Specters Beware!

So I'm back here writing, this time post-election and looking at the changing Senate. Arlen Specter has now been retired by the Democratic voters within the state of Pennsylvania and not at the time that best suits him. Down in Arkansas Senator Lincoln was dealt a devastating blow by Bill Halter, but she still has a run-off to try and prevent a liberal from taking her place after years of serving at the behest of corporation instead of her constituency. North from there, Rand Paul, son of Ron, beat the Republican party's favorite to succeed Senator Bunning for the Republican nomination.

What does this all mean? Do we have a revolt against long-term politicians? Is everyone that's in bed with Wall Street and the rolodex of the Fortune 500 on their way out? Well one thing that is for sure, the faces, they are a changin'.

From RawStory:

Insurgent US Republican voters in Kentucky routed their party's establishment candidate and selected iconoclastic political outsider Rand Paul on Tuesday night, a clear show of anger at Washington ahead of November elections to decide control of the US Congress.

Similarly, Democrats in Pennsylvania appeared to have ended the political career of Sen. Arlen Specter, one of the state's best known politicians who became a Democrat after Obama's election in an effort to prolong his time in Congress.

Democrats also managed to hold onto the Pennsylvania congressional seat formerly held by deceased Rep. John Murtha with the victory of Mark Critz. The race was heavily watched and hyped as a predictor of voter mood in the lead-up to November's elections.

What it says, and to concur with what I mentioned yesterday morning, is that a small but dedicated bloc of voters can precipitate major changes. Reports of low voter turnout were a plenty and definitely not surprising. So in a nutshell, Americans have become extremely apathetic (even with the already low voter turnout rates from years past) and those that aren't have tremendous influence with their votes. And that is why the teabaggers get to celebrate a nominee they helped choose in Rand Paul. That is why liberals are enthused (myself among them) that Halter and Sestak did so well last night.

It just goes to show, if people wake up and participate in their government, their ability to effect change and use power is mind boggling.

It's An Incumbent's World In NY

The politicians were patting themselves on the back last week for allowing one of their comrades in the state senate to vote for the budget after she had fallen ill, going so far as to hit back against the press that has slammed them for their corruption and greed. Yet when you take a good look at what is going on in Albany whatever the Malcolm Smiths say in response to their critics is mostly fabricated.

So we should vote these corrupt bastards out, right? Well not so fast, the DN's Henry Stern tells us why that is highly unlikely to happen, even if the politician needs to be kicked to the curb.

From The NY Daily News:

The first is gerrymandering. The boundaries of existing districts have been carefully drawn to include areas where the incumbent is popular and exclude areas where potential opponents may reside. The Legislature has repeatedly rejected efforts to provide nonpartisan districting, because the current system gives incumbents districts that have been made-to-order for their political convenience. There's no sign of this changing anytime soon.

The second major advantage office-holders enjoy is free mailing privileges. For most of the year, incumbents send out illustrated brochures, styled as reports to constituents, but largely consisting of self-serving prose about the incumbent's accomplishments and photographs of himself, alone, with children or with grateful senior citizens.

Although these "reports" may not be mailed for a 90-day period before an election, the incumbent will have been sending these advertisements for the preceding year and nine months of his two-year term.

When you factor in that most incumbents have served for many terms - the average tenure exceeds 10 years - the public gains familiarity with the incumbent, even if they have no clear idea of who he is or exactly what he does.

Then you have to navigate New York's antiquated petition-signature process, get around the pork legislators are allowed to bring to their district and of course the cost of dealing with the expense of advertising in the #1 media market in the country. That is why over 90% of incumbents never leave their office until they are good and ready.

And that doesn't just apply to our state government. That is the way it works in the city as well. Term limits was supposed to help curb the powers of incumbency, but we all saw how the powerful politicians (see Mayor Bloomberg, Speaker Quinn and 28 others) were able to skirt the laws that the public had put in place to prevent such abuse.

Either one of two things must happen to right this ship we are all on. Reinstituting term limits for the city...and a new law for the state would help to some degree. It was starting to work in NYC and that is exactly why Bloomberg and Quinn got rid of it. Or, we could completely overhaul our government so that gerrymandering isn't allowed, pork is cut and the election process is majorly overhauled. Yeah, that is a tall order, so maybe we should start with term limits and go from there...preferably in a quick fashion so that clean elections follows soon after.