For Obama, No on Prop 8 and more on how I’m voting tomorrow

I have been a supporter of Barack Obama since he won the Democratic Primary for Senate in Illinois (I supported a friend and neighbor who was running against him but was thrilled to support Obama, not the least as a past resident of Hyde Park and student at the University of Chicago).

I will be voting for Barack Obama tomorrow here in CA. This election is the first time I have ever been voting FOR a candidate – my first two presidential elections I supported (a bit reluctantly the second time) Ross Perot, then Al Gore and John Kerry. I was relatively happy to support Al Gore, if disappointed overall with his campaign. John Kerry too I was disappointed in as a campaign though I likely would have voted for anyone who was not George Bush (though I actually didn’t hate George Bush senior).

Here in CA there are a lot of propositions this time around. More than I will get into detail here (I’m still reviewing some of the crazy ones specific to San Francisco and making up my mind on them) but there are THREE which I feel strongly about – and a few others which I have some opinions on.

Prop 8 – VOTE NO on PROP 8!!!!

If Prop 8 wins we as a state and as a nation will have let the bigots and the religious fanatics (specifically of the Mormon Church) win and the rest of us will have lost. I will be embarrassed and disgusted with my fellow citizens. In the past year I have had close friends get married who never seriously thought they would be able to legally marry the partner they loved – and even with a legal marriage in CA (or the other states where it is legal) they still face discrimination at a Federal level – where marriage perhaps has the most impact (on matters of citizenship and the right to work and live here in the US, on matters of Social Security, IRS etc).

The list of the impacts of marriage is lengthy. BUT two people’s marriage does not change the marriage of others, or the lives of those of us who are not yet married. If, as a society, we choose to give benefits and recognition to marriage – we should not discriminate in the least around who can marry whom (with the only exception perhaps being age/ability to consent).

I believe very strongly in the separation of Church and State. I am an atheist – which, i fear, may be the ultimate minority in the US today – and apparently would and could prevent me from winning election here in the US (indeed the allegation that a candidate was “an atheist” was apparently a devastating – and in that specific case quite inaccurate – negative attack. One which required the other candidate for Senate to publicly defend her active membership in her church.

The actions of the Mormon church which have spent a rumored $20M+ on the Yes on Prop 8 campaign (which is currently cluttering up adsense ads across the web among other nastiness) are, I think, reprehensible. Perhaps even grounds for revisiting their tax-exempt status (I can only dream).

I am also ethnically Jewish on my mom’s side so could even emigrate to Israel if I ever so chose. I also grew up with family stories from my father’s Irish side of the active and passionate discrimination which Irish-Americans encountered as he was growing up. From both sides of my family I feel a connection to minorities – and my generation of my family that connection is quite direct – many of my 1st cousin’s have partners who are not white and their children are bi-racial. In my close extended family in a few short generations we have become quite the melting pot – Jews, Catholics, Buddhists, Atheists and Muslims – black, white, bi-racial and via virtual adoption Asian (my Aunt’s on my dad’s side of the family were big sister’s to a Vietnamese immigrant who has truly become a member of the family – was there with us at my grandmother’s funeral).

Barack Obama’s candidacy – and I hope his election tomorrow as the next President of the United States will mean a great deal for my extended family – for the opportunities ahead for all of my cousin’s and their families. The next generation should, I hope, have the opportunity to strive for anything they put their minds to achieving – unfettered by past discrimination.

And I have to note it was not all that many years ago when my cousin’s partnerships would have been illegal in some states (until 1967 though two state’s didn’t amend their state constitutions until 1998 and 2000!) and even today though now quite common mixed-race couples still face discrimination. (I say partnerships because though there are many children, not all of my cousins have chosen to get married).

I am a straight, white male. Currently single. I hope someday to have the privilege of marrying the woman of my dreams. When, as I also hope, we have children I want to raise them in a world where whatever their sexual preferences they have the opportunity to marry the partner of their choosing.

Other Propositions

Vote no on Prop 4

“Parental notification” sounds relatively innocent – but it is not. It is an attack on a woman’s right to choose and it is yet another attempt to restrict abortions, make them harder to get for the very women whose lives would be most deeply impacted by pregnancy.

I recently learned just how active my family has been in the past in the struggle for woman’s rights – my aunt has been a long time pro-choice activist (even in the past driving women to get abortions).

I am an Existentialist – choice for me is absolutely core to my underlying philosophy and outlook on life – and I find measures which seek to restrict other’s choices, which seek to presume how other’s should act, and which seek to force one group’s religious views on the entirety of the population to be extremely troubling.

Vote NO on Proposition 2

I am a serious foodie. I buy locally, often direct from farmer’s, and in fact most of the meat I purchase for myself is “free range”. But Proposition 2 is a case of a proposition which sounds nice but which has a lot of, almost entirely negative, consequences. It forces particular conditions on the raising in particular of chickens for eggs – which would have the impact of raising the cost of CA eggs. Leading almost certainly to greater sales of eggs from out of state.

Which, in turn, impose a higher energy cost for those eggs (transit from out of state into the state), direct food purchase dollars to out of state and mostly very large producers, and in the final irony to mostly producers who would be raising chickens in very large, caged environments. In short the impact of Prop 2 would be higher costs for CA farmers, less shelf space for those farmers in CA groceries, even more CA spending flowing to producers from out of the state, and in the long run even more animals raised in the very conditions the proposition seeks to prevent.

I much prefer NOT imposing by state proposition new regulations of how all farmers should act. Instead I encourage individuals to vote with their own spending – if they choose to spend a bit more for “cage-free” eggs, do so. More customers will encourage more production – and more spending directed to local farmer’s will, in turn, result in local farmer’s reinvesting locally. But many farmers will choose to use a variety of ways to run their farms – some will have both caged and cage-free chickens.

Where the government SHOULD play a role is in ensuring accurate labeling – so that when you buy you can be reasonably certain that you are buying what the label claims. And government should regulate safe food production – ensuring that our food supply is safe and uncontaminated.

So I am voting NO on Prop 2.

A few of the other propositions.

• YES on Proposition 1a. Though not without flaws (the money doesn’t entirely add up) encouraging high speed rail transit and more broadly I hope greater investments in non-road transit across the state is a great and quite important thing.
• NO on Proposition 10. It sounds good on surface but the devil is in the details. And it appears this is a case of one party (T. Boone Pickens) trying to benefit from a proposition campaign, sweetened with a few perks for some (i.e. Prius buyers). I think the case for hybrids is pretty solid without government inducements.
• Yes on Proposition 12 and mostly NO on the rest. I’m still evaluating all the other propsitions, but my default is to say NO to most statewide propositions. I am not in the least a fan of the statewide proposition as having the force of law – it leads to the absolute worst rule of the majority (well even worse the majority of the minorty who choose to exercise their rights to vote) and all to often are poorly worded and have a multitude of horrible and often mostly unforseen consequences. Not the least of which are tying the hands of our elected officials leading to disasters such as the educational system of CA for the past 30+ years (since Proposition 13).
• I’m leaning towards Yes on Props 5 & 11. Still reading through the pro’s and con’s on each. Redistricting is a really complex issue (Prop 11) and frought with opportunities for political action – the Gerrymandering of Texas in the past decades being perhaps just the tip of the iceberg. Prop 5 seems, to me, to make a lot of sense – treatment vs. imprisonment is a very sensible approach to drugs. However though it likely also saves a great deal of money (treatment costs less than overcrowded prisons) there is a serious risk of ineffective treatment – and of underfunded treatment – not to mention quack/ineffectual treatment.

  Addiction is a very real issue (not just of illegal drugs). Personally I think a lot of the issues around the current “drug war” could be best addressed by legalization (and thus also taxation & regulation). I personally make the choice to not use any drugs legal or illegal (even have a argument with myself over my consumption of coffee and i’ve never once been drunk) so the personal impact of this law is relatively minor for me. But as a society I think we have far more serious places to invest our societal resources in than what substances people want smoke (though as a non-smoker I definitely do appreciate the CA laws restricting all smoking in restaurants etc).

And don’t get me started on the many complex propositions specific to San Francisco. I’m going to be studying them and making up my mind probably right up to the moment I step into the voting booth. Though I do know I’ll be voting to name our local sewage treatment plant for the current president…

Some thoughts on Obama’s possible running mates

This is, of course, still all quite speculative, as I write this Obama has a lot of momentum having won all the primaries this weekend, but the final result of the Democratic Primary is still quite up in the air. I am, however, an Obama supporter and I want to put a few thoughts out into the “blogosphere”.

First, I do not think an Obama/Clinton ticket would be a good or healthy ticket. (and nor do I like a Clinton/Obama though I’d be marginally okay with that if necessary but as I noted, I want Obama to win it all).

Nor do I like some of the names usually mentioned – Al Gore, Howard Dean, or John Edwards. Edwards has said he doesn’t want the VP nomination. I also don’t like the idea I’ve seen tossed out in some places for Colin Powell. A few others I don’t like – Wesley Clark, Richardson, or for that matter any of the other candidates for President this time around (all of whom besides the big three turned in pretty poor showings in debates and on the campaign trails).

My primary criteria for a VP is I want a VP who will, in 8 years time make a great president. I want the Democrats to pay attention to the long term – I want another candidate of the same generation of Obama (possibly even someone younger than him) who after 8 years at the VP would make for a fantastic President.

So two names I have heard suggested both seem like very viable and positive suggestions – the female governors of Kansas and Arizona. Both have proven an ability to win in states where Democrats are not typically successful. Governor Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas is 59, Governor Janet Napolitano of AZ is 50. Both are highly skilled politicians from states which could this year be in play for the Democrats.

While for the past few weeks I have been marginally in favor of Governor Sebelius as the VP, on further reflection this evening I now think Governor Napolitano would be a truly fantastic choice for VP by Obama.

Here are my reasons:

– She, like McCain is from Arizona, which makes AZ definitely in play against McCain in the national campaign.

– She has a lot of experience, is strong on a lot of important issues (immigration for one having led a major state where immigration and border issues are important)

– and at age 50 she would be 58 after two terms in the White House and would make for a great presidential candidate at that point!

– plus she will be term limited in 2010

Either would be a historic candidate, neither are however as well known nationally as Hillary Clinton – but as well neither would come with Clinton’s negatives – and both would be strongly in keeping with Obama’s message and movement for change.

And I think either (though slightly more likely for Governor Napolitano) would mean we would go from our first African American President to our first Woman President!

If you haven’t yet voted be sure to vote in your upcoming primary. If you can afford it, consider donating to Obama’s campaign.

Vote Today if you can – my vote is for Obama

I am not a Democrat. Nor am I a Republican. I have been a registered Independent since I moved to CA, while I was in Illinois I didn’t have to registered as a member of either party and I did not, though living in Chicago meant that generally the Democratic primary was the most important so I tended to vote in that (since few if any Republicans even ran for many positions from Chicago).

But this year I have a clear choice – I have been and am strongly supporting Barack Obama for President. Not only because he taught law at the University of Chicago (where I attended The College) and lives in my old neighborhood of Hyde Park, though both are positive factors in my support. My primary reason for supporting Obama is that I agree with his positions (more so than any other candidate of either party) and even more I respect how he goes about governance – what he focuses on, how he listens to and respects alternative positions and viewpoints, including those of members of the other party – yet at the same time how he has now many times over shown an ability to run a very efficient and masterful organization and shows planning and foresight for the long term.

For example, in both the Illinois Senate and at the US Senate Barack Obama has championed, sponsored and gotten passed a number of ethics reforms many of which share a common trait of focusing on transparency and accountability. He has pledged even more such steps when he is elected. Here I think is an example of simple, very hard to argue against steps which will go a long way to major reform of the government – and which take full advantage of our modern, digital age.

He also has shown a willingness to not shirk from his views or positions even when they might not go over well with a given audience he is addressing – notably he championed merit pay for teachers even while addressing a large teachers union (not known for supporting that position – which is one that I also strongly share). He has also frequently addressed gay and lesbian rights – again even when not addressing “friendly” audiences. I’m straight, but countless of my friends are not – and even were that not the case I deeply respect his giving gay rights a prominent place in his campaign and speeches (and unlike certain presidents he has not shown any unwillingness to even say the word “gay”).

On foreign policy I also strongly support his positions and approach. I was not anti-war – though I respect those who were – I do think there are times when we should act militarily, though to be blunt I think the time probably was during the first Gulf War or later on when there was an uprising in Iraq which we had initially supported but then did not follow through with that support. At that time we had a large (and real) coalition and a much clearer reason for acting (invading and taking over a neighboring state is a very clear and immediate cause for military action – much more so than the we now know fictitious reasons for the current conflict).

Obama’s position before the war was and is a very smart one – he was opposed to “dumb wars” – not the knee jerk, sometimes head-in-the-sand “all wars” but he recognized that Iraq was a dumb war. He has since followed up on that position and insight with opposition to further dumb bills – all while also being very active in veteran’s rights (he serves on some relevent committees in the Senate).

In short I think that Barack Obama is the best candidate for President I have had the chance to vote for in my lifetime. This will be my 5th presidential election (I’m 33) – and though like all previous elections in my lifetime a Bush or a Clinton (or both) are involved, I hope that is only the case for a few more weeks during the Primaries.

If you are not in a state voting today, I encourage you to contact and reach out to all your friends who are in states which vote today – and if your state has not yet voted making sure you are registered to vote and when the time comes vote. While I hope, like myself, you will be voting for Barack Obama, even more I hope you will vote and participate. This year we are seeing record participation levels in every primary – and overall I think this more than almost anything else is a positive sign for the country.

So please go Vote. Use the League of Women Voter’s SmartVoter site to locate your polling place and view a full sample ballot.

and

Yes. We. Can!

Update – check out the comments on this Talking Point Memo post for another great Obama related post