Fun with an Absentee Ballot: Why I’m voting for Nader and more importantly why sledding is very cool
by Micah Holmquist
October 26, 2000

"Is this anyway to elect a president?"

The CBS television show 48 Hours did an episode in 1988 or 1992 —don’t remember the exact year and there is a slim chance that it could have been earlier- that aimed to answer just that question. After a good look at the big money fundraisers and obnoxious political ads, an earnest Dan Rather solemnly spoke something to the effect of, it is the way that we have and by implication that it was thus a good system. No doubt less than two weeks from now a similarly earnest Rather will remind his dwindling audience to participate in the political process as if most people who don’t vote fail to exercise their suffrage because they didn’t hear about the election of they weren’t sure that a television news anchor thought they should.

Micah Holmquist, on the other hand, is a good citizen who firmly believes in the democratic process as it exists here in the United States and nothing delights him more than voting for one of the reasonable candidates from the two major political parties. The fact that almost every Democrat and Republican agrees on the war on drugs, the death penalty, the "jackboot state" of SWAT teams and maximum security prisons, and the right of the U.S. to bomb the hell out of other countries only strengthens his belief that the man upstairs has ordained that the U.S. only have two major political parties. After all, anybody who disagrees with the current policy on any of these matters deserves to be shot. "I hope that if I ever find such pinkos that I have the opportunity to dish our some justice myself," says Mr. Holmquist. "The founding fathers would have wanted me to do it. They did know exactly how society should be run in the year 2000 and every other period that has ever or will ever exist, after all."

Yeah that is how I really feel, really. In truth, I believe the in governing via rioting. Sure it has some problems but what system doesn’t. And when get the nerve to go out and riot, they really are taking activity out of their house and into the streets. They are doing something for themselves and there is a lot to be said for that.

Actually, I was kidding there again. Riots aren’t a good way to a functioning democracy, at least not over the long term. And for all its faults, there are some very good things in the system of electoral democracy used here in the U.S. Most of the time I’m at a loss as to what they actually are but they must be there or so I think.

The one thing that I can say is that I am a fairly good voter. O.K. maybe, and opposed to what I have half in jest urged others to do, I am just a fairly consistent voter. I voted in the 1996 election —the first major voting occasion when I was 18 or older- by writing in Ralph Nader. I don’t remember who else I voted for but rest assured that I didn’t for any Democrats or Republicans. I have no idea who I voted for two years ago in the mid term election but I did cast a ballot and probably ignore most elections since I didn’t want to tire myself with the effort of writing in some witty names. I skipped any and all primaries because basically they are rackets for the two major political parties. There is just something I don’t like about the government putting what our really internal matters of these two basically private organizations. (Yes I know that eliminating the primaries would have some undemocratic effects but worrying about that is like worrying about whether you can afford a soda while eating a $10 sandwich.)

Like in 1996 and 1998, I registered to vote at the address of my parents this year. This of course meant getting an absentee ballot, a surprisingly lax process. The clerk at city hall in Cadillac, Michigan (where my parents live) merely asked me to sign my name and give the address that I’m registered at and the address that I wanted the absentee ballot sent to. She didn’t ask for any identification and I could have signed just about anybody’s name and the address that they were registered at —which in most cases I could safely assume to be their home address- and then select another address for their absentee ballot to be sent to. That was it.

Now admittedly I should have known that it wasn’t an overly bureaucratic process as the last two times my dad had done it for me. Furthermore it would be a touch harder to actually commit voter fraud since this person could file a complaint if they showed up on election day and found out that they couldn’t vote because an absentee ballot had been since to such and such address. That address would actually be a dead give away in most cases of who was doing what. So the best that it would be good for would be a practical joke and not even a very funny one at that. Still considering how important voting is supposed to be, you would think that some more safeguards —like asking for one of those pesky driver’s licenses- wouldn’t be out of line. (Not that your vote actually changes anything or that denying one single person the ballot would have alter any outcomes but this entire process becomes unimportant if you are going to use that logic.)

Then came the wait. O.K. the wait wasn’t that long at all since I did all of this on October 4 and proof arrived in the mail box that the whole process had been legit on October 18.

So I know that you my loyal readers are saying to yourselves, "so Micah, who did you vote for?" Well all I can say is hold your horses since I didn’t get a ballot on that fair fall day. No what I got was campaign literature. I was surprised that I was receiving such literature at my Ann Arbor address (where I live) but with a little bit of research I found out that my registering for an absentee ballot meant that my address in Ann Arbor was basically a matter of public record.

Leaving aside the various issues of privacy which I am sympathetic to, I was glad to get this modified wood pulp for its entertainment value from current Wexford County Commissioner (District 7) William S. Barnett. In it I learned such fun things as the fact that the candidate challenging Barnett for the seat may not really be a resident of Wexford County as he "is still in the process of moving from his home in West Covina, California." Call me crazy but I really don’t care one way or the other. Carpet bagging has always gotten a bad rap in my book.

More interesting is that Barnett believes "our County can do more for our seniors, young people, and the middle-aged." (Hey buddy wouldn’t just be easier to say that you are for everybody?) To that end, he proposes a bunch of things that aren’t like to come to fruition except for his plan to turn Diggins Hill over to skiers. For those who don’t know, Diggins Hill is a fairly large hill in Cadillac that high school cross country team uses for practice and kids go sledding during the winter. Also skiing is a secular religion of sorts in Cadillac and just about everybody whose opinion counts skis. There are plenty of commercially run places to ski in the area so it seems a bit far fetched to suggest, as Barnett does, that adding a lift rope would do much to provide additional entertainment for young people.

For all the obvious similarities, sledding is in many ways the opposite of skiing. It is one of those wonderful activities that doesn’t take much skill at all, provides plenty of entertainment, and which capitalism hasn’t been able to do a very good job of harnessing for profits. Sure parents buy sleds for their kids but they don’t shell out very much money for the sleds and there is no per day fee for sledding. If there has been a large snowfall, hills like Diggins throughout the more northern parts of the world are ripe to have many young kids going up and down them for hours at a time. There are no vendors or overpriced snack bars and there most certainly are no instructors trying to teach the proper sledding technique. There is no room for such adult inclinations with sledding. It is just kids having fun. It is particularly cool that many of the best sledding hills are located near schools. Thus when the roads are too full of snow for busses and school is cancelled, many a kid spends all day sledding and, consciously or unconsciously, dissing school. It is a beautiful thing.

Opening up Diggins Hill to skiers could jeopardize all of this. Skiing and sledding just do not go well with one another. Sledders don’t have much control of their course —and believe me that is a large part of what makes it fun- and daredevil skiers in their designer jackets and expensive skis aren’t likely to be to sympathetic when some seven year old clips them and causes them to fall down. Now such fireworks could be pretty entertaining but it wouldn’t last. Skiers would exert their air of superiority and get the sledders removed as quickly as superintendents should say "two hour delay."

I called Barnett up to ask him about this and got a very interesting answer. Sounding a bit surprised by the question, Barnett responded, "you know sledding would still continue on the other side of Diggins." Since his letter made no mention of any "other side," I pressed him a bit further. Basically he responded that skiers would get the section of Diggins the majority of sledders spend their time now while sledders would be dispossessed and moved to a less steep and consequently less desirable part of the hill. And even if adequate space for sledding does remain, the activity will look somewhat second-rate compared to skiing which gets all the attention and all the support from the city. Kids will either gravitate to skiing or towards their home and Segas.

Barnett admitted that he didn’t have any specific plan as to how skiing would be introduced into Diggins Hill and left open the possibility that a small per-use fee might be charged and that it could either be done by the city of Cadillac or a private company.

Since I was on the phone with him, I decided to ask Barnett about another part of the letter where he says "our community deserves two other things that ‘the rest of us’ could enjoy." Putting "the rest of us" in quotes is a bit odd but Barnett assured me that "it was not meant to exclude anyone" and that it stood for "middle-aged" people. He then went on to talk about those two things, a swimming pool and a performing arts center. Barnett contrasted these plans with the recently built and publicly financed ice rink which he says, "serves too few in the community. The people who use it are usually the sons of lawyers, doctors and that type."’

There is certainly nothing wrong with these sentiments and I’m sure that Barnett is sincere. Still I can’t help but think that "the rest of us" will effectively mean the non-sledding population. Cadillac doesn’t have any other easily accessible hills the size of Diggins and it would be a real shame if that tradition is lost just so skiers have to drive a few less miles for their activity.

The "Official Ballot" came in the mail on Thursday, October 19 and what a beautiful ballot it is. It includes the names of some of my favorite candidates for public office. And those wonderful elections people have also given me the option of voting for a "Straight Party Ticket." Funny that the names are supposed to be arranged in random order but the Republicans and Democrats go first. Sure this could have happened by chance but such a result defeats the entire purpose of randomly ordering the different parties.

Before discussing the race to become the most powerful man in both the free and unfree world, let’s look at some of the other races that merit our attention. Scott S. Trudeau is running to become a University of Michigan regent on the Green Party slate. I know Trudeau, who is actually a student at UM, from SOLE and can only say good things about him. I urge all readers who can to support him.

There are two statewide proposals in Michigan which would enact school vouchers and prevent the state government from "enacting certain laws affecting local government." Public schools need support and federalism is an overrated concept so I urge a no vote on both.

After that, there aren’t any parts of my ballot that I support so no more comments and on to the horse race.

Pat Buchanan isn’t on the ballot due to some last minute rigmarole. Such a shame, I suppose that I could write in the names of the guy with a pitchfork and his John Birch Society "Eisenhower was a communist" running mate but is that really saying "Go Pat Go!" I suppose there are worse people in the wold than Harry Browne who has turned the Libertarian Party into the committee to campaign for Harry Browne every four years. Why in fact there is kooky by definition Natural Law Party candidate John Hagelin. And Howard Phillips also graces the lovely document as the candidate of the U.S. Taxpayers Party. (A party that formally calls itself the Constitution Party but is known state affiliates use a variety of names including American Heritage Party and Right To Life Party.) Phillips believes in cause so much that he not only quite the GOP but converted from Judaism to Christianity so that he could rail against abortion and push conspiracy theories about the United Nations taking over the U.S. without the likes of Pat Robertson calling him a hypocrite.

Finally there is Ralph Nader. Say what you will about Nader but don’t deny that he has the support of Phil Donahue. And as a child who grew up watching Donahue I have to believe that his endorsement should count for more than even the combined support of Ben Harper, Michael Moore and Eddie Vedder. (However, if you throw in Bill Murray, another Nader supporter, the balance tips away from Donahue.)

Seriously, Nader may not be a perfect candidate but does deserve support. He wants to end the embargo on Iraq and recognizes that when it comes to Israel and the occupied territories that there will be no "peace in that area without justice for the Palestinians." He supports campaign finance reform, single payer health care, and reproductive rights while opposing the death penalty, the "war on drugs" and the ever present attacks on social services. Plus he may personally favor gun control but doesn’t make that into a campaign theme. In the world of Waco, the bombing of aspirin factories in Sudan, and 41 shots being fired at Amadou Daillo, the fact that most on the left call for gun control is quite disturbing.

But most importantly Nader represents a way forward. A vote for Nader is —if you are in any sympathetic to his politics- a way of saying that elections should be about something completely different than the best possible bad outcome. They should be about voting for candidates that you actually believe in and a mechanism for pursuing the politics and policies that you desire. (Please read Jeffrey St. Clair’s "’You Always Hurt The Ones You Love’ The Real Threat is Al Gore, Not Ralph Nader" where this argument is made much more eloquently.)

Perhaps the most amusing thing about this whole election is hearing liberals and Democratic hacks —not one in the same in the Clinton Era but still often birds of a feather- urging people to not "waste a vote" on Nader. The cynicism im their arguments is amazing. If you believe them, elections are only about winning and losing. Extend this logic a bit further and a vote for a losing candidate becomes a wasted vote. After all, did it make any difference? Those who believe that the political system is basically good have become the cynics while those who see a system rotten to the core have turned to idealism. Funny how all those high school civics teachers who glorified democracy become incorrect when people really take them seriously.

Sure a vote for Nader that would have otherwise gone for Gore could in theory help elect Bush but are you going to run in fear from Bush in order to benefit Gore? I suppose that this issue might be easier for me since Gore never had my vote and if it wasn’t for Nader, I would probably write in somebody like Mateen Cleaves or Susie Ibarra. That is just the type of guy I am. Taking these politicians too seriously only reinforces their grip on your mind and severely limits what you see as possible. Gore is hardly all that progressive and I have a feeling that Bush won’t turn out to be the fascist that some are predicting. The best that a Gore presidency would do is being slightly better on a few issues like affirmative action but there are going to be opponents of affirmative action (and abortion, and evolution, and…) for the foreseeable future so there is always going to be the possibility of disastrous presidency. Sooner or later you have to vote for what you want.

Not that voting is enough by any means. I recently saw a flyer with the headline "Resistance is Vital." Beneath these words was a picture of Nader holding a picket sign that said something about a living wage —"living wage" was the only visible part of the sign- and finally "Vote Nader." While I agree with both formulations, it is a mistake to confuse the two points. Resistance is being out in the streets with a picket sign fighting for a cause. Resistance is marching through the streets of Seattle or Washington D.C. in opposition to institutions used to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. Resistance is opposing police brutality in cities like Detroit and New York City. Resistance is about crashing Madeline Albright’s infomercial for a stepped war against Iraq. These are just a few recent examples of resistance on much higher level than casting a ballot for Nader.

Can you really argue with Mr. Brockman? He is after all the main source of info that we have on Springfield’s politics.

Well actually you can (sorry Homer). For all its faults, representative democracy isn’t a bad idea. There are far less democratic countries than the U.S. (This, however, since more about many parts of the world than it does about the U.S.) And there are countries that have more democratic systems and procedures. It is a joke and impediment to democracy that proportional representation does not exist in this country and the Senate does need to go.

Still, how many U.S. citizens reading this really feel that you have a say in what the government does? How many of you really believe that your voice makes any difference? Furthermore, how many of you really believe that simply voting is going to get your voice heard? Come one, raise your hands all you lovers of freedom, tell us all how the system is fair.

O.K. thank you for your voice Mr. President. I am sure that your megalomania does make a difference but it is an entirely different system for the rest of us.

Two years ago I spent the month of July in Cuba. During one sweltering Havana night, I got into a conversation with a Cuban about how much influence he had in the affairs of his country. He said that he could write a letter to officials —who are elected in sometimes contested elections- but that it wouldn’t make any difference. He then added in his quite good English, "But it is the same for you in America."

And until that changes in both countries, there is something wrong.

Return to U.S. Politics
Return to The International Home of Micah T. Holmquist