Same-Sex Marriage Bill REJECTED in New York State Senate
Video: Times Square Obama Afghanistan Protest Arrests
Catholic League Pissed at PETA
New Photo Brings Flying Overweight Debate Back
State Sen. Savino Gets Noticed For Impassioned Gay Marriage Speech
On Sundays, Gothamist publishes opinion pieces on issues relevant to life in NYC. Here's one:
This time last year, all I wanted was for everyone to vote. Everything I did revolved around electoral politics, because, like many of my peers, I just wanted W out of the White House. I preached that the only way this country could have a true representative of the people was if everyone voted. When I overheard my neighbors on their fire escape talking about how they weren't registered to vote, I stuck my head out the window and said I'd be right up with New York State voter registration cards. I traveled to Pennsylvania, Georgia, Missouri and Ohio to register voters. In fact, I even created an alter ego/superhero, VoteGirl, to encourage young people to vote.
One year later, as another election day draws near, I can't bring myself to vote for either (major) mayoral candidate for New York City.
Bloomberg has done some great things, like 311. And he’s not a bad mayor; I could even put up with another four years of him. But given his plans for the ridiculous overdevelopment of this city, I don’t feel comfortable casting a vote for Mayor Mike.
As far as Freddy, he's had one screw up after another and he hasn't said or done anything to make me believe this city would be any better under his administration than it is under a Bloomberg administration. And I’m certainly not going to vote for him just because he’s a Democrat.
So instead of deciding on one, I’m deciding on none.
Democracy is not about choosing between the lesser of two evils, or even the lesser of two mediocre candidates; it’s about having a choice. And given these choices, I could care less who our next mayor is. So I’m going to leave the decision up to those who give a damn. As someone who’s ambivalent about the outcome, it would be unfair to those who have a stake in this election to vote just for the sake of voting; it would be just as bad as going to the polls uninformed.
But don't give up on VoteGirl yet. On November 8, I'm still going to vote. I'm just going to abstain from voting for mayor.
Emily Farris lives in Brooklyn. You can read more of her ramblings on her blog, eefers.com.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
I'm sorry, but why _wouldn't_ you vote for the lesser of two evils? I strongly believe that not voting is the equivalent of voting for the winner. A protest-non-vote is fine in an abstract, integrity-sustaining, philosophical way but doesn't really do too much in any concrete terms. You may as well as vote for whomever you think will hurt NYC the least since this is the reality of the current election - and if you truly care about the city - truly there must be ONE candidate you woulr _rather_ have. How can you criticize people for not even being registered to vote when you choose to throw away the ability to do so when you actually have it? The real issue to address may be what went wrong on the primary level that precluded a viable candidate from being put forth.
Sadly, this demonstrates the naivete of a young activist. "All I wanted was for everyone to vote," she says, "because, like many of my peers, I just wanted W out of the White House." Obviously, the two don't necessarily go hand in hand. (If you are apathetic enough not to even register you also may be dumb enough to vote W.)
If you feel unqualified to make a choice, then fine, don't vote. That's actually a more realistic stance than "everybody should vote." But gee, couldn't you take some of that energy you spent trying to influence others last year, and put a little more thought into it now?
Since I personally know you, I know that you're educated and up to date on just about everything political especially within New York City. You're not one of the apathetic ones, quite the opposite.
Emily I think it's fine for you not to vote. People should appreciate our right to vote and not just be apathetic to the entire thing.
And to the person who wrote that last comment I'd like to see you challenge Emily in a political discussion because she would wipe the floor with you.
Nice article you wrote there.
In this year of the Bloomberg advertising blitz, almost all of the mayor’s campaign commercials revolve around one central idea: that he is an apolitical guy doing a good practical job. But it’s not really that simple.
The old cliché about running city government is that there is no Democratic or Republican way to take out the garbage. But it’s not true. Just ask supporters of recycling or trash-burning incinerators, and check their party affiliations.
In this year’s mayoral race, sanitation is not an issue but there are some real substantive differences between the views of the Democrat and the Republican that deserve to be discussed, but are being mostly ignored. Here are five issues on which Mike Bloomberg and Freddy Ferrer disagree, and if you didn’t already know who the Democrat and Republican were, you could certainly tell:
1. Ferrer supports the new law to require decent health care coverage for workers at large grocery stores. The mayor vetoed the bill. City Council overrode him 40-2. The law is aimed at keeping out stores like Wal-Mart that hire lots of low-wage workers but provide less health coverage than other employers. The Mayor thinks it’s illegal for the city to regulate health benefits and that the marketplace should decide if Wal-Mart moves in.
2. Ferrer supported the new lead paint law, also vetoed by the mayor and enacted by a City Council ovverride. In that case, the mayor thinks the law costs too much money for too little extra protection for children’s health. Ferrer and the Council believe the science is on their side and that the mayor is being too soft on the landlords.
3. Ferrer wants more taxes on the rich – a stock transfer tax to fund education and a vacant residential land tax to fund affordable housing. Mayor Bloomberg rejects those taxes as trickle-down job-killers and inflation starters. But his property tax hike gave a direct hit to middle class homeowners.
4. Ferrer seems more inclined to help the city’s home health aides, who often work below the poverty line and get no health benefits of their own in the current privatized system. Mayor Bloomberg made a big show of turning down the aides request to be hired directly by the city. It’s one reason Ferrer got the endorsement of the health care workers union, 1199.
And 5. Ferrer supports mandatory inclusionary zoning. The mayor does not. Mandatory inclusionary zoning would require developers of expensive housing to make a certain percentage affordable. The mayor would rather negotiate with developers case by case.
Five issues, one pattern: Classically, the Republican, Mayor Bloomberg believes in less regulation on business to help the working class. The Democrat, Ferrer, believes in more. Decide for yourself which approach you prefer. But don’t tell me this race has no issues, or no parties.
Somebody's got to say it. 311 was Mark Green's idea.
The oligarch's other good ideas?
side note that really doesn't matter much: 311 SUCKS!
I am a city worker... and I can never find out about my very own programs through 311. 311 is only good for alternate side of the street parking.