apophenia :: politics

May 7, 2008

Mobilizing Generation 2.0

Ben Rigby and Rock the Vote have put together a book for activists, politicos, and organizers called "Mobilizing Generation 2.0: A Practical Guide to Using Web 2.0." It is a how-to guide to help those who want to mobilize using the web, focusing on how organizers can leverage blogging, social network sites, photo/video sharing, mobile phones, wikis, maps and virtual worlds. Interspersed between the directly practical and usable are a handful of "Big Picture" essays which are intended to help organizers put the practical and usable into a broader context. I had the honor of writing one of these based on my talk last year at Personal Democracy Forum. My essay is called "Digital Handshakes in Networked Publics: Why Politicians Must Interact, Not Broadcast." In short, I outline why it is important the politicians treat the online world as another form of public space where direct outreach and interaction is critical. If you see networked publics as a modern-day street, it only makes sense to login to the street and start shaking hands.

If you're only looking to read what I've written, you can check my essay out here. If you're an organizer or activist, you might enjoy it better in the context of the whole book.

Category: politics

Tags: activism

   

Posted by zephoria at 12:40 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

February 7, 2008

did my vote count?

A month ago, I called the county registrar to make certain that I could vote in the democratic primary and confirm that I would get my absentee ballot. I couldn't remember if I was registered democratic, independent, or green. The woman at the other end of the line told me that all was fine and that I was in the system, no worries. I took this to mean that I was registered democratic because I didn't know at that point that independents could vote in the primary. I got my absentee ballot in the mail a few weeks later. The ballot said that it was a democratic ballot, but the pamphlet said that if you're an independent, you have to fill in the #6 dot as well. I was uber confused by this. What would happen if I was registered democrat and filled in the #6 spot? Since I was pretty sure that I was registered democratic based on my conversation with the registrar, I decided not to fill in that extra bubble and moved straight to #9.

As election day panned out, I started hearing about "double bubble trouble" as independent voters were being given democratic ballots but not being told about the extra bubble. Worse, the silly punch machines in the democratic zone at the polling places didn't have a section for punching that out. Midway through the day, I found out that a friend of mine didn't vote because the absentee ballot that they sent him didn't have a democratic section even though he'd wanted this. Then I started hearing about precincts running out of democratic ballots. And pollsters giving people the wrong ballot and not letting them void it for the right one. And on and on and on with the various chaos. So I started wondering: did I do it right? Did my vote count? (I kept the stub but I can't figure out how to confirm whether or not my vote did count. Anyone know?)

It seems as though the problem that I was hearing was bigger than I imagined. Courage Campaign is reporting that 94,000 independent ("decline-to-state") voters in LA are having their ballots rejected because of this problem. The registrar in charge of LA County is refusing to check these ballots by hand, thereby invalidating the intent of those voters. As a LA resident who isn't sure if her vote counted, I'm pretty bloody peeved about this. I'm glad that the LA Sups ordered an investigation, but it seems like this should be obvious and not require external demands.

As I started fishing around to find out more information, I found something alarming. The San Francisco Chronicle originally reported that the Clinton campaign "is mystified by the Election Day complaints from the Obama team, since the rules for decline to state voters - specifically the requirement that request Democratic ballots - have been a matter of public record posted on the California Secretary of State's web site for months." (These quotes from the Clinton campaign were removed and the article's title altered in the version updated 7 hours later.) I hope to god that the Chronicle's article was changed because they inaccurately quoted the Clinton campaign.

As much as I'm a big fan of Obama, I'm a bigger fan of democracy. I believe that every vote counts, even those that disagree with me. I'm pretty annoyed that my registrar is telling reporters that voters were educated on this. I'm a very educated person who is obsessive about her right to vote and I didn't understand the bloody ballot. As an average citizen, I don't care that this requirement was on the website for months. And I sure as hell didn't look to either candidate for instructions on how to fill in the ballot. Voting instructions should be clear in the instructions that I'm given. And it wasn't. The ballot didn't tell me what I was registered. No one at the polling place told me what I was registered. All I knew was that I had a democratic ballot, thought I was registered democratic, and voted for #9. Oh, and I did it in blue pen because I did see the instruction that only black or blue pen would count.

Please please tell me that our democracy is not so broke that people's votes aren't being counted in this primary. I mean, if Courage Campaign is right and 94,000 votes in LA weren't counted, I'm scared. Then again, Chicago voters were told that broken pens have invisible ink. At least LA didn't stoop that low.

Category: politics

Tags: election voting corruption

   

Posted by zephoria at 5:10 PM | Comments (12) | TrackBack (0)

January 31, 2008

my February 5 voting ballot: Barack Obama and CA Propositions

It's election time. For the first time in my life, I'm excited about a primary. Why? My vote actually counts for once!! It's kinda a weird feeling and it makes me realize how much different it would be to vote if it were all about choosing delegates rather than a winner-takes-all scenario. I ended up taking the primary pretty seriously, researching the candidates and thinking long and hard about what my choice should be.

At first, I defaulted to identity politics. I mean, I've been dreaming of a woman president all my life. But then a friend of mine asked me if I'd vote for Condi just to have a women president and I was like omg no. So I decided that this was irresponsible and that I should sit and think about the issues more deeply.

Problem is that the issues aren't the issue - by and large, Barack and Hillary are on the exact same plan. Then they came to Los Angeles and one glaring difference became visible: Hillary is all about old media and Barack is all about new media. Hillary is totally in bed with big corporations (and Hollywood) and Barack embraced a lot of the innovative ideas put forward by independent startups and tech culture. This started to make me very nervous about Hillary. For me, net neutrality is a *HUGE* issue and I would hate to see the next president play nice with old media just to get some bribes.

This all started making me think about media and its relationship to the presidency. For better or worse, media plays a HUGE role in making a president and helping the president communicate to (or outright manipulate) the masses. I realized that Barack had an asset that few really thought through: Oprah Winfrey. I don't think that Oprah can necessarily get him elected, but if he were president, what I do think that she can do is help the masses understand the decisions at play. She's her own woman and I don't think that the White House could ever buy her off, but if she's invested, I strongly believe that she can help people understand sticky complex issues in an elegant way. This is going to be extremely important as we face the crisis in Iraq. Iraq is not a matter of pulling out/staying in. Both really really suck as solutions. Problem is that the mainstream discourse is binary and that's going to make things a mess for the next president. The economy and its implications are another piece of chaos. The environment is another issue. We need a president who can communicate to the masses and get support to make difficult changes in this country. I don't believe someone in Washington can do this alone and, damn, Oprah is about the best asset in the world for helping out.

Then I started thinking about the general election. Hillary is soooo divisive. I actually feel badly for her on this front, but I can't ignore that reality. People love her or hate her. She has enemies everywhere. She's going to have a hard time getting things done because of those enemies. She doesn't motivate young people to be engaged in politics like Barack does. And, frankly, I don't think that she can beat McCain. And that worries me. Cuz even if McCain isn't that bad, the idea of another term of Republican machinery SCARES THE LIVING SHIT OUT OF ME.

Finally, when I was in Davos, I expected everyone to be pro-Hillary and anti-Barack because of the whole "experience" thing. I was shocked to find that this was not the case at all. Most foreign diplomats and companies thought that Barack would be much better at negotiating with foreign powers than Hillary. They all knew that the candidates would have huge advisory teams that would help them understand what was going on. Even though Hillary knew more people already, they felt as though Barack would be more effective. (And most were extremely worried about how Bill would overshadow anything with Hillary... another sad reality.)

So, I made my decision and I'm going to vote with a level of enthusiasm unprecedented in my lifetime. I donated to his campaign and I'm going to vote for Barack Obama.

California Propositions

Before leaving for Davos, I threw a proposition party so that my friends could come together and collectively decide how to vote for California Propositions. Here's my slate for anyone who is interested (or any lazy person who wants someone to tell them how to vote). More notes over at Mindtangle.

CA Prop 91: NO (Not even the proponents are for it any longer.)

CA Prop 92: YES (This formula should've been redone long ago; community college is extremely important and, arguably, more important than HS ed.)

CA Prop 93: NO (I don't like fishy changes in term limits that suit the proponents and have unclear long-term effects.)

CA Prop 94-97: NO (Gaming contracts the benefit the top tribes at the cost of the smaller ones are extremely problematic and without clear audits, it's not clear that it will be the economic benefit that people believe.)

LA Prop S: YES (Yes, the 10% tax was illegal and so yes, this is an increase not a decrease in taxes. But the damage done by propositions in the past makes funding some of these necessary services really challenging and I strongly believe that we should modernize the phone tax and, more importantly, that companies using digital systems should pay per user not per company. This prop isn't ideal but it's necessary.)

Category: politics

Tags: election voting

   

Posted by zephoria at 3:20 AM | Comments (25) | TrackBack (0)

June 7, 2007

The Devil Came on Horseback

After WWII, my grandfather and grandmother moved to Khartoum in what is now Sudan. My aunt was born there but they left before my mother came into the world. My grandfather often told me that political tensions were already rising when he left, but he isn't one for talking details about these things. I've always been quite intrigued (and often disturbed) by what has and is happening in Sudan.

When Bich Ngoc Cao told me that i absolutely must see The Devil Came on Horseback, i decided to take a break from my current state of workaholicism to see it. Her recommendations are usually spot on and this film is mind-blowing. I knew of the atrocities in Darfur, but this film does an astounding job of really personalizing the stories of the people involved. It's deeply disturbing, showing the horrifying images of genocide through the lens of an American Marine Captain who is assigned to document the lives of but not protect the people of Darfur. At one point, he can no longer sit by and watch and so he returns home to the States to rally American politicians. He figures that if they just knew, they would be in there to stop it. Or if the American people just knew, they would make their government do something. As we know, the tragedy in Darfur continues.

On top of the amazing depiction of what is taking place, there's a simple message: raise a fuss, contact your politicians, make them know that you care and that you want them to do something. I am trying to convince myself to believe this could work, although i admit that i'm feeling very disillusioned with our political structure. Still, i do believe that it is important for the American people to understand what is taking place there. This is genocide and it is horrific. People are being brutally murdered because they are of the wrong race. The women are raped and tortured and people are burned alive. And, just like with Rwanda, we have turned a blind eye while China continues to fund this atrocity. I really recommend checking out this movie when it comes to your town (currently, it seems to be on the film festival circuit). Also, check out Save Darfur for more information on what's happening in Darfur.

Category: politics

Tags: darfur film

   

Posted by zephoria at 4:12 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0)

May 18, 2007

"Digital Handshakes on Virtual Receiving Lines"

I gave a short talk at the Personal Democracy Forum today. I put together a crib for anyone who wishes to get a sense for what i said. Very simple talk with one point: politicians should reach out and shake virtual hands with young people rather than just putting up flat profiles on social network sites. Anyhow, if you're interested, enjoy!

"Digital Handshakes on Virtual Receiving Lines"

Category: politics

Tags: talk PDF2007

   

Posted by zephoria at 11:57 AM | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

February 6, 2007

Los Angeles is green!

Tonight, i had the fortune of attending a Hollywood Hill event featuring Deputy Mayor Nancy Sutley. She spoke about the moves LA is making to turn itself into a green city. The event took place at the home of the producer of "An Inconvenient Truth" and the room was filled with truly engaged Hollywood types invested in social change. The conversation was fantastic but what astounded me was just how many cool projects are taking place in Los Angeles.

My favorite project concerns "bio solids" (a.k.a. crap). When you flush your toilet, your feces is diverted to an old oil chamber where it is left to decompose. As this happens, the shit lets off a bunch of methane which is then converted into energy for the city. (Don't worry - it's clean by then.) How cool is that? Apparently, we're the first city to really do this on a large scale.

Last year, 6% of the city's energy came from renewable resources. By 2010, the goal is to have 20% of it coming from renewable resources. There are projects involving solar power, wind power, methane, and all sorts of other things. There are also projects underway to encourage the reduction of energy consumption. Building developers who are going to be LEED compliant have a much easier time getting their permits. There's a group called 18 seconds working with large corporations to move everyone towards environmentally-friendly lightbulbs (lightbulbs can be changed in 18 seconds).

Apparently, in the 1990s, the city had all of these initiatives to move everyone to using low-flow toilets (giving them out for free across the city). The result was a 15% water savings. This is crucial considering LA has to get its water from all sorts of weird places. There are now initiatives underway to bring back the LA river (which was paved over in the 1930s as a flood prevention technique). This will allow more water, more green space, more bicycle lanes, and fewer movie-ified high speed car chases. There's also a million trees initiative where the city will plant a million trees by 2010 in areas that desperately need them. Aside from being pretty, trees are critical to environmental ecosystems because they like to eat carbon dioxide and turn it into oxygen.

I can't even remember all of the other initiatives i heard about tonite but i'm in awe of how conscious our city government is about these issues, how they are engaging with environmental organizations and city planners, how they are working on multiple levels to address environmental issues in the city, and how they are working to make it a better, more liveable city. I have to admit that i haven't been that proud to live in land-o-Hummers but this event made me feel much better about Los Angeles, or at least those in charge of the government.

Anyhow, yay Los Angeles! And now, if we can only figure out how to get community sidewalks and eyes on the street.... (And sssshh all of you haters out there.)

Category: politics

   

Posted by zephoria at 10:35 PM | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0)

January 2, 2007

prisoner 24601: teenage sex offenders

If you believe in the sex offender registery (and even if you don't), i'd really like you to read this article in the Atlantic Monthly: Why Is Genarlow Wilson in Prison?

It is the story of a 17 year old "good" kid who will spend 10 years in prison for child molestation and be forever on the sex offender registery for having consentual oral sex with a 15 year old. One of the interesting twists in this case is that this would not have been his fate had he had vaginal sex with her (oral is a felony; vaginal is a misdemeanor). This kid had no prior runins with the law; he was a football and track star, homecoming king, honor roll student. He was your picture-perfect kid who fought the law and the law won. Imagine if he was your kid.

Now, think for a moment about what it means that this sex offender list is being put to other purposes. Does this kid deserve to be banned from MySpace (or the numerous other spaces that are seeking to build restrictions based on this flawed list)? Does he deserve to be limited from living close to a school or park? Does he deserve to have to wear a tracker for life, to be permanently branded? This list is not being scrutinized; it is inherently flawed. We are punishing people over and over again. Double jeopardy was set up in the constitution so that we would not repeatedly try someone for a crime but this list is double punishment all the same. What happened to the belief that people can change that is at the root of our modern prison system? What happened to the Judeo-Christian value of forgiveness for ones sins?

The law has ruined this kid's lives. They have made him a criminal. It is one thing to believe in justice; it is another to turn people into slaves of the law.

Now every door is closed to me
Another jail. Another key. Another chain
For when I come to any town
They check my papers
And they find the mark of Cain
In their eyes I see their fear
`We do not want you here.'

Look down, look down... you'll always be a slave.

Category: politics

Tags: sexoffender registry myspace youth

   

Posted by zephoria at 4:41 PM | Comments (17) | TrackBack (0)

November 18, 2006

UCLA Police Taser a Student

Police officers at UCLA abuse their power by repeatedly taser one of their students. ::shudder:: Students videotape the entire incident, requesting identification from police who refuse to provide it. This makes me sick. Welcome to a police state.

For more information, see Blake Ross's detailed post. Also, the LA Times covers the students' protest and the efforts by UCLA to calm the furor by ordering an outside probe.

Category: politics

Tags: police taser UCLA

   

Posted by zephoria at 3:53 PM | Comments (12) | TrackBack (0)

November 8, 2006

Prop 83 blocked in court

For those of you who didn't obsessively watch the election results last nite, Prop 83 (the flawed sex offender one) passed 70/30. This is not at all surprising although what really gets my goat is the number of people who voted for it who didn't realize what it did. Every time i'd bring up 83 with people, they'd tell me they were all for it. So i'd tell them what all it would do and show them the fine print. They were horrified. I've managed to convince everyone i've talked with to vote against it (except the people at the CyberSafety event who believe that anything to stop sex offenders even if you kill the baby in the process is AOK). This drives me crazy because it's a classic example of ill-informed voters hurting everyone.

So, while i was really hoping that my message might have gotten out about 83, i knew that it was going to pass and i was prepared for that disappointment. I wasn't prepared for the immediate blockage of 83 by the courts: "U.S. District Judge Susan Illston, ruling on a lawsuit filed here early Wednesday, said the measure 'is punitive by design and effect' and likely unconstitutional." I really hope that this means that it might not go into effect because the law is so problematic and costly. It might also mean that, if it works its way up the courts, it might be blocked in other states. ::bounce::

Still, the problem stands: voters don't read the fine print when it comes to propositions. This means that many other propositions can pass if worded in a way to capitalize on people's fears. That REALLY upsets me and i'd like to know what to do about it.

So, all and all, it was a decent night. We have the House. Rumsfield resigned. We may get the Senate (but even if we don't, Cheney has to be the tie-breaker which is *fascinating*). Of course, we still have the Terminator terminating education in California. And far far far too many states banned gay marriage. And the reality is that no one voted _for_ the Democrats but _against_ the Republicans which means that we really shouldn't be celebrating per say. On the plus side, more people seemed to have come out to vote than have in a long long time. And it looks like a lot of young people came out too. But i still can't call that a victory because more does not mean close to all.

I'm also disturbed about something else. I watched election returns until it was clear no more info on Virginia or Montana was coming in last night. I couldn't help but think about how close the last few elections have been and how much money is being made off of election coverage. I remember being horrified when i realized that there's fine print at the end of Reality TV shows saying that the producers have input over who gets kicked out. In short, they make sure that the results are rigged so that people want to watch the show. The last few elections have felt like that - uber close elections meant to make people like me obsessively watch TV coverage all night, nearly memorizing all of the ads (i will definitely see Bobby on Thanksgiving). Please please please tell me these close calls aren't scripted. I really couldn't handle that.

Category: politics

   

Posted by zephoria at 3:14 PM | Comments (13) | TrackBack (0)

November 7, 2006

tis election day. vote dammit!

Say NO NO NO NO to Proposition 83 and Proposition 85! PLEASE! See my full slate.

Category: politics

   

Posted by zephoria at 4:42 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

November 3, 2006

voting issues, take n

Remember when i said that i couldn't vote in LA? I filed a complaint with the city about my inability to vote. I then learned that a bunch of my friends were in a similar position so i was unbelievably pissed. Luckily, i called up the nice San Francisco people and got them to emergency me an absentee and was all prepared to vote in SF. Then, late last nite, i got a call from some government official telling me that she had heard about my problem and had looked into it. She told me that i was now registered in LA and should have no problem voting. I asked if an absentee ballot was going to be rushed my way (since i'm in DC next Tuesday). She said that they had no record of me filing permanent absentee and that i had to remember to check the box. I said that i knew this and had done so on all three of my registration forms. She told me to hold on and i heard muttering and shuffling of papers in the background. I was then informed that she had my application right there and i had indeed checked permanent absentee and that she was extremely sorry. She explained that i couldn't get an absentee ballot on time but that i could go to Culver City City Hall and vote touchscreen. She gave me detailed information and told me to call her back directly if i ran into any problem. I asked her if i could have my friends call her and she said yes.

I immediately called my friends and told them to contact her. K did so right away - i had pressured her into registering ("for her own good") and so, when she finally decided to register, she wasn't pleased that she never got anything back once she did. She called up the lady this morning who immediately recognized my name and took care of K, making sure she too could vote. While this is all fine and well (and i'm glad that i can vote and i'm glad that K can vote), i'm not too thrilled that there seems to be many mistakes in the registration process. How many people aren't registered because of such oopses? Why do we even have to register? Why can't we automatically be registered simply by being citizens? ::grumble:: And we wonder why people don't vote.

Anyhow, i went to City Hall to vote. At first, i was pretty humored. There were people of all ages and backgrounds standing on line to do their civic duty. When i got to the front, i asked if i could use a paper ballot; they looked at me like i was the devil and told me that this was a touchscreen only station. I decided i should suck it up and figure out how this touchscreen shit works so i didn't argue. But OMG do i not feel secure about my vote. I went in and there was a big Diebold machine laughing at me. I was given a card that i had to put into the machine so that i could click a bunch of buttons on a screen and "submit" my vote. Did it count? I have no idea. I'm not even a technophobe and i don't trust that damn thing. One of the things that i love about voting in SF is that i have to tear off this piece of paper at the top of my ballot; that confirms my vote and i can always go back with it and say, find my vote. I'm one of those crazy people who even keeps her pieces of paper until well after the election. When i cast my ballot in SF, i get to see the machine read it and the number go up - i can always see how many people voted before me. Here in LA? I have no idea. And i'm sooo not confident about the database behind that thing. I asked if i could get a receipt for my voting and the people looked at me once again like i had horns. They said that it counted, that it was all in the computer. (Damn techno-fetishism.) I made a less-than-thrilled face. One guy say and said, here, take this and handed me a sticker. Rather than simply saying that i voted, this sticker has the gall to say "I voted touchscreen."

::sigh::

For the record, i want to state that no matter how fucked up this process is (and it's MAJORLY fucked up), it's critical that you get out and vote and fight for others' right to vote. Our ancestors fought to make this country a democracy. Lives were lost so that all men could vote, regardless of the color of their skin. The fight for women's suffrage was long and hard. Still, today, there are many around the world who don't have the privileges that we take for granted when it comes to voting. Regardless of what you believe, if you are an American, you have a civic and social responsibility to get out and vote on Tuesday. Furthermore, you have a responsibility to make certain that every citizen in this country can vote and be counted. Freedom means nothing if you aren't willing to fight for others' right to vote or if you aren't willing to get off your ass and vote yourself. Vote on November 7. Be counted, be heard.

i love my country
by which i mean
i am indebted joyfully
to all the people throughout its history
who have fought the government to make right
-- Ani Difranco

Category: politics

Tags: voting election

   

Posted by zephoria at 3:27 PM | Comments (13) | TrackBack (0)

November 2, 2006

my voting slate

I held a proposition party last night. For those who are not familiar with this, it's an event where i gather American friends to discuss the different propositions in California so that we can all be collectively informed. I've found that i often don't agree with the suggestions of major organizations but that i'm very politically opinionated. By bringing my friends together, we can split the research and educate each other. Plus, it's a good excuse for some wine.

I've decided to post my intended ballot here. If you violently disagree with something that i've listed, please comment and explain why (i'm happy to be convinced to vote otherwise). For those who tend to just vote whatever someone else says, you're welcome to use this. ::grin:: Although i've done the research for Los Angeles, i have to vote in San Francisco due to *#$&! voter registration fuckups. Thus, i'm including the propositions in both cities.

State Propositions:

• Proposition 1A: NO. Transportation Funding Protection. While money is needed for transportation projects, the uses here are too narrowly defined. Legislators should make decisions about the best allocation of these resources; they have more information than we do.
  
• Proposition 1B: NO. Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act. This is too focused on freeways, suburban sprawl, and moral panics; there is too little focus on public transit for such an expensive bond. Plus, it's a bond measure.
  
• Proposition 1C: YES. Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund. While this is a bond measure, it focuses on low-income groups that desperately need housing help (battered women, disabled, senior citizens) and there's no other good way that these groups will be helped.
  
• Proposition 1D: YES. Kindergarten-University Public Education. Again, sucks to be a bond but schools are in desperate need of repair and damn thee Prop 13.
  
• Proposition 1E: Yes. Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention. Again, more sucking on the bond part but we also know that the federal government is not going to repair CA levees and while this doesn't solve the problem, it definitely helps. Not great, but better than nothing.
  
• Proposition 83: NO NO NO NO NO NO NO.... FUCKING HELL NO! Sex Offenders. ::grumble::
  
• Proposition 84: ? Water Quality, Safety and Supply. I don't know where to go on this - it helps central valley in the near-term but is unsustainable.
  
• Proposition 85: NO GAAAAH NO NO NO NO NO... BAD BAD BAD! Anti-Choice, Anti-Youth Waiting Period and Parental Notification. I can't believe this is up again. On top of all of the fucked up aspects of this legislation, one key side effect is that it will drastically increase parental child abuse. Bad bad bad.
  
• Proposition 86: YES. Tax on Cigarettes. While i don't like how this tax will be leveraged primarily on poor people who addictions, i do support cig taxes that channel their money into medical programs instead of advertising programs. I also think that a drastically huge tax will shock some people into quitting.
  
• Proposition 87: YES. Alternative Energy. While the market will force companies into thinking about alternative energy, this will help fund more basic research. I wish we could tax foreign oil too but that's a federal issue.
  
• Proposition 88: NO. Education Funding. It breaks my heart to say no to this but it's too vague to be useful.
  
• Proposition 89: YES. Political Campaigns, Public Financing. I'm all down with limiting corporations and taxing them when it comes to their power over political campaigns.
  
• Proposition 90: NO. Government Acquisition, Regulation of Private Property. This is a false eminent domain issue that would give developers far too much control over environmental and other local initiatives about what is best for a town.
  

San Francisco:

• Proposition A: Yes. School Bonds. I hate bond but damn thee Prop 13. Plus, all reports say that this has been working since the pass of the original bond measure.
  
• Proposition B: ?. Telecommuting for Board of Supervisors. I don't get it - it seems pointless and a waste of a proposition.
  
• Proposition C: Yes. Salaries of Top City Officials. Seems appropriate.
  
• Proposition D: Yes. Privacy of Personal Information. Duh - don't sell personal info just cuz you have access.
  
• Proposition E: ?. Downtown Parking Tax. It'd be great to lower cars but i'm not sure how this will be spent or who this will hurt.
  
• Proposition F: Yes. Paid Sick Leave Requirement. Quality of life issue - when are we going to learn from Europe?
  
• Proposition G: ?. Limitations on Chain Stores. On one hand, i hate chain store takeover of SF; on the other, i'm not sure if this is the best thing for people given that many people can't afford boutiques and the indie restaurants that pop up. I'm leaning yes because of my poshy views but i don't know if this is the best approach.
  
• Proposition H: Yes. Relocation Expenses for No Fault Tenant Eviction. Helps those who are required to move cuz it's god-awfully hard to do in SF as a poor person; especially helps seniors.
  
• Proposition I: ?. Make the Mayor Meet with City Council "On The Record." I love transparency but this is a catfight proposition concerning Gavin and i'm not sure this is the way to do this.
  
• Proposition J: YES. Impeach Bush/Cheney. Policy statement....
  
• Proposition K: ?. Seniors and Disabled Housing Protections. Always good to do, but there's not much substance.
  

Los Angeles:

• Proposition H: ?. Affordable Housing Bond. On one hand, want to help people who cannot afford to buy houses but it's a huge bond and it doesn't address the root causes of lack of housing. Leaning yes but feel icky since the building developers love it.
  
• Proposition J: Yes. Regional Fire Stations. Helps correct a dumb problem with Prop F from a while ago.
  
• Proposition R: No. Councilmember Term Limits. While i'm not convinced that term limits are the best thing, i hate anti-term limit propositions written by the people affected by them. I would've been more inclined if this didn't count for anyone currently in the council out of principle. Plus, i hate that there are all of these ethical bits tacked on to make people vote for it; that's illegal.
  

Anyhow, this is my general take after doing some research. Any thoughts or suggestions? I should note that i have no qualms about not voting on a proposition that i don't have a good yes/no about. It took me a long time to learn that this is not a scan-tron and that it's AOK to choose not to vote on a particular measure. It takes some undoing given my academic tendencies to think that there has to be an answer but i'm finally OK with it.

Finally, please please please vote NO NO NO NO NO on Propositions 83 and 85. And then vote NO again. And convince everyone you know to vote NO. Please. ::grumble::grumble::grumble:: stupid propositions.

Category: politics

Tags: voting election propositions

   

Posted by zephoria at 4:39 PM | Comments (13) | TrackBack (0)

October 30, 2006

at Diebold we're changing democracy, one vote at a time

(for Joe, tx Ry)

Category: politics

   

Posted by zephoria at 9:18 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

October 26, 2006

guess who can't vote in LA?

Gaaaah! So, check this one out. I moved to Los Angeles. When i did so, i changed my driver license and changed my registration. I never received anything so three weeks ago, i registered to vote again by filling out the form online, getting the paper thing that they send you with everything filled out and sending it back. Still, nothing. So i called the Secretary of State hotline who told me to call LA County. I called them and they told me that i improperly reregistered to vote when i moved back to LA. I was like, move back to LA? I didn't move back - i just moved here. They then proceeded to tell me that i lived in some address in Long Beach and that the registration material they sent there bounced so i was not registered. I was like, i never lived in Long Beach, and they were like, says here you did. I said this did not make sense, that couldn't be me. She responded by yelling at me that i was in the books under Long Beach. I asked if there was any way we could fix this and she said that i should send in another application or go to the DMV. I said that it was after October 23. She told me that was my problem, that i couldn't vote in this election because i didn't send in an application. I told her i did send in an application and that i even went through the process online so they'd have me recorded there. She said they didn't. By this point, she was yelling at me and i was in tears so i hung up on her.

I called back to the Secretar of State (still crying) and the guy there said that the local jurisdictions have control over this so there's nothing that he could do except that i could file a complaint. Damn right i want to file a complaint. I can't even imagine what the Bob Smith's of the world go through with people telling them they are someone else.

Luckily, i called up SF and i'm still on the books there (even though they didn't send anything to my old house according to the people who live there who i asked last week). So i just need to fax in an absentee request and i can vote in SF. This pisses me off since i want to vote on local ballot measures but at least i can vote against the evil state measures.

But WTF? Anyone who knows me knows how obsessed i am with voting. Hell, in 2004, i flew my ass to SF to vote and then flew immediately back because i hadn't received my absentee ballot. I drag everyone i know into registering. I register multiple times each election just to make sure i'm registered. Imagine the people who aren't nearly as obsessive. How many people aren't going to be able to vote because the city thinks they are someone else? How many people are not going to be able to vote because the city just didn't receive their registration? How many people aren't going to vote because when they tried to correct their registration the city's reps yelled at them? Why does it have to be this hard to vote? The city certainly has no trouble finding me when it comes to taxes. In fact, every city i ever lived in finds me tax time. Gaaaaaah!

Category: politics

Tags: election voting

   

Posted by zephoria at 4:01 PM | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)

October 24, 2006

Prop 83: Sex Offenders is not what it seems. SAY NO!

California Proposition 83: Sex Offenders ("Jessica's Law") is an example of a terrible law that will pass because of good framing (who on earth is in favor of sex offenders?). I don't believe that i can stop it from passing, but i want to beg anyone who can listen to please please please Vote NO on 83. Please continue on to read why; it's really important.

On the outset, the law seems like a good thing. It would increase the length and severity of penalties for specified sex offenses, eliminate early releases, and extend parole. Here's where things get tricky.. It would also require GPS devices for registered sex offenders (per Meghan's Law) for the rest of their lives. It would also limit sex offenders from living within 2000 feet of any school or park. Again, these might not seem so bad, but here are some reasons for which they are:

• Not all sex offenders are child molesters. Included on the list of registered sex offenders are: adults who rape adults (including domestic rape), people who commit sodomy (often used to go after gay men), people who engage in oral sex (including consensual oral sex and oral sex while in jail), and people who commit statutory rape. While rape is horrific, this punishment does nothing to prevent it from happening, but it punishes many in the process.
• Schwarzenegger recently signed laws that expand the penalty for child rape and calls for the electronic tracking of high-risk sex offenders (i.e. child rapists) while on parole. The new laws even ban sex offenders from loitering around schools and parks which is much more effective than banning them from living close to a school. In other words, the meat of this bill has been signed in and the bill only expands it for all sex offenders over all time (even if they have done nothing wrong in 20 years). (see OC Register)
• All of San Francisco is within 2000 feet of a school or park; most of Los Angeles is. This means that sex offenders cannot live in major metropolitan regions. This exports the problem to rural regions where there are less resources to handle cases. This also means that offenders will have a much harder time getting jobs and homes which means they are likely to commit violent acts again (remember: rape is not about sex; it's about power). Syphoning perverts to suburban and rural regions (where most children live) does not do anything to help children. (see: CALCASA)
• Residency restrictions do nothing to stop the 80-90% of cases where children are raped in their own homes. Furthermore, it reduces the likelihood that they will be reported. (see CJCJ)
• The vast majority of rapists are known to their victims; this reduces the likelihood that domestic rape will be reported.
• 86% of sex offenders are never reported; this will make sure that even more go unreported. (see: CALCASA)
• Very few child molesters pick their victims from schools/parks and of those who do, it is almost never what they do the second time. Furthermore, keeping them from living near parks/schools has never actually stopped those that do.
• A very common tactic of predators is that they marry single mothers to go after their children. This does absolutely nothing to stop this (nor would banning marriage).
• This will cost the State upwards of $100M a year; this money could be better spent on prosecuting sick fucks who are found out (only a small fraction are actually prosecuted due to lack of funds).
• GPS companies are rallying for it - they will make millions.
• GPS does not work in BART. It does not work in parking garages. It doesn't even work reliably in malls. There are other location-based technologies that could do the same job with more accuracy and reliability (such as mobile phone positioning), but Prop 83 only specifies GPS. (Tx Liz)
• Those who want to get out of these devices will have an easy time - they can pound them, cut them, destroy them. They cost $3500 a piece and must be replaced every 6 months because they break so easily.
• Many towns have laws regarding sex offenders that make sense for their towns; this overrides them in a one-size-fits all way that is not helpful for anyone and it takes agency away from local neighborhoods to deal with risks in their area.

This law does not make people safer; it only makes them feel safer.

I'm all in favor of doing things to stop crimes against children, but let's use our money and efforts to do something that will actually prevent crimes rather than something that will make us feel like something is being done. Let's make sure we prosecute these men (and jail them for a long long time); let's make sure we educate young people to come forward. Let's separate high risk (likely to repeat) sex offenders from one-time sex offenders.

Don't get me wrong - i'm not in favor of child molesters and i'm all too familiar with the experience of rape. I've spent a good chunk of my life trying to stop violence against women and girls; i want to see real action, not politics when it comes to this issue. This is a terrible terrible terrible law that will not prevent crimes, but will cost the State money that could be used to really address this problem. The problem is that it's passing 7:1. Please, if there's any chance in hell of stopping this, please help me do so.

More Information:

For a fantastic panel discussion on Prop 83, please listen to NPR's The Forum.

Many organizations are opposed to Prop 83, including the California Coalition on Sex Offending, Progressive Christians Uniting, Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice, California Attorneys for Criminal Justice, various queer organizations, the ACLU, the Criminal Legal Justice Foundation, the Santa Cruz Commission to Prevent Violence Against Women, the Los Angeles Times, the Orange County Register, and the California Coalition Against Sexual Assault (CALCASA). Check out CALCASA's blog

Category: politics

Tags: prop83 sexoffenders rape

   

Posted by zephoria at 6:23 PM | Comments (30) | TrackBack (0)

May 24, 2006

"Not Ready to Make Nice"

Forgive, sounds good
Forget, I'm not sure I could
They say time heals everything
But I'm still waiting

I'm through with doubt
There's nothing left for me to figure out
I've paid a price
And I'll keep paying

I'm not ready to make nice
I'm not ready to back down
I'm still mad as hell and
I don't have time to go round and round and round
It's too late to make it right
I probably wouldn't if I could
'Cause I'm mad as hell
Can't bring myself to do what it is you think I should

I know you said
Can't you just get over it
It turned my whole world around
And I kind of like it

(The Dixie Chicks)

Category: politics

   

Posted by zephoria at 12:37 AM | Comments (36) | TrackBack (0)

April 2, 2006

why i oppose HR 4437

When i posted about the teen walkout, i wanted to highlight how excited i am that students are speaking out for something that they believe, for something that they know is wrong. Embedded in my post was my disdain for HR 4437, but i did not fully articulate my own views. The comments that followed made it clear that i need to explain why i oppose HR 4437.

The status of undocumented workers in this country is very tricky. Over the years, we have looked the other way as immigrants enter our country illegally and work doing the most grueling labor that no citizen will do. We have turned a blind eye because our economy depends on that cheap labor. Some employers have taken this to a new level and slavery in this country is at an all-time high. The abuse of immigrants is atrocious. There are no labor laws to protect them, no social security, no social services. In most places where undocumented workers live and work, there is a social contract: behave, work hard, and no one will turn you in. Undocumented workers stay because, even with these atrocious work conditions, their lives are better here than where they came from; their opportunity is greater.

Our approach is not sustainable, nor is it morally just. Thus, the question emerges: what do we do about the 20 MILLION illegal aliens living in the United States? This question is both a moral and a practical question.

Many of these people have been living in the United States for decades. They no longer have homes in their country of origin. They have children who are citizens of America. They have obeyed the laws, paid taxes and worked harder than most of us can imagine. There is nothing morally just about treating these individuals as criminals and expelling them. They have done their time, they have paid their dues. And we have always treated them like the trash of the earth.

Some people argue that these people don't deserve to stay because they did not get visas, did not follow the rules and that it is unfair to legal immigrants. Unfortunately, this argument misses the class dynamic that is critical to the story of undocumented workers. The American visa system is set up to welcome wealthy, educated individuals into white collar jobs. Take a look at how many people get visas to work on farms, in meat packing factories or as janitors. These are not the visas that we offer; most undocumented workers are not eligible for the visas we do offer.

Once an individual is in the United States illegally, it is very difficult for them to begin the process to become a citizen. You cannot apply for a green card if you are here illegally. Thus, there are people who have been here for 20 years and have not taken the steps to become citizens; they have simply worked hard to remain undetected because they do not know of a better way.

HR 4437 is not the answer. While the adjustments to penalties for child abuse and other atrocious acts are logical, what makes HR 4437 problematic is actually its adjustments to employment. By requiring mandatory employment identification, people who have been working in this country for decades will be forced out of jobs with no recourse. This section aims to starve out the population, to force law abiding undocumented workers to leave. Certainly, there will be an even darker underground and many desperate undocumented workers will be forced to turn to more dangerous work in an attempt to stay in the country. There is no doubt this will also increase gang activity and other illegal activities. Racial tensions will rise and violence will erupt, all because of desperation.

I can respect that we need to move to an above ground market, but we cannot turn our backs on those who have been working hard for years. We need to provide ways in which law abiding undocumented workers can come forward without fear of expulsion and apply for citizenship and visas. As we move towards an above-ground system, we need to temporarily forgive undocumented workers for certain crimes committed out of desperation to stay in the past (such as social security number fraud).

I am also very concerned about the sections on "gangs." What is the legal definition of a gang? It worries me greatly that people can be deported or refused admission for presumed association with gangs. It also worries me that the Attorney General can designate any group or association as a street gang. (Why do i have a sneaking suspicion that i would be considered a gang member for my affiliation with Burning Man?) I completely understand why the government wants to deport people for illegal activities, but i worry about the guilty until proven innocent framing of this section of HR 4437. And i really worry about the guilt through association implications. Didn't we learn anything from the McCarthy era?

People ask why it is so significant that teens walked out. These teens are legal; they are citizens. They are speaking out for a population that is silenced, a population that cannot be visible. They are doing so on school hours because that makes the most impact. Even with the knowledge that they will be fined and given detention, they walked out. Frustrated teachers argued that this is foolish, that their parents came here to give them an education and they aren't even trying. While these teachers have the best intentions, students have a better grasp on reality. They know that their parents are at risk of being deported. They know that they are mostly not eligible for good jobs that depend on an education; they are going to do the kinds of work their parents do. They are living a working class reality and are completely alienated from it. It is the saddest aspect of our failed education system and our unacknowledged class hierarchy.

Unfortunately, this political regime is doing an amazing job of approaching world politics with brute force and xenophobia. HR 4437 is no different. No wonder the world hates us. I am glad people are thinking about how to handle undocumented workers; i just wish that folks would have more compassion and understanding of the dynamics and lives of people who have worked fucking hard to fatten our privileged asses. Most undocumented workers are not criminals and they should not be treated as such. They are good people, trying really hard to make their lives and the lives of their families better.

On a personal note, i spoke with a neighbor about this bill. She's been here illegally for almost a decade; she has two small children that she works hard to support. When i brought it up, her eyes got wide with fear. I told her not to worry, that i am on her side; this gave her much relief. It is clear that she's very scared. She told me she didn't understand this bill. She pays taxes, she works hard, she obeys laws, she is trying really hard. She doesn't know what to do. I wish i could tell her not to worry, that everything will be OK. But i have to admit that i've lost faith in the humanity of this country.

Category: politics

Tags: hr4437 immigration xenophobia

   

Posted by zephoria at 2:04 AM | Comments (43) | TrackBack (0)

December 15, 2005

should i participate in a government panel?

I'm torn and i need some advice. I was asked to be on a panel at an upcoming CIA conference "with the objective of providing extensive insight into how terrorists can and likely will use cyberspace for influence purposes." They want to understand how blogs and Friendster work. They seem to be running a series of conferences, including a cyber one, one with religious and non-profit groups, one with advertising and PR groups, and one with entertainment and gaming folks... all to get "insight" from experts to understand the terrorist schtuff.

My first inclination is to object on moral grounds. I am violently opposed to PATRIOT and how the government and military are using technology to track civilians under the umbrella of finding terrorists. I object to the culture of fear being perpetuated and the "if you aren't with us, you're against us" attitude. I have major systemic issues with our government and its exploitation of power. Major issues.

Of course, part of me wonders if i can learn from these folks and use this platform to change people's minds (or maybe be a little bit subversive). The audience is purportedly "group of between 40 and 50 high level intelligence managers and policy analysts from the Central Intelligence Agency, U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Intelligence Agency, U.S. Strategic Command, U.S. Special Operations Command, Office of Naval Intelligence, and various other unified military commands."

I'm also worried because the terrorists make sense to me in the same way that punks who steal and kids who blow up schools make sense. These groups feel as though they will never have agency within the system because the systemic hegemony is too oppressive. They seek to overthrow the oppressor through brute force, to disrupt the system from its core and rattle the foundations that blind everyone to the problems of the system. Of course, in every case, the system does a good job in keeping the mainstream blinders on so that these acts are only ever seen as wrong instead of as attempts to wake up the mass zombie culture. I don't support these groups' violence and i think machismo clouds the efforts to make change. But it's the same attitudes that make Fakesters and goths utterly lovable to me - same concept, no violence.

Given this perspective, i'm worried that there's no way that i could ever change the minds of military folks because the core values are so different. I'm worried that my efforts to influence will simply be repurposed and manipulated, no matter what i do. I'm worried that i will become a tool of the kinds of oppression that i loathe and the lack of understanding that angers me. I don't want to eliminate terrorism by force; i want to see a cultural change that makes it unnecessary and unvalued. But is there any way that i can do that by participating? I'm not sure...

Anyhow, i'm torn. Thoughts? Perspectives?

It's funny... i sat in traffic on the Bay Bridge for an hour last night and i kept reading the bumper sticker in front of me. "Join the army and go to exotic distant lands so you can meet exciting new people and then kill them." ::sigh:: I don't want to be that anthropologist that helps the colonial empire destroy the world and abuse its privileges.

Category: politics

   

Posted by zephoria at 10:47 AM | Comments (46) | TrackBack (2)

December 9, 2005

favorite non-profits/foundations?

Call it tithing or call it tax-savings, i'm a strong believer that privileged people should give a portion of their income to support causes that make the world a better place. For this reason, i can't help but smile at 10 over 100 which asks people to promise to give 10% of what they make over $100K. (Of course, personally, i think that those who make over $100K should be giving a percentage of their total income, not just what they make over $100K. And i think that many of us who don't make $100K should still be giving back. Also, i prefer to make a promise to myself than promise a website. But still, it's a good idea and one that i support.)

In my donation, i always ask not to receive any newsletters or other junk mail and i ask not to have my name sold. Email is fine, but i don't want to be supporting the postal service or the paper mills with my donation. Of course, few organizations listen. At the end of each year, i re-evaluate the organizations i give to and donate again to those who sent me nothing over the year and send nothing to those who sent me stamps, packets, or other crap.

I am looking for some new organizations (and particularly foundations) that i should be considering. I am looking for 501(c)3 organizations that will not send me junk mail. I am particularly fond of organizations/foundations that work on both local and global scales, feminist and anti-racism organizations, youth-positive organizations, and environmental organizations. I am not interested in supporting religious organizations or any organization that permits discrimination of any kind (most notably on the basis of gender identity or sexuality). Do you have any that you recommend?

Already on my list of awesome organizations are:
- V-Day
- EFF
- Goma Student Fund
- PAWS
- City at Peace

Category: politics

Tags: tithing non-profit

   

Posted by zephoria at 3:34 PM | Comments (35) | TrackBack (0)

November 9, 2005

election day: analysis of California Proposition 73

hold me down
i am floating away
into the overcast skies
over my home town
on election day -- Ani

When the election results started pouring in tonight, i was in a state of horror. Initially, it looked like Proposition 73 was going to pass. Thankfully, with most of the returns in, it looks like it will die a well-deserved death.

Some folks have asked why i am so obsessed with Proposition 73 and i feel the need to articulate the problems that emerge because of it. First, take a look at the propaganda:

• Protect Our Daughters - Parents have a right to know

  

• Campaign for Teen Safety - Their safety, our responsibility: If she can't come to me, I just want to keep her safe

  
  

There are some amazing linguistic messages there: protect vs. safety, right vs. responsibility. The Yes folks give parents ultimate power while the No folks are invested in youth agency. The imagery from the Yes folks is directly targeted as parents and speaks past youth, never inviting them to participate in a dialogue about this proposition. The Yes folks are speaking a protectionist rhetoric while the No folks are speaking the language of respect. Protectionist rhetoric comes from a place of ageism, a belief that there is a clear division between adults and youth: adults know what they're doing; youth do not.

Unfortunately, ageism is one of the least acknowledged forms of oppression in this society. As a society, we're pretty shitty to our youngest and oldest members, thinking them too stupid to deserve agency. These groups often have no voice, no power. Adults will never go back to being youth and they can't see life from a youth's perspective. Instead, they project their own needs onto youth. They create hazing rituals following the "we did this, you should too" mentality. Why do we try to strip those we have power over of any agency?

As with most political propaganda, the problems are not addressed. The target market for the Yes folks is clearly middle-upper class parents. Yet, the effects of this proposition would place undue burden on poor or working class teens, abandoned and abused teens. I think back to the time that i spent hanging out with teens on Haight. Many of them came from abused families and found the street to be safer. Unfortunately, these are teens are quite susceptible to rape and unwanted pregnancies. Can you imagine them needing permission from parents?

There is no doubt that parents should know, but this does not mean the government should mandate it. Parents need to earn the respect of their children, not demand obedience. Parents are informed when parents engender a trusting relationship. But when parents don't, teens should be able to turn to those that they do trust. This is not to say that there aren't fucked up stories... the Yes folks certainly highlight them. But what they don't highlight is what the consequences would be on abused youth. And sadly, there are far more abused youth getting pregnant in this state than sad stories like Holly Patterson (who wouldn't be covered under Prop 73 anyhow since she was 18).

I'm actively pro-choice, but this doesn't mean that i like abortions or want to see youth getting them. I want to structure a society where youth don't have to face that choice, but if they do, they have one to make. I want to see parents be supportive and trying to build a meaningful relationship with their children based on trust and respect. I don't want to see oppression and regulation, ageism and condescension - this destroys our society. And it pains me that people don't realize this.

Of course, Lakoff has gotten far too deep inside my head. I know the response... good kids don't get into those situations... good parents make their children behave... the world is evil and a good parent has to protect his kids... you can't solve a sin with a bigger sin... God, it makes me angry. I wish Dobson a good long painful spanking.

Category: politics

Tags: proposition73 election youth abortion

   

Posted by zephoria at 1:48 AM | Comments (10) | TrackBack (1)

October 26, 2005

pre-election party

One of my favorite things to do each year is to throw a pre-election party where friends gather to discuss different candidates and propositions (because we live in California). It's a good excuse to hang out with friends, drink some wine and inform each other about the upcoming election. Each person takes a candidate or a proposition and researches the pros/cons and which organizations/people are supporting or opposing them/it. I'm a strong believer that every citizen in this country has a responsibility to inform themselves and vote.

Last night, i threw one such party and we had a blast dis