Column for November 9, 2006

The mid-term elections are over and I am glad they are. This was the most nasty campaign season that I can remember in a long time, especially for a mid-term Congressional and local election. Even races as local as District Attorney have gotten personal and negative.

The problem with negative campaigns is that they work. Exposing your opponent as some sort of immoral deviant is effective. I did learn more about some of the candidates as their dirty laundry was exposed. Some items were profound, others miniscule.

Some of the problems I have seen with elections are not necessarily the mud slinging or campaign tactics. They are nothing new. In watching documentaries about other political campaigns in other time periods, I saw a lot of the same tactics. That is just politics.

The problem seems to be some of the election process itself. One big problem is so called non-partisan elections. They are not really non-partisan, but it sure does cause confusion for the voting public. It is especially futile when partisan political organizations give their endorsements in allegedly non-partisan campaigns. I have voiced this concern many times over the years.

We are expected to know what candidates stand for in order to cast an informed vote. If someone has a Democrat, Republican, other party, or no affiliation, it is possible to at least get some sort of idea of the candidate's alliance or ideology. When voting for school board, judges, or in municipal elections, this is a handy bit of information.

I have looked at the sample ballots and at those from previous elections and see some profound problems. Why should anyone have ballots with or be able to cast a vote for anyone not from their district? The county commission races have three districts on one ballot. Why do we run elections in that manner? It is beyond my comprehension that we should be allowed to even consider marking a ballot for another district. Why do we even have districts if it makes no difference to voters?

Clayton had having a ballot initiative over changing to a system of electing town council members by district. I have advocated this for Selma for some time and it is what I believe to be the best solution for municipalities. There is a lot of puffery and propaganda that Clayton voters will in effect lose their right to vote if the town goes to districts for municipal voting.

This is just what I said, propaganda and puffery. What people are not being told is that the entire crux of the opposition is that some minorities believe that there should be minority representatives on any given elected board and that they are not properly represented if that is not so. The minority groups like voting as a block to cast large numbers of votes for a minority candidate, thereby guaranteeing the candidate's election. They mistakenly believe that they have no representation otherwise. A candidate's quality is not determined by skin color.

District elections allow for proper representation of an entire geo-political zone, not just a particular faction within that region. If there is a good candidate who happens to be a minority, then they should obviously be elected. A candidate should not be elected merely because of one's race. That is blatant racism being employed rather than voting based upon issues and ideals. It is an incredibly ignorant method of voting. No racial group should be guaranteed a representative of their race upon a governing board. The people as a whole, however, should be guaranteed quality candidates regardless of their racial background.

The Town of Selma has no representation on the Council from the entire west precinct. The present electorate consists of all men and women from the east side. I realize that it would take a change to the town's charter, but we should really consider changing our method of election to election by district. In addition, we should consider the addition of a few more members to the Town Council. This would truly give the town a better representation of the entire populace rather than all officials being elected at large. Clayton leaders deserve applause for their courage to at least consider the change in their town. I can only hope that the same could happen in Selma.