Patriots: Only Free-market Capitalists?

     This year's tax day was a monumental occasion, resulting in several hundred tea parties, and several thousand jokes involving protesters and interesting sexual techniques. My colleague Erich Stremel writes about how he appreciates and agrees with these oh-so-American methods of civic participation and how he understands Governor Perry's recent statements endorsing the Tea Party movement. He focuses on America's history of protesting taxes and and Perry's reference to today's protesters as "patriots" carrying on the spirit of our ancestors. According to Stremel, President Obama has started his administration with good intentions and ideas but is overstepping his constituents' wishes in passing this stimulus package.

     I understand Stremel's point of view; he articulates it well and, I have to say, in a much more even-tempered manner than some of the activists recently protesting. He takes time to examine Mr. Obama's perspective, one of earnest concern for his voters, but respectfully disagrees with his course of action. When weighed against the angry and bombastic tactics of other tea party participants, Stremel's calm assessment of the problem is a much more effective voice for the movement.

     Apart from the fact that Stremel and I disagree ideologically, he presents his opinions logically for the most part. However, I do have an issue with the underlying implication of his article, which seems to be that Americans who do not push for low taxes are somehow less patriotic than fiscally conservative Americans. This is probably not Stremel's intention, but this is the message I hear from Perry and other zealous governors when they use the term "patriot." Is it so unpatriotic and treasonous to suggest that our government should spend money to provide us with essential services? I know how Texas is: mentioning raising taxes is equivalent to suggesting reviving Hitler and placing him in charge. But we've been paying taxes since America was founded, regardless of the party in office. The most recent objection to this basic governmental function seems suspiciously like a power play by a party that has lost its influence, a party desperate to regain its hold over the public. Republicans are quick to accuse their rivals, but it's an exercise in futility to exclusively blame ANY party in office for ANY economic crisis, because they all contributed to it because they are all the same: before they are Republicans or Democrats, they are capitalists.

     This tangent goes beyond the scope of Stremel's article. His only intentions are to applaud the "patriots" for their courage in standing up to a (so far) popular administration and to remind those of us dubious of the tea partiers' actions that dissent is in our cultural makeup. As for the rest of the conservatives trying to figure out their new place in politics, I would recommend taking a page out of Stremel's book. Make an effort to consider the other side of the issue and use what you learn to craft a solid argument. And think before you speak!

Civic duty, and old people.

     And I forgot to pick up my sticker... It's OK, I'll only be voting for THE REST OF MY LIFE, so there will be plenty of opportunities to get that stupid little sticker in the future. (BTW, I've never understood the purpose of that announcement: "I Voted!" Do we need to shame everyone else with our civic participation so much that we must proudly display it on our lapels and then refuse to talk about our choice of candidates if asked? Oh, Americans!)

     I left the polls today feeling pumped, very inappropriately laughing and talking in the Shriners' Temple/funeral home that housed the early voting. My husband said as we left, "Do only old people vote?" I had to think about that for a minute. Granted, we're probably not going to see ANY young people on a Monday afternoon in Allandale, much less at an early voting location. But he makes a valid point. When questioning all of our peers, we both got the same answers. "Oh, that's coming up, isn't it? I really should do that this year, but I don't know who to vote for."

     And therein lies the problem. The actual voting process today took a total of 5 minutes, 4 of which were occupied by all the old people there--both voters and election officials--trying to figure out what was going on. Even on election day, council elections garner such little turnout that lines are rarely long, so clearly there's little time involved in this part of voting. So why are people (and young people especially) so indifferent about voting in local elections? It must be because of the difficulty involved in choosing the candidates. As much as everybody likes to claim otherwise, voting is very hard.

     While researching the candidates in order to vote in this (my first) council election, I began to realize how little information there is circulating before the election. Austinites have few significant sources of "unbiased" information on the candidates; the Statesman and the Chronicle, primarily, and more recently, a corps of bloggers putting their opinions out in cyberspace. When compared to the fine-toothed comb raked over national elections, the coverage of local elections can leave voters a little bewildered. Some of this lack of information can be attributed to campaign finance restrictions, which limit the candidates' exposure around Austin, especially to people that are not already looking for the information.

     Another obstacle to easy choice is the similarities between candidates. All those running for mayor/council seats have a nasty habit of sounding exactly like their opponent(s), going so far as to have debates full of complete agreements. Of course, this isn't exclusive to local government, but without party identification, voters are left with news clips, sound bites, and website campaign promises to wade through. Even once I had cast my vote, I went home and continued to research the candidates, partly out of confidence and partly out of buyer's remorse. In the end, I am confident with my choices, and I sincerely hope that those I pick will win.

     But though this election might not have been the most thrilling, I'm proud that I trudged through the information and made my choice. All corniness and patriotism aside, voting is an important way to have your voice heard on the issues that affect you most. And these council elections are the most important because, after all, all politics is local, and these decisions will directly affect my most immediate environment. If that's not something to get excited about, I don't know what is.


GO VOTE!