Comment 59397

By mystoneycreek (registered) - website | Posted February 07, 2011 at 09:52:27 in reply to Comment 59389

Cityjoe: I'm trying to track down those two issues you mentioned. If I'm able, then I'll respond.

It's easy to get downbeat about 'all this', about the muck, but here's how I look at it: our default regarding our roles in local governance...how much we get involved, how we respond to 'what happens'...is so crap, and has been for years, that the potential for creating a far, far better situation is incredible.

People talk about wanting to increase voter turnout. And this is an admirable goal. (Yet is not the be-all and end-all that some believe, if we take into account what the basis of these additional vote-casters decisions could well be. In the 2006 election, it's said that 60% of votes cast were done so on the basis of 'name recognition'.) If we could double the rate to 75%-80% -and they were 'informed' ballots being cast- then we'd be getting somewhere.

I believe that were we to double our engagement...which really, isn't much, not at all for the average person...would provide a massive ripple-effect in an improvement of local governance. (My 'wish state' is far more than a doubling. Which explains my optimism for how good things could be.)

For now, what matter most to me isn't 'victories', it's sustained dialogue. And input such as yours, to keep us talking.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds