to demonstrate that such changes are necessary. In other words, this proposition is protection from insurance company price gouging. Now that we HAVE to buy health insurance, if someone doesn’t regulate them, the industry can curb coverage or raise rates at will. Sure, it might be better if it wasn’t one insurance commissioner who has this regulatory power, but I want someone overseeing the health insurance companies.

But I suspect the ads have done their work and that proposition will go down in defeat.

There are a couple catch phrases that have worked in the past, and it’s interesting to see them get recycled. One is “power grab” as I mentioned above. Another is “protect the children.” The Republican running against Jerry Brown has used that one, which I think is a real stretch. I don’t see how Governor Brown’s policies have put children at risk. I don’t think it will win his opponent any votes, but we’ll see.

Obviously Governor Brown isn’t worried. I have yet to see an ad for his re-election. Yes, he’s been in a couple supporting two propositions he wants us to pass, and a friend told me he’s endorsed another politician for a different office. But he feels quite secure about his re-election, it’s apparent.

The other “protect the children” ads are for Superintendent of Schools, and that’s understandable. But of course both candidates can pull out that line. It’s what they should be doing.

The part of the election I hate the most is for the judges. I have no idea who these people are, but they have such an impact on society! I don’t have enough information about them to make an educated decision. There are a couple other offices I don’t really know about either—water board, board of equalization, controller, and county assessor. What do those officials do and what would make someone qualified to hold the office? I try to figure it out every election cycle, but then it blurs in my mind again.

The other thing we have to deal with here in California is term limits. I voted for term limits, but there are two problems. First, some people who are good at their job are getting termed out. I’m thinking of one of our county commissioners who used to represent my area until lines were redrawn. She’s more liberal than I’d like (but that’s true of all of the commissioners by virtue of the make up of our county), but she had the interest of the district at heart and went to battle for the things she felt were right.

So she’s out of a job, which brings up the other problem with term limits. Career politicians, who have name recognition even if they can’t be re-elected to their old job, just look for another one to run for. So we aren’t getting rid of these CPs—just recycling them.

OK, let the fun begin. I wonder if anything or anyone I vote for tomorrow will win. 😉

Advertisements
Published in: on November 3, 2014 at 6:04 pm  Comments (1)  
Tags: , , , , , ,

One Comment

  1. We vote by mail here so the pressure has been off for weeks (or the anxiety prolonged depending on how you look at it) We’re in a no win situation here, a couple of people we elected actually threw in the towel and resigned citing too much corruption. We now get to vote for their replacements who of course, are the people who caused the corruption in the first place.

    Our county election is a bit amusing, they’re going to improve the public’s perception of county government and since they are the ones who destroyed our trust in county government, we should vote for them because they are the most qualified to now fix it. That’s actually not cynicism, that really is the ad they’re running, The ones who made the mess should have to clean it up, it’s only fair.

    Like


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: