Back from voting

Favorite local candidate name: Judge Proud was up for re-election. Voted against him -- not because he sounds like a character from John Bunyan, but because I don't support judges from the Waterboarding Party.

Today was also my first opportunity to vote to remove the Delaware County judge who last summer, in Sea Isle, N.J., I overheard ranting about how Upper Darby was "turning into Nairobi" and "going to Hell." Voting against racist judges is a Good Thing.

Local elections like this make it difficult to cast an informed vote. I pulled the Big Lever today because the Delco Republican Machine is so entrenched, corrupt and moribund that a vote for Anyone Else is the obvious choice. But party identity isn't always easy to gauge down at the very local end of the ballot.

The first election I ever voted in seemed at the time like the sort of Your Vote Matters civics lesson everyone's first experience ought to be. My hometown had been ruled, for decades, by a mayor known locally as "King Larry." The king was, nominally, a Republican, but he really represented a party of one. He wasn't aligned with the larger statewide GOP, and opposition to him had led to many local Republicans registering as Democrats, so at the municipal level, party identity simply became a way of registering one's support for or opposition to The Mayor.

In my very first election, King Larry was opposed by a bright-eyed and handsome New Man in Town. Like most people, I didn't know much about him, except that he was charismatic enough that he seemed like he might actually do the impossible and defeat our mayor-for-life.

And he did. By 11 votes. And mine was one of them. Hip-hip-hooray!

The new mayor's affair with the town secretary, who was also married, began shortly after his swearing in. A few months later they were cited for public lewdness in the parking lot of a bar in the next town over. King Larry was reinstated after the following election.

But still, you know, Your Vote Matters. Really.

Comments

[Jake]

By 11 votes. And mine was one of them.

How do you know it wasn't just one of the many that got him up to par?

[Spalanzani]

"Judge Proud was up for re-election. Voted against him -- not because he sounds like a character from John Bunyan..."

I love it. I love it so much.

[MikeJ]

In Washington, we've got R-67 which actually makes it a crime (well, a tort) to deny insurance claims in bad faith. Without this law, the most you can ever recover from suing an insurance company is what they owe you in the first place, so they have no incentive to ever approve any claim. This one is winning right now. Yeah us!

We also have I-960, which says that any initiative that has to do with taxes can only be described on the ballot with a maximum of 13 words. Pro and con arguments for the tax (which are allowed for every measure on the ballot) will not be allowed. This, sadly, is also winning. Democracy in action, demanding less information.

[Majromax]

any initiative that has to do with taxes can only be described on the ballot with a maximum of 13 words.

That's an odd maximum. What previous initiative are they specifically trying to render impossible going forward?

[MikeJ]

Let's count: "Tim Eyman is a horse's ass".

Nope, only 6. I'm not sure how they came up with their magic number, but like you, I'm suspicious that there is something specific they have in mind.

[Spalanzani]

"Let's not tax people so much that they can't pay for stuff like food."

[Steve]

In my area we have a Judge David Judy. Yup. Judge Judy. My wife argued a driving citation in front of him and he took mercy on her and threw out the case on a technicality.

[Steve]

BTW, in my hometown (Harrisburg, PA) we have a mayor for life too...been in office about 25 years now. He has done a lot of good in town, bringing the city back from some rough times to be a cultural and business center. So he wins handily in his reelection bids. But no one is perfect, and if there is one thing the Bush Administration has taught us, its that political leaders need strong, effective accountability.

There have been some controversial issues facing the city, and the Mayors approach has been "trust me" and "my way or the highway". But there are some serious concerns about his approach, and his stranglehold on all the power in our city. There is a sense that he has overreached in power grabbing, as well as pushed forward with some of his riskier financial ideas without input from the community. So some members of city council started standing up to him...demanding accounting for funds spent, appointing their own appointees to one powerful, local boards and fighting in court (and winning) when the mayor said they had no right to make those appointments. So in this election, two of the council members who've been willing to oppose the Mayor are up for reelection. The Mayor, as usual, found his own three candidates willing to run for the three open spots (one incumbent is retiring), and put them on "his team", with their campaigns fully funded by him.

They painted the incumbents as obstructionist who are wasting time fighting over issues when the city could be moving forward. The incumbants sent out a flyer depicting the mayor as a puppetmaster controlling the strings on his three candidates. Anyway, both incumbants won (meaning 4 of the seven council members will be people who have been willing to stand up to the mayor)! The third slot went to one of the Mayor's team. So a victory for accountability! Democrats in DC, take note! The voting public notices when a leader need accountability and is willing to support it.

[Mister Charlie]

See what Fred does there? Better the devil you don't know. Marvellous. A recipe for the status quo.

If there's no-one worth voting for (which, these days, is pretty likely) don't vote for anyone. Democracy is persuasive because it looks like they have broad support even when in reality everyone just hated the other guy. Don't give them that legitimacy.

If there is really no-one your town can agree upon as mayor, then you probably don't need a mayor, and you certainly don't need any of the people who want to be mayor but couldn't get the town's support except by multiple choice questionaire.

[Nenya]

King Larry was opposed by a bright-eyed and handsome New Man in Town.

Am I the only one who's flashing on Nicky Appalachia here? Or that guy from the Dead Zone that Johnny Smith can't stand. Handsome New Men in Town are starting to scare me. :D

[cjmr]

Our city-level elections are non-partisan, although the candidates do seem to form coalitions based on similar platforms.

No judges to elect this time around. And the really heinous judges, who I'd love a chance to vote against, are in the next county over.

[mike timonin]

Why, Mister Charlie, that sounds like anarchism!

[Stan Taylor]

A good friend of mine from my former church is a former social worker and criminal defense lawyer. Can't get much more bleeding heart than that. But, now she is a Republican judge on the Texas court of criminal appeals. Running as a Republican was the only way to get elected.

So, yeah, party affiliation is a slippery subject, on the local--and in this case, state--level.

[Geds]

See what Fred does there? Better the devil you don't know. Marvellous. A recipe for the status quo.

Actually, I don't think that's what Fred did at all. He didn't say everybody was happy to have King Larry back. He just said that King Larry came back, probably because as hard as it was to get someone to run against him in the regular election, it was even harder in the replacement election.

Democracy isn't perfect, especially when you have multiple screw-ups as your only option. Still, the point is that they did keep trying to find a different mayor, even if the new one wasn't so great, either.

It's a tough lesson, but everyone learns it some time. I'd rather have the option of learning that one than any of the alternatives I've seen.

[Jeff]

Besides, we all know that sex outside of marriage is a worse affront to the pulic at large than corruption or anything like that!

[farrington]

RE: Judge Proud from a November 3,2006 TOPIX opinion. Nothing ever changes in DELCO.

"Weldon and his Bag Man Then and Now Appointed Crooked and often Black Mailed, Judge Jimbo F. Proud has to go as well.

Judge Proud has employed his “poor” Mother in the Orphans Court records as well as Reg. of Wills Records, slipping new pages into and out of, the official court record.

Check the Judge's Record."

[Chris]

Judge Proud, excellent. I'm sure he was presiding at Vanity Fair.

My first thought about the handsome, charismatic young man was: "You do know you just voted the Antichrist in, right?"