A Vote for Obama

Barack Obama represents the promise of the United States of America and the belief that Americans can do anything. He has the empathy to understand the condition and plight of others. He is calm, collected, and methodical in his decision making. And he has the leadership to guide our country on a better path. Watching him during this campaign has reminded me of the power of the human spirit. Not just his actions, but those of his supporters. A belief in the good of this country, the strength of its people, and the promising ideals that the U.S.A. represents. My parents immigrated to the U.S. in 1974, the year before I was born. I am the first U.S. citizen in my family, and I strongly believe in this country. My child, who is due in January, will be a second generation American. Everything that I do now and in the future will be for him. I want this country to allow him the opportunities that it has provided for my parents, for my brother, and for me. It is for his future that I voted for Barack Obama.

Friday Videos

Ben Harper at Obama Voter Rally

This article was written by a friend of mine, Joel Burns.

Ben Harper, Zach Braff Rally for Obama, Promote Voting Early at CU Campus in Boulder
Musician Ben Harper and wife/actress Laura Dern joined actor Zach Braff at Mary Rippon Theatre at the CU-Boulder campus to encourage Coloradans to vote early - and to vote for Barrack Obama.
View more »

Quick News Update

Late last week, I heard the story about the woman in Pennsylvania who was supposedly robbed by a black man, and then assaulted when he found out that she was a McCain supporter. I could not believe the story and thought that it must be a racially motivated hoax. Well, turns out that it was a hoax, and the woman is being held in jail for a mental health evaluation and for filing a false police report.

Also, the largest newspaper in Alaska has endorsed Barack Obama for president.

Q&A #3: Covering the Colorado Ballot

Here is the third of my responses to election questions posted by readers.

Can you go over all of the items on the Colorado ballot to help us sort through everything? - Kevin

When I first started voting, I realized that I didn't understand the difference between constitutional and statutory amendments. Constitutional amendments go directly into the Colorado Constitution and include detailed provisions that cannot be changed without another election. Statutory initiatives preserve the citizens' right to initiate laws, while giving the legislature flexibility to react when laws require clarification or when problems or unforeseen circumstances arise1. Another thing to understand is that a "No" vote means that you are sticking with the way things are currently set up (No means status quo). Thus, I typically only vote for a constitutional amendment if I truly feel that it is necessary. For most of the amendments on the Colorado ballot this year, I am planning to vote No. Here is an analysis of the statewide ballot.

46: Discrimination and Preferential Treatment by Governments
No
This amendment would eliminate affirmative action by any agency of the state or local government including college admissions. Hate to say it, but discrimination against women and minorities still exists. This is also a constitutional amendment. If it was a statutory amendment, it might be better, as it would allow the legislature to make modifications to the law to provide for needed exceptions. This is also being pushed by Californian Ward Connerly. I think the guy should stick to his own state and stay out of our politics. Quick question. Who has benefited the most from affirmative action since its inception? Answer: white woman. Ladies, you may want to think about future generations of woman and vote "No" for this one.

47: Prohibition on Mandatory Labor Union Membership and Dues
No
Another constitutional amendment. I am pretty much pro-worker, so I am voting against this and the other anti-labor amendments. Colorado has had a pretty good relationship between business and labor over the past 125 years. Why change things in favor of corporate interests? Also, Jake Jabs supports this amendment. He pretty much wants to avoid fair payment and benefits for his employees. If Jake Jabs supports it, vote against it. Check out here to see the diverse (liberal and conservative) groups that are opposed to Amendments 47, 49, and 54.

48: Definition of Person
No
The basic premise of this amendment is to make the new definition of "person" in the state of Colorado start at the moment of fertilization. This constitutional amendment is really vague in its wording. It could prohibit medical care, such as birth control (i.e. methods that prevent implantation of the egg in the uterus), chemotherapy, tubal pregnancies care, and infertility treatments, as medical professionals could be prosecuted for murder or manslaughter. This could cause huge issues related to in vitro fertilization techniques, and I don't have any comprehension about how miscarriages could be considered by the law.

49: Allowable Government Paycheck Deductions
No
This constitutional amendment interferes with public employees ability to make individual choices about paycheck deductions. Although amendments 47, 49, and 54 are supposedly pro-business, you might find it interesting that campaign finance records show donations were received from the Colorado Bankers Association, Western Plains Capital, ProLogis, Vail Resorts, 4334 LLC, Xcel Energy, and Wal-Mart (yup, you read that right) to fight these amendments. Also, see 47 link above.

50: Limited Gaming in Central City, Blackhawk, and Cripple Creek
I don't care
If you like to gamble, vote for this one. If you think that gambling brings to many ills to society, vote against it.

51: State Sales Tax Increase for Services for People with Developmental Disabilities.
I don't know yet.
This is a statutory amendment. I feel like an asshole for not supporting this, as I feel like I am neglecting people in need. However, I don't know if this is the right method for obtaining this funding.

52: Use of Severance Tax Revenue for Highways
No
I work in the water industry, but even if I didn't, I still would be opposed to this constitutional amendment. Amendment 52 diverts money that would help meet Colorado's rapidly growing water demand and maintain its aging water supply system. Half of the money shifted to highway projects under this measure would be available under current law to provide loans and grants for water projects, water conservation, and other programs. A recent study indicated that current and planned water supply projects are likely to meet about 80 percent of the estimated new demand between 2004 and 2030. By shifting over $100 million in the next four years from water projects to transportation projects, Amendment 52 hurts the state's ability to meet long-term water supply needs. It also takes $29 million away from programs such as wildlife conservation, soil conservation, bark beetle control, low-income energy, and zebra mussel control. I hate the congestion on I-70 just
as much as the rest of you, but this amendment actually doesn't guarantee the money will go towards the I-70 ski corridor. I don't think that highway spending should trump all these other needs. Let's allow the legislature to allocate additional funding for I-70 and other transportation projects (or obtain the funding from Amendment 58).

54: Campaign Contributions From Certain Government Contractors
No
Why only certain government contractors and why not all, if you really feel adamant about this constitutional amendment? This amendment would unfairly silence any person, or family member of anyone, who works on a government contract from contributing to a candidate and/or advocating for an issue at any level. Loopholes are built in to this amendment so that the laws will not apply to large corporations such as defense contractors and drug, oil, or energy companies. This constitutional amendment could make it impossible for candidates to raise money through grass roots fundraising for fear of receiving a contribution from someone involved in a government contract. Let us take a hypothetical scenario. I am a part owner of a small environmental firm. I win a bid from the state for a $105,000 mine remediation contract. Under this amendment, neither my wife nor I would be allowed to give a contribution to any political candidate or issue.

58: Severance taxes on the oil and natural gas industry
Yes
This is a constitutional amendment that I can support. As you can probably guess, the oil and gas industry has been pumping millions of dollars into defeating 58. This initiative will eliminate a severance tax credit that was granted to the oil and gas industry back when gas prices were very low. The increased revenue will primarily be directed to college scholarships for Colorado residents attending state colleges and universities - as well as the preservation of native wildlife habitat, enhancements in renewable energy and energy efficiency, transportation projects in counties and municipalities impacted by the severance of oil and gas, and community drinking water and wastewater treatment grants. For comparison, the severance taxes in Colorado are lower than they are in Wyoming. The oil industry isn't going to be hurting because of this.

59: Eduction funding and TABOR Rebates
Yes
Douglas Bruce is opposed to this one, so I am going to vote for it! This amendment creates a savings account for public education. It dedicates a permanent source of funding to public education, preserves the right of citizens to vote on taxes, and untangles the fiscal knot in Colorado's constitution, as TABOR limits spending growth while Amendment 23 requires spending increases in education. This amendment does not increase taxes, but places money collected above the spending limits of TABOR to be used for education (essentially this takes over for Ref. C, which is due to end in a couple of years).

Referendums
L: Qualifications for serving in the State Legislature
Yes
I don't see why a person age 21 or higher should not have the opportunity to run for office in the state legislature.

M: Obsolete Constitutional Provision Relating to Land Value Increases
Yes
This removes an obsolete provision from the constitution.

N: Obsolete Constitutional Provision Relating to Alcohol Beverages
Yes
This removes an obsolete provision from the constitution.

O: Citizen-Initiated Laws
Yes
This makes it a little tougher to get a constitutional amendment put on the ballot and a little easier for a statutory amendment. Just looking at the number of constitutional amendments this year, and you realize that it isn't all that tricky to do.

Remember - a No vote means status quo, Yes means that you really want to change something, and abstaining from voting means you are leaving it up to others to decide.

Colorado Ballot Information Booklet

Friday Videos

Saw a great show by Kings of Leon last night. Here is a live clip of them playing their new single "Sex is on Fire."

Q&A #2: Obama the most liberal foreign senator?

Here is the second of my responses to election questions posted by readers.

Some whack job that I work with said that Obama was the most liberal senator and that he was born in Kenya. I know this is BS, but you can you write something about these false allegations? - Anonymous

I will start by answering the question related to citizenship. Barack was born in the State of Hawaii, which is part of the United States of America. Some bloggers tried to claim that his birth certificate was fake, but his birth certificate has been examined by factcheck.org and confirmed to be legitimate. This false allegation is just another smear designed to divert attention away from the issues and raise doubts about Obama. In truth, John McCain is the one who was born in a foreign country. Still, I think that McCain should be considered a natural born citizen, as he was born on a U.S. military base.

Now let's answer the other part of your question. I too have heard conservative pundits and republicans refer to Obama as the most liberal Senator. They often cite a flawed rating conducted by the National Journal as evidence. The National Journal's 2007 Vote Ratings, based its rankings not on all votes cast by senators in 2007, but on "99 key Senate votes" (out of 442 total votes). However, a study by political science professors Keith Poole and Jeff Lewis, using every non-unanimous vote cast in the Senate in 2007 to determine relative ideology, placed Obama in a tie for the ranking of 10th most liberal senator. Senator McCain was the 8th most conservative according to their study. For further information, I will refer you to Politifact.com for their report on this topic.

Friday Video

This video was shown at the DNC on the jumbotrons in Mile High Stadium.



This is a great video and has excellent backing music. The song is an instrumental version of "Fake Empire" by The National. I would recommend that any of you that like independent music buy their album "The Boxer". Last year, I wrote about this album; "Singer Matt Berninger's baritone provides a melancholy mood, and adds additional depth to the complexity of the songs, which feature subtle layers of horns, strings, and piano. The songs are well crafted, revealing a band that is extremely comfortable with their craft and knows exactly the sound they want to create. A very rewarding album." I still agree with what I wrote, except I now find the album to be more uplifting. It is one of those great albums that really pays off after you listen to it for a few times, as it may take some of you a while to get used to Matt Berninger's baritone voice.

Q&A #1: What is the deal with ACORN?

This is the first in hopefully a series of responses to election questions posted by readers.

What is the deal with this ACORN thing that Fox and Limbaugh are pushing? - Axel F

Let's start with answering, what is ACORN?
The Asssociation of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, is an organization that performs voter registration drives in low income and minority communities. They have registered over 1.3 million voters nationwide for the upcoming election. However, In some cases, registrations obtained may contain false information provided by those being registered or false registrations provided by part-time employees trying to pad their hours with fake or duplicate cards.

What does ACORN do with false registrations?
ACORN has a Quality Control staff which calls the person listed on every card to verify information. ACORN alerts election officials whenever its Quality Control staff find a card that appears to be a duplicate or problematic. In most states, the law requires that every signed card be turned into election officials, even if it is fake or incomplete. ACORN flags those cards. In the relatively few cases where some canvassers have turned in bad voter registration cards, the employees are fired and the employee's name is turned over to state election officials for possible prosecution. These cases appear to be workers trying to get paid for doing work they didn’t do.

What is Obama's connection?
IN 1995, Obama was part of a team of lawyers seeking to force the State of Illinois to implement the National Voter Law of 1993. In the lawsuit, ACORN, the United States of America (the Department of Justice), the League of Women Voters of Illinois, and the League of United Latin American Citizens were named as plaintiffs, and the decision identifies Obama as counsel representing ACORN and others. The plaintiffs won the lawsuit. Additionally, the Obama campaign has hired Citizens Services Inc. in the past, a consulting firm that subcontracts some voter registration work to ACORN.

Why is Fox and Limbaugh trying to make a big deal out of this?
I am not fully certain as to why conservatives are trying to implicate Obama in some "scandal" with ACORN, but I will hazard a guess. Low income voters and minorities are believed to typically vote Democratic. Thus, the Republican party would like to purge the voter registrations obtained by ACORN. It is a form of voter suppression. If they can make Obama look guilty of misconduct in the process, all the better for them.

Is this voter fraud?
No. This is voter registration fraud. Voter fraud is extremely rare, and in the few cases that it has been found, it involved people who were directly involved with the election and polling places. So, what is voter registration fraud? One example that I heard someone give on the radio was for a person who filled out a registration form as Mickey Mouse. If this person was to vote using that registration, they would have to show up at the polling place with a valid form of government identification with the name Mickey Mouse. For those of you in Colorado, here is a list of the forms of ID accepted for voting by mail or in person.

Axel F, I hope that provides the information you wanted about Acorn. Feel free to ask more questions.

Q&A Time

If anyone has any questions about the upcoming elections, I would like to offer the chance for you to ask your question here.  For example, you may want to know a candidate's position on energy, if something in a political commercial is accurate, or my analysis on an amendment on the ballot (Colorado only).  You can leave a comment with your question, and I will try to provide a timely and informative response.  As always, the comment can be left anonymous.  Also, if anyone has any additional information or opposing views, that person can leave their comment on the post.  The only thing more important than voting is being an informed voter.

DNC Footage

Here is some "behind the scenes" video from the DNC in Denver. The bit about Obama's daughter and the Jonas brothers is pretty funny.



Note: Michelle Obama's brother, Craig Robinson, is the head coach of the Oregon State University basketball team. He is referring to basketball shots.

Health Care

Health care is a big issue this election. Like Barack Obama, I believe that believe that every American has the right to affordable health care. We have amazing doctors and health care professionals in this country. Unfortunately, the health insurance system is broken and we need new solutions to improve it. I have tried to figure out John McCain's health plan, but frankly, it has left me scratching my head. I cannot see the benefit to the consumer. Economist Paul Krugman, who is the 2008 recipient of the Nobel Prize in Economics, wrote an op-ed piece for the New York Times this week that does a better job explaining McCain's plan than I can. I recommend reading it here.

I definitely disagree with McCain's plan to deregulate the health insurance. This would allow health insurance companies to relocate to a state that is more favorable to them and less favorable to the consumer. Different states have different regulations, because we, as voters, have either voted directly for these protections or have elected legislators who have enacted these regulations. Deregulating the industry will take away our protections and will make it more difficult for many people, especially those with pre-existing conditions, to obtain adequate health coverage.

I will direct you to Barack Obama's web page that discusses his health care plan. To dispel any falsehoods you may have heard, Obama's plan is not socialized health care. As his website states: On health care reform, the American people are too often offered two extremes - government-run health care with higher taxes or letting the insurance companies operate without rules. Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe both of these extremes are wrong, and that's why they've proposed a plan that strengthens employer coverage, makes insurance companies accountable and ensures patient choice of doctor and care without government interference. The Obama-Biden plan provides affordable, accessible health care for all Americans, builds on the existing health care system, and uses existing providers, doctors and plans to implement the plan. Under the Obama-Biden plan, patients will be able to make health care decisions with their doctors, instead of being blocked by insurance company bureaucrats.

A good friend of mine, who is a highly respected surgeon in Denver, also has serious reservations about McCain's plans for health care. He recently wrote to me stating "I will say our health care system cannot take the potential onslaught of the McCain ticket." I couldn't have said it any better.

McCain Campaign Turns More Negative

With the election slipping out of control, the McCain campaign has decided to make more personal attacks and smears against Barack Obama. Some of these tactics are simple, such as calling your opponent the opposite of the popular opinion. After the two debates, many have commented how presidential Obama appeared. Thus, the McCain camp runs an ad stating that Obama isn't presidential. Ooo, that is real "gotcha" campaigning.

Another method is to take a quote from your opponent and excerpt a portion of it to provide a false or misleading claim. The McCain camp is running an ad that has Obama saying that US troops are, "just air-raiding villages and killing civilians." The whole quote is; "We've got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we're not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous problems there." Unfortunately, there have been a large number of innocent civilians killed in Afghanistan. The Associated Press ran a fact check and also noted that US led coalition forces have regrettably killed more civilians than the militants, although militants have been known to use the disgusting and reprehensible tactic of using civilians as shields. Obama's comment intended to say that we need additional troops in Afghanistan to more effectively fight the Taliban and Al-Qaeda and prevent the deaths of innocent civilians. Collateral damage is one of the many tragedies of war. More troops and fewer air raids would likely decrease the number of civilian casualties. The deaths of innocent civilians makes it more difficult for the US to gain the support and trust of the Afghan people.

The McCain campaign has also run personal attacks against Obama this week. For example, they have decided to re-hash the issue of former-Weatherman Bill Ayers. McCain has unleashed Palin and is having her do his dirty work on the campaign trail. In a speech, Palin claimed that Obama "is someone who sees America as imperfect enough to pal around with terrorists who targeted their own country." She even referred to an article in the New York Times that discusses Obama and Ayers. I guess she must not have read the article, as it states, "the two men do not appear to have been close. Nor has Mr. Obama ever expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers, whom he has called 'somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8.' Read the entire article here.

The McCain camp has realized that it cannot run on the issues, and thus must try to attack the character of Obama. Their desperate tactic often ignores the truth and will likely backfire on them. As the public learns the truth about the claims, they lose more trust in him. Additionally, McCain has many skeletons in his closet that the Obama campaign can bring out if they are pushed too far.

Who Doesn't Support the Troops?

The McCain campaign has been running an ad that says that Barack Obama is against the troops and voted against funding for the troops. Well, nothing could be further from the truth, and by this logic you could also claim that McCain is against the troops. Here are the details behind who voted "against the troops."

On March 27, 2009, John McCain voted against a bill, H.R. 1591, that would have funded the troops. It was an emergency spending bill that would have funded the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and would have provided additional funds to the Department of Veterans Affairs. The Senate passed H.R. 1591 by a margin of 51-47, and once the bill's conference report was agreed to by the House, the Senate again passed the measure on April 26, 2007, by a vote of 51-46. McCain did not vote on that version of the bill (McCain often abstains from voting against bills as a political move to protect himself from criticism). President Bush vetoed the bill, citing its provision for a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.[1]

The bill for emergency funding returned to congress as H.R. 2206 and did not include the provision for a timetable (which would have been set by the President). Barack Obama voted against this bill on May 24, 2007, as it did not contain the timetable. This was the only time that Obama voted against a bill with funding for the troops.

In summary, McCain and Obama voted differently on the bills due to their stance on a timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq and giving control of the country to the Iraqi government. I don't think it would be fair to either candidate to say that they are against the troops.

Register to Vote!

The deadline to register to vote in most states is October 6th. Click here or here to register, check registration status, or find out where your polling place is located.

The Daily Show Clip

Another must-watch-clip from John Stewart.