Don’t be a low-information voter

With the presidential general election less than four months away, I’m starting to turn my attention to the statewide initiatives that will be on this November’s ballot. So far, a dozen propositions have qualified for the general election ballot, with one more possible addition, pending a count of submitted signatures.

Unless you want to be a “low-information voter,” it’s not too soon to begin studying the pros and cons of the statewide propositions that will be on the general election ballot.

What’s a low-information voter? Blogger Mike Pontillo defines them as “… individuals who are not knowledgeable and vote anyway. The term ‘low-information voter,’ in political discourse, sounds better than the word ‘idiot.’”

Blogger Kevin Field has a slightly different take, explaining that low-information voters “… rely on talk radio and less-than-factual hearsay from friends and family members to shape their political decisions.”

Low-information voters are the people that the recent controversial New Yorker cover cartoon tried – and failed – to mock.

Whichever definition you prefer, start learning about the issues now so that you can cast an educated ballot on Nov. 4.

The qualified statewide propositions cover issues ranging from the treatment of farm animals to an attempt to ban same-sex marriage. Voters will be asked to approve bonds to fund a high-speed train system, renewable and alternative energy research and incentives, home-purchase programs for veterans and construction and renovation of children’s hospitals.

You can review all of the propositions at the California Secretary of State’s web site.

When ballots are finalized with local candidates and ballot measures, more information will be available on the Smart Voter web site.

Even now, however, it’s clear that the general election ballot will feature quite a crop of propositions. I haven’t decided how I’ll vote on most of the measures, but one proposition in particular has me especially torn. It’s Proposition 11, a redistricting reform proposal from the League of Women Voters.

I’ve been writing in favor of redistricting reform for years. With the current system, legislators draw districts for the state Senate, state Assembly, and House of Representatives following each census. Instead of drawing compact districts made up of communities with shared interests, legislators draw sprawling, oddly shaped districts that ensure that the same political party will continue to hold each district.

Here’s what I wrote in 2006: “California’s system is so broken that it’s rare for a state or congressional legislative seat to change hands. In fact, the Los Angeles Times reported that in [the November 2006] election, ‘a third of legislative candidates won their races with 70 percent or more of the vote.’ With seats that ridiculously safe, legislators don’t have to be responsive to constituents, in large part because they don’t have to compete in tough races against viable candidates.”

You’d think, then, that I’d be all for Prop 11, but it has a serious flaw: It only reforms redistricting for the state legislators. It exempts the powerful House of Representatives.

Just as with Prop 99, which was faux eminent domain reform, I worry that Prop 11 might be faux redistricting reform. Because Prop 99 passed, the pressure to pass real eminent domain reform – a measure that applies to all real property, not just owner-occupied property; a measure that isn’t shot through with loopholes and exemptions – evaporated.

Similarly, if Prop 11 passes, I worry that  the pressure to pass real redistricting reform – a measure that applies to the drawing of California’s districts for the United States House of Representatives as well as the state Senate and state Assembly – will evaporate.

We don’t live in a perfect world and perfect solutions are not usually available. That’s why I’m willing to consider lots of methods to achieve redistricting reform, including using a panel of retired judges to draw districts, as Prop 77 proposed, or a commission of citizens, as Prop 11 suggests.

However, not all compromises are acceptable. For example, Prop 99 was – and is – an unacceptable compromise on eminent domain reform. I’ll study Prop 11 closely to decide if exempting Congressional districts is an acceptable compromise or not. It won’t be an easy decision.

But wherever I land on Prop 11, I’ll do it after reviewing reams of reliable information – because the last thing I want to be called is a low-information voter.

Ignoring the plight of feral cats

“No matter how much cats fight, there always seem to be plenty of kittens.” ~ Abraham Lincoln

For the last several weeks, I’ve been aware that a cat gave birth to at least three kittens underneath the playhouse in our backyard.

I don’t know if the mother is a stray or an unspayed pet that’s allowed to roam the neighborhood. Our inventory shows one white kitten, one gray kitten and one calico kitten.

I really want to do the right thing by these kittens. I’d like to make sure they are sterilized and adopted into loving homes, thus preventing them from becoming fertile feral cats that multiply the problem.

That problem is substantial: One female unspayed cat can be responsible for more than 400,000 kittens over seven years; one male unneutered cat can sire 2,500 kittens in a single year.

Doing the right thing requires trapping the kittens with a live trap to prevent getting scratched in the process. As one web site said, holding a feral kitten is like holding an animated cactus.

With that in mind, I set about finding a live trap to borrow. I contacted Morgan Hill’s animal control services and was told that they don’t help at all with cats. When I pressed, I was told that they do have a live trap to loan, but that it was currently being used. I put my name on the waiting list nearly two weeks ago.

Next, I contacted a local nonprofit cat rescue group. They would only help me trap the kittens if I agreed to foster them.

With a two kids, a dog, two cats, a full-time job, part-time work, extensive volunteer commitments and no knowledge about fostering kittens, I cannot make that commitment.

According to my research, it’s best to trap feral kittens by their eighth week for optimal socialization. I can’t tell by looking how old these kittens are, but I’m guessing they are rapidly approaching their eight-week birthdays.

Meanwhile, despite being ready and willing to do the right thing by these cats and my community, I’m stuck. I’m waiting for a loaner cat trap from Morgan Hill. I can’t get the local nonprofit “cat rescue” group to help me rescue these kittens.

That’s not all: I know that if I do trap the cats, I won’t be able to take them to the nearby animal shelter in San Martin because I don’t live in unincorporated Santa Clara County. I’ll have to take them to the animal shelter in the city of Santa Clara. It seems counterproductive to me, but I’m willing – despite gas prices nearing $5 a gallon – to make the long drive.

“Cats seem to go on the principle that it never does any harm to ask for what you want.” ~ Environmentalist Joseph Wood Krutch

The lack of feline animal control services isn’t limited to Morgan Hill. Last year, The Dispatch ran a story detailing the runaround Gilroyan Margaret Baker experienced while trying to get some agency to take the abandoned kittens she found.

Baker, who said of Gilroy’s animal control policies that ignore the suffering of feral cats, “You people make it very hard to do the right thing,” eventually dropped the cats off at Gilroy City Hall, where employees adopted the kittens.

“It’s deplorable,” Baker said of the runaround. “How can anyone do the right thing?”

Baker was one step ahead of me: She had the kittens in hand. I can’t even get that far.

Taking a cue from cats who ask for what they want, I’m asking that the agencies in South County take these steps:

• Make more loaner live traps available.

• Forge an agreement between the cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill and Santa Clara County to allow city residents to take stray animals to the San Martin animal shelter.

• Establish ordinances in Morgan Hill and Gilroy to require residents to license their cats – as is the case for dogs – and dedicate that money exclusively to funding feline animal control services.

The lives of feral cats are short, violent and painful. Because feral cats avoid humans, most of us don’t see how they suffer.

Mother Nature has given me a chance to reduce the problem with the kittens that were born in my backyard, but I cannot get the help necessary to do so.

Taking these three steps would go a long way toward reducing the number of suffering feral cats.

“Think occasionally of the suffering of which you spare yourself the sight.” ~ Nobel Laureate Albert Schweitzer

Honoring Patrick Henry’s words with our deeds

Preservation of historic buildings is a laudable goal. But it is not the most important goal for this, or any, American community.

What’’s more important –– and more American –– than historic preservation? Civil liberties preservation.

It’’s so important that patriot Patrick Henry prized it above life itself: ““Give me liberty or give me death.””

Civil liberties are the rights granted in the Constitution to limit government intrusion into citizens’’ lives. They include the rights of assembly, privacy, access to courts, free speech, free press and freedom of religion.

Many of my politically left friends join me in protecting these civil liberties. The ACLU, for example, defends civil liberties even when the person exercising them is unpopular or offensive, a practice that irritates many of my politically right friends.

However, many folks who consider themselves to be left-leaning civil libertarians often overlook another important civil liberty – property rights.

Despite their poor-stepsister status, property rights are just as important as any of our other civil liberties and require vigorous defense, especially in this post-Kelo, post-Prop 99 era.

When it comes to preserving old structures, I’’m all for designating properties as historically significant –– if affected property owners consent.

But governments must not impose restrictive historically significant designations on owners who purchased properties without that designation.

Remember, civil liberties limit governmental intrusion into citizens’ lives. But Morgan Hill’s Historical Resource Code limits property rights and intrudes into citizens lives by imposing, according to a recent Morgan Hill Times article, “an extensive and ‘invasive’ list of things potentially subject to city control and permitting requirements” on owners of properties that the city designates as historically significant.

The historically significant designation is different than CC&Rs because CC&Rs are disclosed to potential buyers before they purchase properties. The historically significant designation is being imposed on owners after they purchase properties.

The designation brings such onerous intrusions that Mary Wright, current owner of the George Edes house on First Street, went to City Council to plead that her home not be designated as historically significant, The Times reported.

“We had extensive conversations with the staff saying our house may or may not be subject to … all the particulars,” Wright said. “… It’s very scary for us because it’s literally everything.”

Council agreed not to impose the historically significant designation on the George Edes house because Wright is preserving the home, which her great-great grandfather built at the turn of the 20th century, on her own.

“Far be it for me … to dictate to them what they should and should not do when it’s obvious they’re very committed to keeping the house in the family and in the manner that it’s been kept up in for the past 100 years,” Councilmember Marby Lee said.

Really, whether Wright keeps the house “in the family” or not and whatever “manner” she chooses to keep it are irrelevant. The house belongs to Wright – it’s her property.

If she wanted to remodel it into a hacienda-style knockoff or paint it garish hues, that’s her right because it’s her property.

If she doesn’t want a historically significant designation imposed on the house, that’s her right because it’s her property.

You might not make the same choices, but property rights are more important than historic preservation.

I don’t have a problem with an opt-in historic designation program. If a property owner opts into a program – probably one with incentives such as property tax breaks, permit fee reductions, and the like – then the historically significant designation could stay with the property in perpetuity. This way, like CC&Rs, the historically significant designation would be disclosed to potential buyers before they purchase a property.

Community Development Director Kathy Molloy-Previsich told City Council during the George Edes home debate that Morgan Hill’s Historical Resource Code is being updated.

Here’s something the code needs to include, if, like Patrick Henry, we value liberty above old structures: Language that makes it clear that property owners can choose whether or not to participate in the program.

Yes, historically significant structures have value to the community. Folks who are passionate about them can purchase such structures and preserve the buildings themselves, rather than imposing their passion on unwilling property owners.

Because civil liberties are more important than old buildings, designations of historical significance must not be imposed upon property owners who do not want those designations, whether they’re preserving their old structures or not.

Otherwise, Morgan Hill’s historic structures will be monuments to our diminished property rights.

Note: This was a point-counterpoint style column I wrote for the Morgan Hill Times on the topic of historic preservation. The opposing column was written by Sam Shueh.

Repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell already

The ridiculous Clinton-era rule needs to go. Homosexuals should be allowed to serve their country openly in the military. A new Michael D. Palm Center study says that gays in the military don’t negatively affect unit cohesion or morale, the AP reports. Key quote:

The study was conducted by four retired military officers, including the three-star Air Force lieutenant general who in early 1993 was tasked with implementing President Clinton’s policy that the military stop questioning recruits on their sexual orientation.

“Evidence shows that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly is unlikely to pose any significant risk to morale, good order, discipline or cohesion,” the officers states [sic].

Of course, we didn’t need a study to tell us that: We only needed to look at the experiences of the Israeli and British armies, where homosexuals openly serve, to tell us that. We only needed to ask our returning soldiers, who tell us that.

Name that concept

You know when someone misunderstands the lyrics of a song – we need a word for that concept, don’t you think? Now we have one, the Associated Press reports: mondegreen.

The term was recently added to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, along with 99 others. Key quote:

In a category of its own, [mondegreen] describes words mistaken for other words. A mondegreen most often comes from misunderstood phrases or lyrics.

It comes from an old Scottish ballad in which the lyric “laid him on the green” has been confused over time with “Lady Mondegreen.”

Among the best-known modern examples: “There’s a bathroom on the right” in place of Creedence Clearwater Revival’s “There’s a bad moon on the rise” and “‘Scuse me, while I kiss this guy” in place of “kiss the sky” in the 1967 Jimi Hendrix classic “Purple Haze.”

Pyrotechnic plants

Every early July, I’m amazed by the number of blossoms in my garden that remind me of fireworks:

Buddleia

Lantana

Daylily

Agapanthus

It’s fascinating that the pyrotechnic plants seem to hit their peak near Independence Day.

Just two plants

I only planted two zucchini seedlings this spring. I’ve never grown zucchini before, but have heard the horror stories about too much zucchini. While taking advantage of the three-day holiday weekend to weed and photograph the garden, I took shots of the giant zucchini blossoms on those two plants that no longer resemble “seedlings” in any sense.

That’s when I discovered two giant zucchinis — each at least 14 inches long — hidden at the base of the plants. Guess we’ll be marinating and grilling, battering and deep frying, or baking zucchini (in bread, most likely) this weekend.

Puh-lease: Too little common sense, too much hypocrisy

This week I’ve compiled a natural disaster-themed roundup of current events that make me roll my eyes, shake my head and utter a two-syllable “puh-lease.”

Thanks to the numerous lightning-sparked fires plaguing our region, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District issued advisories warning of unhealthy, smoke-filled air.

These advisories, while issued with the best of intentions, always make me roll my eyes and wonder: What are we supposed to do about the bad air, stop breathing?

Thankfully, I haven’t noticed any lung irritation during the last several days, but the smoke is a major problem for my eyes. Sometimes it gets so bad, the only thing I can do is the visual equivalent of not breathing: close them.

I’ve considered leaving the area until the smoke clears – it’s difficult to be productive when your eyes are closed – but gasoline prices are so high that outrunning the smoke in a car is prohibitively expensive, not to mention prohibitively time consuming.

So why not fly to some smoke-free destination for the duration? Puh-lease. The same high oil prices that are boosting gasoline prices are boosting jet fuel prices, meaning that outrunning the smoke in a plane is prohibitively expensive, not to mention prohibitively annoying, thanks to the dubiously effective safety measures to which air passengers must submit. Air travel elicits lots of head shakes and eye rolls from me.

One lesson that the unusually early and vicious fire season should teach us is renewed respect for how dry this region is. Right?

Puh-lease, not in Gilroy. Despite fresh evidence that we live in an area that’s ready to go up in flames at the drop of a spark, Gilroy remains the one place in Santa Clara County where “safe and sane” fireworks – and there’s a term that induces head shakes every time I see it – are legal.

Last week, with the air full of eye-stinging, lung-clogging smoke, Gilroy City Council held an emergency meeting to consider a one-year fireworks ban. The proposal suffered an eye-roll inducing lopsided defeat, 5-1. Councilman Peter Arellano cast the lone vote to ban fireworks this year; Mayor Al Pinheiro was absent.

I know the current fires were started by lightning, not fireworks, as Councilman Dion Bracco is fond of pointing out. That’s not the important lesson taught by the current fires, or the other recent fires attributed to other causes. The important lesson is that, to paraphrase a holiday song, baby, it’s dry outside.

In addition, the mix of legal and illegal fireworks makes it very difficult for fire officials and police to distinguish between fireworks that are “safe and sane” and those that are, I must deduce, “unsafe and insane.”

It also leads to the lame attempt to control illegal fireworks called administrative citations. Instead of citing the person who’s using the “unsafe and insane” fireworks, officials can take the easy way out and cite the owner of property where illegal fireworks are used.

With administrative citations, officials don’t worry if the owner might be a landlord who lives several blocks, cities, counties or states away, or might be a resident owner who’s out of town. Instead, with administrative citations, property owners are held responsible for the actions of others.

Puh-lease, common sense should tell officials that scheme is patently unfair. But common sense should also tell them that fireworks and tinder-dry conditions don’t mix.

But, common sense is clearly in short supply.

Of course, natural disasters like fires aren’t limited to the liberal, diverse, tolerant, same-sex marrying state of California.

The Midwest, the veritable buckle of the Bible belt, a predominantly religious, politically conservative region, is experiencing the opposite natural disaster: flooding, the worst in decades.

But I wonder, where are the prominent religious right wingers blaming the Midwest flooding on the victims, as so many did after Hurricane Katrina?

Perhaps they’re silent because the fact that Midwesterners are among America’s most religious and most conservative citizens proves an uncomfortable truth: That natural disasters aren’t related to abortion rates, tolerance for homosexuality, or prevalence of non-Judeo-Christian religions and non-literal Biblical interpretations.

You can’t proclaim natural disasters to be God’s vengeance on the wicked when they strike a region populated mostly with people with whom you disagree and remain silent when natural disasters strike a region populated mostly with people with whom you agree.

At least, not without generating an eye roll, a head shake, a “puh-lease” and a charge of hypocrisy from me.

Have a Mad Lib birthday

It figures, since I liked the fill-in-the-blank game show Match Game, that I also liked Mad Libs as a kid (and truth be told, as an adult). The word game created by Roger Price and Leonard Stern is turning 50. Read all about how the game came to be on the official Mad Lib web site.

Semicolon hoax; semicolon history

Paul Collins writes in Slate about an April Fool’s Day semicolon hoax in France - only in Europe; I doubt that Americans would pay any attention to a semicolon hoax attempt - and launches into a fascinating history of the beleaguered  punctuation mark.