💾 Archived View for clemat.is › saccophore › library › ezines › textfiles › ezines › STUCKINTRAFFIC … captured on 2021-12-04 at 18:04:22.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
==================================================================
Stuck In Traffic
"Current Events, Cultural Phenomena, True Stories"
Issue #35 - November, 2000
Contents:
Current Events:
Vote Swapping For Fun And Profit
The internet throws its usual monkey wrench into the
electoral process.
Current Events:
You Read It Here First
My call on the Presidential Election
True Story:
Observations From A Train
Comparing the differences between flying, driving, and train
riding
Cultural Phenomena:
Movie Review:
Nurse Betty
===================================
Current Events
Vote Swapping For Fun And Profit
Just when you thought there was nothing new that could be said of an
election campaign, along comes the Internet to throw its usual monkey
wrench into things.
Seems a canny leftist was frustrated at his voting prospects for the
election. Faced with the unpleasant choice of casting a principled
vote for the let-most leaning candidate (Nader) and a power grabbing
vote for the popular candidate who was just left-of-center, he found a
way to have his cake and eat it too.
It's called vote-swapping. Suppose you are a Nader leaning leftist in
a state where the race between Bush and Gore is very close. What you
do is find a Gore supporter in a state where Gore has a comfortable
lead in that state's race. Then the two of you come to an agreement.
You pledge your vote to Gore, and your vote swapping partner pledges a
vote for Nader.
It's a win-win situation. The Gore supporter is, in effect,
transferring his vote from a state where his vote for Gore will not
make much of a difference to a state where every vote counts. The
idea beng that it increases Gore's chances of winning in the state
with the close race while not increasing the risk for Gore to lose the
election by very much.
The benefit to the Nader campaign is less clear, but nonetheless
important in the long run. If Nader gets a certain percentage of the
popular vote, he qualifies for Federal matching funds. Not too many
people know about this little pork-barrel give-away for the politician
class, but it's heavily used. Basically, it's a tax-payer subsidy to
election campaigns for the major party candidates while excluding the
same benefits from smaller parties. So if Nader gets enoug votes to
qualify for matching funds, the Green Party gets a nice fat check from
the government which it can plow into future campaigns.
The original web site for finding a vote swapping partner was
voteswapper.com. But the idea quickly spread to other web sites as
well. The Attorneys General in several states ave declared the
activity illegal, though it's far from clear whether such claims would
hold up in court. The Presidential Candidates have all disavowed
association with the practice. Editorialists are having a field day.
Of course these vote-swapping arrangements are not legally binding
contracts. No one actually knows who you vote for once you enter the
voting booth. So there's no enforcement mechanism possible.
Indeed, there are no doubt thousands of Republicans flocking to these
web sites pledging to vote for Gore so that Nader supporters will
continue to vote for Nader. Of course those Republicans can walk in
to the voting booth and go ahead and vote for Bush and no one will be
the wiser.
Is vote-swapping such an evil practice? One thing's for certain, it
violates the spirit of democracy. The idea behind a democratic form
of government is that we vote our conscious, based on who we think the
right person for the job is. Voting is not a power grabbing
arrangement. When you vote for a candidate, you are not buying that
candidate. You should not expect anything in return. Only people who
think they are going to get something out of a candidate would use
their vote to ensure that they've at least voted for the winner, even
if it's not their favorite candidate.
The real problem that these shenanigans highlight is the electoral
college process. If the election were simply a popular vote among the
entire U.S. population, then the vote-swapping arrangement would be
moot. Perhaps in the days where politicians were still primarily
responsible for representing a geographic region, the electoral
college made sense. Perhaps back in the days before the states' power
was removed in favor of a strong federal government, the electoral
college made sense. But these days, every race is essentially a
national race. We vote on politicians based not so much on their
particular policies for the home state, but based on their positions
relative to our favorite special interest or national issue.
The real solution to the vote-swapping fiasco is to get rid of the
outdated electoral college process.
The other issue that the vote swapping fiasco highlights is the
absurdity of Federal matching funds. There's no reason whatsoever to
justify using taxpayer money to subsidize a federal election. And the
main reason the leftist Nader supporters dreamed up this scheme is to
help the green party cash in on the pork. Putting an end to Federal
matching funds would remove one of the motivations for the money
hungry power grab and maybe, just maybe, people could return to voting
their conscience.
=======================================
Current Events
You Read It Here First
Ooops. I realized too late that the time for election predicitions
was the October issue, not the November issue. Oh well.
Nonetheless, I�ll take a stab at an election prediction. It�s
Thursday October 26th. I predict Al Gore will beat George Bush by 4
or 5% of the popular vote. I don�t follow it cloesly enough to be
able to say whether he�ll win the necessary electoral college votes.
But I believe Gore will win the popular vote.
Whether this is a good thing or not remains to be seen and I wouldn�t
hazard a guess.
I�m betting that fully half of the Nader support will evaporate on
election day and swing to Gore. Too often, people of marginalized
political views give up on making a principled statement and go for
the power grab.
=======================================
True Story
Observations From A Train
A couple of weeks ago, I had the opportunity to do something I had
never done before. I took a train. Now, strictly speaking, it's not
the first time I had ever been on a train. I had taken a train while
on a vacation trip and I took a train once as a field trip in
kindergarten.
This time, I needed to get from my home in Cary to my parents' home in
Charlotte so that I could rent a truck, load it up with some furniture
I was inheriting from my parents, and drive it back to Cary. It turns
out that it's a lot cheaper to rent a truck "one way" than it is to
rent a truck "locally" and drive it that far. The train seemed like a
good solution. I took the Amtrak "Carolinian" from Cary to Charlotte,
where my parents picked me up. So this was the first time I ever took
the train for no other purpose than practical transportation.
I'm not prepared to claim that riding a train is better or worse than
driving a car. It was more expensive, and took more time. But the
debate on public transportation is much broader than that and it's a
tired debate. People have their own opinions on the merits of public
transportation and don't tend to be swayed by argument.
What I found impressive about my train ride was just how different an
experience it is. I have driven the route from Cary to Charlotte
dozens of times over the years. And even though my train route
covered essentially the same territory, I got a totally different view
of the country side. I almost would not have believed it was the same
state.
Picking up the train was a relatively simple affair. The train stops;
you get on. In theory you need a ticket. And if you don't have a
ticket, then you at least need a "reservation code." But I was
challenged for neither. I was just asked whether I wanted business
class or coach and then I was directed to the right car.
The Carolinian is a small Amtrak train. Only about 4 or 5 cars total.
But it was pretty full. Nearly every seat was taken. Seats are not
assigned, so people are free to move around and arrange them selves as
they want. There are no seat belts on the train either. At least
none that I could see. Certainly people were not using them. No one
was yammering away about the importance of wearing seat belts ether.
This was a very good thing. Made for a more relaxed trip.
The Carolinian was reasonably clean, but it was obviously old and in a
tedious state of repair. The seats, at least the ones I tried,
weren't exactly comfortable. They were clean, but the cushions had
obviously seen their better days. The reading lights above many of
the seats did not work, There were electrical outlets along the walls,
which I was hoping to use for my laptop computer, but none of the
outlets worked. I did not see a lot of trash on the train, but thee
was dirt and grime on the walls and windows. I got the feeling that
there were people assigned to keeping the train clean and in good
repair, but they were only doing the minimal job necessary to keep
their boss of their back. But it was no big deal. I'm not the sort
that gets bent out of shape over such things. But it was a sharp
contrast to my experiences flying a plane. Compared to flying, the
train is a much more casual, informal affair.
As the train pulled out of the Cary station, I was excited by the
novelty of the view. I recognized many of the streets we crossed, but
it was amusing to see the intersections from the viewpoint of the
train, rather than the car waiting for the train to pass. But the as
we headed to Durham and on to Burlington, the novelty passed. The
conductor passed through, taking our money and giving us tickets. I
could not help but notice that his system of keeping track of people
who have and have not paid isn't the least bit foolproof. He put
ticket stubs above the seats when people paid. But since people were
free to roam from seat to seat, someone could probably slip past the
conductor as he made his way down the aisle and avid paying. I
suspect that the conductor has done this for so many years that he can
remember each rider's face and remember who has and has not paid. I
find that pleasantly comforting. I'm not a "ticket holder" in his
eyes, but a person with a face. Nice.
At the risk of painting a picture with too broad a brush, I have to
say that it's a different sort of people who ride the train. At least
in America, trains are for people who have more time than money. On
the other end of the spectrum, you have people who fly airplanes who,
in general, are people for whom money is not much of an issue, but
time is precious. Business men, wealthy folk, college students. But
my fellow train riders, judging by their dress and manners, had little
to no discretionary money. I didn't see much in the way of Designer
Clothes, Brand Name Accessories, or expensive haircuts. Nor did
people travel with much luggage. Most folks had just a small bag or
two with them. Which is not to say the train passengers were slovenly
or ragged. Nor were they impolite or rude. There was one fellow who
had his earphone blaring into his ears so loudly that it was clearly
bothering people who sat nearby (including me). But he was the
exception, not the rule. For the most part people chatted quietly
with each other. People were patient with each other as they got on
and off the train and helped each other with their bags, etc.
It was interesting to note the differences between train riders and
plane riders. But I was most fascinated by the differences in the
countryside.
For one thing, the times have turned their back on the trains,
literally. Most of the buildings you see from the train have their
backs to the tracks. Unlike the interstate where everyone is facing
the road. Occasionally you would see a very old house built from an
era where trains were important and it faced the tracks, nut mostly
everything faced away from the tracks.
You see a lot of junk yards, trailer homes, and warehouses from the
train. You see lots of produce too. More than once I saw a pick up
truck filled with sweet potatoes driving along side of the tracks. .
There are no billboards as you go down the tracks. Some would say
this is an advantage. But out in the rural areas, at least in North
Carolina, you could not see much of anything. You have this romantic
ideal of watching the countryside flow by you as you scoot along the
tracks. But on the Carolinian route, the vegetation in the rural
areas comes right up the rail way easement and it flashes by in a
blur. If you try to watch it too much, you get a head ache. .
Occasionally the vegetation would clear and you could get a glimpse of
the country side. And the impression you get is very rural. People
tend to think that the interstate represents the state of development
everywhere. But it's not. Most of the country is very rural and very
natural and thinly developed. .
You see lots of junkyards, chemical plants, abandoned grain silos, One
distinct advantage to riding on the train is that you can use cell and
mobile phones anytime you want. It seemed that my cell phone was
never out of range of the tracks. I found that pleasant, even though
I didn't actually use the phone while on my trip. Saw tobacco sheds
along the way. It is true that you get to see much more life of small
towns than I would have expected Even the back side of a small town is
more interesting that driving down the interstate. Occasionally you'd
go through a small town and get peeks at huge beautiful, frame houses,
obviously built for a different era. You also got to see lots of
shanty-shacks.
I didn't get to see that many people, mostly because of the time of
day I suspect. But I saw a few kids around. Let's just say these
weren't Gap kids and leave it at that. Went by school that was
holding pee wee football practice. I was surprised at how much was
built up along the railroad tracks Even in the most rural parts of the
state, there was almost always a road running parallel to the track.
The perpendicular roads were often. just dirt roads though.
Of course this is North Carolina, so I got to see more than my fair
share of kudzu along the way. I saw a surprising amount of swampy
standing water on the trip. Would not be surprised to see it at the
eastern end of the state, but I was travelling from mid state to
western end. so to see swamp like areas was strange. Saw some big
plant nurseries along the way. But surprisingly did not see much crop
land from the train. I guess the crop lands are not right up against
the tracks but they are out there.
The things I didn't see from the train were also interesting. No
billboards trying to entice me to take the next exit for fast food and
gas. No speed limit signs. No road construction signs. No mile
markers. On the road everything is at a safe distance away. The
interstate is wide and they don't let buildings come anywhere close to
it. So in a way, the interstate feels emptier than the train route
because on the train route, the things you see are much closer to you.
Everything feels more immediate on a train. This surprised me. When
you are driving a car you have to be constantly paying attention to
what's going on around you, but you don't really get to observe much,
so it's all kind of disconnected.
Was riding the train better than driving? I can't say it was. The
fact of the matter is, I'd take the speed in exchange for the
inconvenience every time. But riding the train made me realize just
how narrow our perceptions can get when we take the same route over
and over again. That old adage about the "taking the long way home"
is just as true today as it ever was. And everyone should do it every
now and then.
=======================================
Cultural Phenomena
Movie Review:
Nurse Betty