Voting By Mail -- A First Person Experience

While it will come as no surprise that I support vote by mail, this is less an advocacy piece than a recounting of my wife’s and my experience with the process in the August primary election today.

When MO offered vote by mail as COVID roiled the country, we requested ballots for the elections in March, August and November. Carolyn and I are of a certain age, which puts us at risk. While our choice protects us, even more importantly it reduces the risk we could pose to our immune-suppressed daughter and immune-compromised granddaughter. We are grateful to have that choice. Supporting the process was also (a small) part of our motivation.

We returned our August ballots last week. Both ballots were mailed at the post office in the same box on the same day at the same time. I used the QR-code to track the ballots; mine arrived and was registered. Carolyn’s, however, was noted as “being processed by the USPS.” My daughter tipped me off to 1-866-OURVOTE helpline, so I called them this morning, expecting it would be more of a report than solution. However, this (national) organization walked me through the steps we could take to try to make sure Carolyn’s vote would count.

Complicating things, Carolyn’s back picked this time to act up and she wasn’t able to stand in line or probably even walk into the polling place. I went to the polling place and explained the situation in all its complicated glory. The local election officials would get a 5-Star Yelp review if that were a thing.

After explaining the situation to the poll workers through our masks, they called HQ, which tracked down her ballot. Apparently the ballot arrived but missing an important check mark in some box. HQ claimed to have called yesterday and left a message, but I’m skeptical, given that there was no recording in our inbox. In any case, we were offered two options. Go to HQ, claim and cast her ballot, or come to our polling place, claim a lost ballot and vote. To accommodate her (temporary) physical challenge, we opted for “curbside voting,” and her replacement ballot was brought to the car.

So this trial run gives us food for thought. I can only speak to our experience here in Missouri. I am sharing these observations. 

• If you’re going to mail in your ballot, double and triple check that all necessary boxes have been checked (we thought we had). 

• Give yourself time to track your ballot. The USPS is in the process of being defunded; the system and the workers are being set up for failure. 

• Understand you must weigh the competing risks of your votes not being counted and exposure to a potentially fatal disease.

• After all the hoops we had to jump through, we came to the conclusion that any fear of massive voter fraud, at least in MO, is unfounded. The Republican poll worker agreed with that assessment, as we chatted while Carolyn filled out her ballot.

• The (bi-partisan) poll workers we met and worked with were dedicated to ensuring that everyone who wanted to vote was able to do so, despite the difficulties of our times. I mean, “curbside voting,” who’d have thought?

• It’s pretty easy to make a mistake that could cost you your vote.

• There is help available. Again: 1-866-OURVOTE

Final anecdote from the day. As the election officials (one from each party) came out to the car, I explained, again, how the muscle relaxers Carolyn had taken for her back made walking and standing an unsafe activity. This good-natured exchange followed.

The (Republican) poll worker said, “So she’s on drugs?” 

I answered, “I told you she wanted a Democratic ballot.” 

“Of course, thank you.”

Random Auckland (& perhaps auckward) Aubservations

Auckland is extremely pedestrian friendly, especially downtown. Of course, there are lots of pedestrians, many with backpacks or even suitcases or carry-ons. They all seem to have no problem looking the correct direction – took us a little longer. See video:

Lots and lots of public transportation, as well, although there seems no shortage of private vehicles, either. Gasoline sold by the liter and expensive, especially by our standards today. Interestingly, diesel is half the price of gasoline, although diesel vehicles are subject to a use tax. Bicyclists ignore traffic laws with the same impunity as stateside.

For a seemingly affluent town, there are still lots of street people, perhaps homeles, and beggars, at least on the main drag and environs. Their often bare feet may get cold, but at least they won't freeze to death. Not aggressive, just there, but disconcerting nonetheless.

Apparently very safe. So were told by our cabbie, but we did note almost zero police presence (except outside our hotel for the protesters, and they didn’t seem very stressed). The occasional siren, but at least once it was an ambulance. We walked the downtown area to dinner and back without any trepidation.

Based on limited evidence, it appears that NZ has not only accepted diversity but embraced it to the point where only Americans probably notice. However, apparently Asian immigration has been used as, and may be, for all I know, a divisive political issue.

Very large ethnically Asian population. Most store signs in both English and (what I assume is) Chinese. A polyglot city, with people speaking more languages than I could possibly identify.

No tipping. Plusses: you pay what you pay (you can add a bit if you want, but it's “not an insult” if you don’t. Workers claim to have better protection, fewer hassles. Minus (maybe?): no real sense of urgency in terms of restaurant service. Very casual, you can sit there all night it would seem. Tip-based industries almost require workers to turn over their tables. Relaxed for customers though, too.

Personal expression most commonly expressed via ink and hair color, explaining the large number of hair salons and barbers, plus the piercing & tattoo parlors on the main shopping areas and not relegated to the fringes. The young are just as focused on their screens as their counterparts in the U.S. Oh, and they don’t seem to have gotten the memo on smoking – or the anti-smoking campaign by our various levels of government have been effective – or both.

Aucklanders, at least, are interested in American politics. So much for our escape plan. And they are frightened (their words, not mine) and disbelieving of Donald Trump and his ascension, opinions they offered without encouragement or us even bring up the subject.

Ask Less, Get More

Kevin Horrigan wrote a great article today in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. It was something I never thought of before.

I know we teachers used to (probably still do) complain loudly and often about how society was dumping all of its problems on our doorstep, that we were expected to be parent, social worker, spiritual advisor (non-sectarian, of course, although I’ve no doubt some strayed outside those lines), sex educator, counselor, etc., etc., as well as teacher. As much as we complained, though, we kind of knew it came with the territory, and we were, more or less, prepared for those aspects of the job. I like to think that the best of us (at least at The Place), for all our griping, embraced and even welcomed those challenges.

Until I read Horrigan’s column this morning, however, I had never even considered the possibility that something similar has been happening to our police officers for many years now. According to Horrigan, and I (obviously) agree, we are expecting police to not just enforce the laws and solve crimes, but to enforce social norms and solve social problems.

With no intended offense to those men and women who are doing a job that I couldn’t handle (I had enough trouble enforcing classroom discipline), I don’t think most of them are suited for the demands of social service in terms of the personality of people attracted to law enforcement vs. those attracted to education or social work. I might be wrong, but I would suggest those who want to do the (important) job of social service are not heading to the police academy but down a different educational path. I do know that when I took the Strong Interest Inventory as a college freshman, my scores for teacher (well, not industrial arts teacher) and police officer were at the opposite ends of the scale.

It is very easy to criticize police officers, but even if, as is true for some teachers, it is deserved, I refrain from doing so because no way could I do that demanding job. Add to the demands the element of risk that cannot be ignored, dumping the thorniest problems of modern society on our police departments is not only unfair but unwise.

Finally, adding a point emanating from my pragmatic bent, it is also economically inefficient. One of the reasons police departments are stretched so thin for money is because we’re asking, no forcing, them to spend their limited resources on tasks that are not, or at least should not be, in their purview.

If we want more, or better, from our law enforcement community, perhaps we should consider asking for less. (I would argue that the same holds true for education, as well.) If you have not read the article, I urge you to do so, and am adding the link again: http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/columns/the-platform/horrigan-in-tribal-america-too-many-problems-are-dropped-on/article_e9e0523d-e6f9-53b8-9e4f-626c86136cbb.html

The Fallacious Fear of The Nanny State

Fear of an ever-encroaching “Nanny State” has been a common theme among conservatives for a number of years, as they bemoan the decline of personal and the growth of government responsibility, the loss of liberty to do what you want when you want, the right to the consequences of your own actions. I get it in theory, but there seems to me to be a fallacy in that thinking, one that has been brought to the fore as over the weekend GOP contenders Rand Paul and Chris Christie pandered with their answers about vaccinations. I was most disappointed with Christie who at least claims to be a “Damn the consequences, here’s what I believe” kind of politician.

There used to be another libertarian axiom, “Your freedom stops at the tip of my nose.” Those who claim to be most fearful of the growing nanny state seem to have forgotten, or just deliberately ignore (as so many seem to do with that sciencey stuff) such a concept. Too many of those trying to reclaim the primacy of personal responsibility ignore the far-reaching consequences of the irresponsible. It’s not government overreach if the majority are being protected from actions of the few that put us at risk.

I’d be happy to support your right to drive 110 mph (without a seat belt) if you guarantee that you will travel alone on this highway to hell and pay for the cleanup costs and damage to the infrastructure.

You don’t want to wear a helmet riding your motorcycle? Fine, I concede your right, but promise to die instead of living for months in a brain-dead coma, driving up health care costs for everyone (to say nothing of creating mental anguish for those who care about you).

Don’t want health insurance? Okay, but then don’t expect the hospital ER to treat you when you’re sick or injured. There is no such thing as “free care.” Someone is paying for it, and for a long time it’s been those who had health insurance. It’s why conservatives from the Heritage Foundation proposed mandatory coverage to solve what they called the “free rider” problem.

The ironic coalition of ultra liberals and anti-government conservatives joining forces in the anti-vax movement is mind boggling, but as long as the wackos are willing to solely associate (and infect) each other and not put at risk children with compromised immune systems, as long as they isolate their epidemic to their own group, I’ll grudgingly accede to their misguided notions. However, we protect children from bad parenting on so many other levels (and, having seen too much of the negative results of irresponsible parents firsthand, I might argue not often enough), I have my doubts about even this. And who will be paying for the children permanently damaged by their parents’ failure to vaccinate them? All of us.

I am a live and let live kind of person, but our society has become too interconnected, too complex, to allow the few to take actions that jeopardize the well-being of the many. It is never just your mess, never just your problem. The fallout from individual irresponsibility spreads throughout society. It may not have been what John Donne was really talking about when wrote “No man is an island,” but we do have obligations to our fellow human beings, even if those obligations interfere with what we want to claim as rights. It is the price we pay to live in the world today. Your claim to a freedom that jeopardizes my, or a loved one’s, health, safety, security, or future creates a problem that is beyond just you, a conflict that must be resolved in favor of the majority.

Any concept, pushed to its logical extreme, can be ridiculed, of course. That is precisely the tactic used by both fringes, to advocate for the positions of those who want either no government involvement or those who want the government to solve every problem. But the re-emergence of measles offers us the opportunity to discuss rationally the role and limits of government rules and regulations, as long as we don’t allow the slogan masters to slam the “nanny state” or “my freedom, my choice” doors in our faces.

Before the Ferguson Announcement

The whole Ferguson thing makes me sad.  Some random thoughts before the announcement:

• Just because someone calls you racist doesn’t mean you are.

• Conversely, just because you don’t (want to) believe you’re a racist doesn’t mean you aren’t.

• Just because you don’t see (or understand [or it’s not your problem]) a problem doesn’t mean there is no problem.

• Protests, going back to before the American Revolution, have always been led by “radicals” and have always been opposed by those who favor the status quo.

• It only takes one random act to turn peace into violence. (See the Boston Massacre)

• If you’ve referred to protesters (as a group) in derogatory terms, you might think about the dangers of stereotyping. It damages both the typer and typee, because now both have to overcome preconceived identities.

• Name-calling has never, to my knowledge, helped to solve a problem.

• If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem, like it or not.

Cruise Diary 14: Days 8-11, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Mexico

It would appear that the Pacific side of these countries is more affluent than the Caribbean side. Not that you will want to go house hunting any time soon, but still, not nearly as depressing as what we saw last year.

As noted previously, Costa Rica is proud of its accomplishments and heritage. However, the one constant on this trip is that every guide feels the same way about his (or her) country. It truly irks me when the drum-beaters for “American Exceptionalism” fail to realize that most people, or at least those with a sense of country, believe that their country, too, is exceptional. Those same loud voices are also critical of the trend to eliminate winners and losers, the trophies for all attitude. “We can’t all be winners.”

I get that, but comparing your country to mine isn’t even a parlor game and what rules there may be come from those who want to stack the deck so that their homeland becomes the winner. National pride can’t only be good when it’s ours. Who is to say that we’re better than anyone else? I’d suggest we’d be better off treating our attitude toward our country like golf, and working on just being the best that we can, knowing there is always room for improvement, without the need to “beat” some other country. In the unlikely event that I could beat you (or anyone) in a golf match, it still wouldn’t mean I was any good.

Being better than the competition doesn’t mean you’re good. Being louder than the other side doesn’t mean you’re right. Bob Dylan long ago got it right when he said, “Not to climb up any higher but rather drag you down the hole that he’s in.” We should be cheering these countries as they work to develop their economies, education, social services, etc., even if not always the same way we would prefer. Instead, the American Exceptionalists seem to want to put a ceiling on others’ ambition so that we can wave our foam fingers and shout, “We’re #1!” to justify any action we take. Let’s at least not be offended or surprised when we get a different finger in return.

On a slightly different note, I must admit it was a bit disconcerting to see all the soldiers with big guns on our last two stops. I know I’m in the minority here, but being surrounded by armed people, even if it’s obviously the military doing its job, does NOT make me feel safer. It only makes me wonder when they’re going to use them, and on whom. And if you’re a civilian toting a gun, well, hey, you may know you’re not crazy or a threat to me, but I sure as hell don’t. Quite frankly, your need to display your weaponry is enough to make me wonder.

But back to foreign travel, we remember seeing lots of guns and armed security in Europe, especially Italy, almost 40 years ago. Didn’t make us feel safer then, either.

In any case, we’re happy to be trading the snow at home for the 80+ degree temperatures here, at least temporarily. And now a few random pictures: