Arkansas Blog

And all this for a price tag of $80,000...Good Grief! What a waste of taxpayer money and public faith. I can't IMAGINE that either item will pass...just as I can't IMAGINE how it came to pass... Stodola is exhibiting that he is just a ribbon cutter...not a leader (and that would be true at ANY salary).

"And what's this about how the mail campaign targeted select neighborhoods? "

Do you mean something other than a campaign that focused its resources on areas where folks tend to regularly vote vs. areas where people don't? Most campaigns do that, right? Or do you mean something else entirely?

ARK. BLOG: Er, maybe that they didn't want people in certain neighborhoods to be given ANY encouragement to vote?

i voted against this issue Max , because it did not do away with at-large directors in the city I'm was not bother by the amount they were paying going to pay the Mayor ,i do believe we need a FULL time mayor through . what we dont need is At large directors we need those folks elected by the community and Wards they hold the seat for . not elected by the COC of Little Rock and big BIZ .

Voting machines have got to go.

The poll workers at my precinct seemed confused about how the new machine worked. I was told to pull my "receipt" from the machine and hand it to another poll worker, but as I was pulling it out, another poll worker ran up to say not to do that.

I noticed it said that I was voter No. 1, but I was actually voter No. 2. I sure hope it counted my ballot.

Of course it won't pass. I'm voting for both items however vain and useless that will be.

I think it will pass. More people usually turn out to defeat a bill to pass a bill. I don't think the turn out will be as high as we all think. The campagin to pass this measure has been hard and heavy and the news coverage it has gotten has made hard to people to not know what is going on. People are reactive and not proactive. Proactive people got the measure on the ballot. Reactive people try a stop gap, 11th hour means to stop the election. Proactive people would have been in court much earlier to stop the election. Just my two cents

Our poll workers were very nice and pleasant, the machine functioned without any mishaps, and I was out in a few minutes. During a conversation yesterday, one of the participants tried to encourage us to vote a certain way. According to this person, Stodola has an issue with Moore telling him what to do. I don't get that impression--they seem to work well together. I don't know...

I, too, don't expect the measures to pass, but I'll vote for them anyway. If you don't vote, you can't bitch.

Pavel,

I could not have said it better myself. You hit the nail on the head. People should exercise their right, ot shut up.

ARK. BLOG: I disagree. I think you can not vote and still complain. Does voting and losing mean you lose your right to complain? Of course not.

"ARK. BLOG: I disagree. I think you can not vote and still complain. Does voting and losing mean you lose your right to complain? Of course not."

I disagree, Max. Isn't democracy supposed to be based upon ACTIVE participation by the people. b Not voting, to me, is inaction. Inaction or apathy leads to corruption by those in power. I only wish we had a more active electorate. The American electorate has become too apathetic and that's why we have people like Bush in power. To encourage registered voters to "not vote," to me, is exactly what this city, county, state and country DON'T need.

That's my two cents. It and the two cents will get you....well, nothing anymore.

Arky

ARK. BLOG: I'm not encouraging anyone not to vote. I love to vote. But I don't tell people who didn't to shut up.

Dan Rather - Scathing Indictment of Electronic Voting Machines

"Business Wire announced today that "DAN RATHER REPORTS" will present conclusive evidence of the failure of electronic voting machines used across the USA.

A 13-minute screener clip from this controversial episode highlights serious problems with Election Systems & Software (ES&S) machines that Rather traced back not only to a factory in the Philippines, but further back to manufacturing sources within the US.

The full one-hour program, Dan Rather Reports "The Trouble with Touch Screens", will be broadcast on HDNet Tuesday, August 14 at 8:00 p.m. ET and at again at 11:00 p.m. ET (5:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. PT).

We have just over a year until the 2008 general election. If you want your vote to count in November 2008, you'd better get informed and get active on the election integrity issue NOW."

blue bejeeus--LINK

Sorry, max, but that dog don't hunt. Yes you can still complain if you don't vote on an issue or election, but I can tell ya, when you start complaining, the first thing I ask you is did you vote against it orfor it or whatever way your complaining. If you didn't do your part to stop it, or help it pass, then your opinion immediately means zilch to me. Life's much easier on the sideline.

ARK. BLOG: That's a popular thought. Sometimes people don't vote because they don't like the options. Sometimes they don't care. Sometimes the outcome makes the failure to participate a painfully clear mistake. Let people speak, publish, broadcast. It's the American way. As is bitching. There's no First Amendment test.

Well of course, Max, people can bitch even if they don't vote. And a lot of the people who bitch the loudest are people who don't vote. It's not a First Amendment issue. It's a credibility issue. I take a back seat to no one in defending the right of others to express their opinions, but I reserve my respect for those who vote, even those who vote different from me.

blue bejeeus,
Do you think it is a coincidence that Karl Rove resigned the same week as this election? Hell no he is in the thick of this along with Halliburton and Tom Delay to tamper with those machines and at the same time to conspire to take the tin foil off of your head!!!

Max,

you make a good point, but like Hickintheheigts says, you've got to do your part to stop what you don't like. That's like complaining about not having a job, but you haven't filled out any applications to obtain one. It's all about the effort.

ARK. BLOG: Oh, I think there are many ways to make an effort that can be far more productive -- and harder -- than voting. In this election, for example, you could reject the entire process as a largely meaningless exercise and decide a vote was irrelevant regardless of outcome. And you could be out gathering petitions to call an election on mayor-council government. And bitching all the while, with absolute moral and constitutional ability to do so, that a vote in this election was a waste of time.

Of course your right to bitch is protected by the Constitution regardless of whether you vote or not. It's kinda like when Mother used to predict dire results from a planned activity and then would say "don't come crying to me." Same principle here. If you didn't vote, I just don't much want to hear it.

Voted at noon at the little Baptist church on Woodlawn. I was voter # 125 which is really not bad turnout for my precinct. I've been #32 at noon lots of times.

ARK. BLOG: Note, however. There was more early voting in the race for Sherwood mayor a few weeks ago than there was for this election.

The future of Little Rock's government will be decided by those who vote, not by those who refused to vote because the proposition didn't suit them. Maybe the non-voters will get their wish some day and have the opportunity to vote against at-large representation, but if the opportunity does arise, that issue, too, will be decided by the people who vote. Those who sit on the sidelines can still bitch, or pout, or move to Cabot, but they won't have much of an effect on Little Rock's government.

"blue bejeeus,
Do you think it is a coincidence that Karl Rove resigned the same week as this election? Hell no he is in the thick of this along with Halliburton and Tom Delay to tamper with those machines and at the same time to conspire to take the tin foil off of your head!!!" by: mpan18

WHAT!?!?

"tin foil off of your head"...LOL what is that?

"Karl Rove resigned"...Karl Rove's resignation will not stop our inquiry into the firings of the U.S. attorneys.

Seeing as my grandmother lived through an era where women were not allowed to vote, I considervoting to be a priveledge (as a woman) and a duty (as an American.) I believe everyone is entitled to their own opinions, and I have no right to shut them up, but I do have a right to not listen to what they have to say. I have no time or respect to listen to people who bitch about government and then do not vote. And I agree, Pavel, the whiniest, bitchers and moaners I've ever heard in my life aren't even registered. The sad thing is, many of those people have valid opinions, and are (what I would consider, at least) intelligent. Tragic! If more people like that participated in the electoral process, we may be able to acutally make positive changes in our government and country. I'm with you, hickintheheights, my first question to those who complain is "Did you vote?" and if the answer is "no" then that's the end of the conversation for this girl.

I voted at a polling station that I'm sure is dominated by voters who support a full-time Little Rock mayor with veto power. I cast my vote at 1 p.m., without a hitch or glitch, confident that at least 400 people would already have voted there. Nope. I was only the 55th. Don't know what this portends, but I'd think not good for a full-time mayor of our fair city. We shall see.

I voted at 10:30 AM this morning at the Temple in West Little Rock. I was number 71.
I voted against a stronger mayor.
Since the late 50's, we have had a Manager form of government and other than one scandal with a former city attorney there have been no scandals, corruption or major shenanigans of any kind. With no one person totally in control, there has been a requirment for all pursuers of city approvals for whatever reason to solicit the approval of a broad section of the city board to ensure success. That's not all bad. If we go to a strong mayor system, then the perception is always going to be there that the strong mayor has sided with his political supporters to push one position or another regardless of reality. If one strong mayor can control things, then one strong mayor can be controlled much easier than a voting majority of the Board. That's a system we really do not need. Conscenus government is better than you think. Just wait and see if these issues pass today.

Got a report that 240 folks have voted at Pulaski Heights Presbyterian as of 2p.

Max - how many people early voted in Sherwood mayor's election? How many early voted in this one? Last I heard the number was creeping up on 1,000.

ARK. BLOG: I'm just going by what election commissioner told me. More than 1,100 voted early in the first election for Sherwood mayor.

I voted at Terry School during the noon hour. Everything went smoothly.

As one who opposes the three "at large" seats on the board, I used this opporunity to vote against them by voting against both proposals. Should these two items pass, we will not see a mayor-council proposal on the ballot for years. The entire purpose of this election is to keep any mayor-council discussion off the public agenda.

The folks who filed the lawsuit have one pretty good argument. Since when should Mark Stodola get to enjoy powers to which he was not elected? If there is a new type of mayor, should we not decide who it will be? Please understand that I like Mark Stodola and Bruce Moore. They are fine public servants.

Is there another Arkansas city that has any "at large" council (or board) seats in which the mayor has a veto? This is a lot of power against ward representatives, in my opinion.

Pat Lynch

Pavel,

This notion that for some reason everyone should be obligated to cast an affirmative or negative ballot has always troubled me. It seems that by not showing up and casting a ballot on an issue a voter has effectively abstained from voting which is a valid and recognized procedure in all organizations. It is an option provided to a decision maker when they feel they are not able to make a qualified decision on an issue. I think campaigns should educate voters as part of the effort to give them the information they need to cast a ballot. That is part of the reason we have free press and freedom of speech.

I feel that I am completely entitled to complain about an official or an issue even if I didn't feel qualified to cast a ballot. By your reasoning, if I am 17 years old, and haven't voted, then I can't complain until after I have registered and cast a ballot in an election.

I am much more concerned about people who have not taken the time to educate themselves regarding an issue voting for or against something. Those votes tend by be cast in the same way my friends wager at Oaklawn...color of jockey silks, name of horse, etc. People point to the disparity in votes in American Idol compared to the process to elect our leaders. I don't think that the voters on American Idol are moved by rational or educated opinions about who is the best musician. Those votes are cast based on appearance, sympathy or another reason.

Now, I believe that people fought and died to protect the _right_ to vote. I don't think _right_ translates into an obligation, especially if the voter doesn't feel educated or qualified to vote on an issue. But, a citizen of a free country should be given every opportunity to gain knowledge about the issue and cast their ballot if they so choose.

For whatever its worth, I can only imagine the turbulent times that we would be living in if 90% or more of the electorate were so aroused to actually show up and vote on any given day.

Equity,

I hope you are not relying on campaigns or media to educate you on how to vote. If that is the case, I'm a little scared of how you might be voting. It's the American citizen's responsibility to educate them on what's going on in their community, state and national government.

And I don't think the entitlement to complain is what's being argued here. I think what everyone is basically trying to say is that if you are not voting, yes you may complain, but we don't want to hear it, nor do we care what you have to say. If you have enough of an opinion to speak on a matter that is being decided upon by vote, then you probably should vote on it. Otherwise, your bitching and moaning makes no DIFFERENCE.

There are too many people in this country who feel the way you do, and this is the problem with our current government. We need more people educating themselves, instead of expecting the media to do it for them, and more people becoming proactive in their government. If this were the case, then our government might run a little more like other countries where the government is afraid of the people and not the other way around. I'm sure the Bush/Cheney administration enjoys your opinions, as long as you're doing nothing about it.

ArgentaGirl,

If not "the campaigns" or "media" to educate on an issue, how do you propose voters learn about them. Oh, that's right. If they just look hard enough they will find that oracle with the answer that is always right and always has the right answer. If we were just smart enough to listen to it, then all need for debate and differences of opinion would go away. It would be impossible for two intelligent people (like Max Brantley and Pat Lynch....if you consider them intelligent) to view the same issue (like this mayoral election) and come away with two different points of view.

Most people don't have a lot of extra time to research especially if you discount newspapers, internet, news television, news radio, books (because they are written by people with an agenda), and other assorted journalists (and any information the campaigns might send out). And with your perspective, most of us probably aren't smart enough to compare different materials from different sides of an issue (even if "gasp" they are from the campaigns themselves) and make a decision.

I also suspect that you don't care what I think if I vote in a way in which you find objectionable (because surely if I took time to research an issue like you then I would come to the same conclusion that you did). As I said, the decision to not vote affirmative or negative on a ballot is in and of itself a vote. Just the act of not voting changes the dynamics of an election regardless of what you think (might want to consult a statistician for some "truth" regarding those numbers. I suspect that if you "proactively" got involved in that math you might agree with the truth of statistics).

And regardless of what you or I think of Bush/Cheney, a percentage of this country still likes them and still thinks they are doing a good job. And of course, on election day, if a huge chunk of the electorate decides to stay home during the next election because you haven't created a large enough value proposition to support your side or opinion then you lose not because you are right or wrong, but because you don't have enough votes to win. And we still let you bitch about it and if an elected official is smart, they will listen to all citizens because you can never predict who will be motivated by what in the next election.

The large mass of previously disinterested voters that gets irritated causes problems...just ask Clinton in 1980 what happened when he crossed a few good old boys about their trucks.

Lyncho,

If the 2 Votes for Leadership campaign is an attempt to halt any movement toward ward only representation, why are two of the key people behind the ward movement endorsing the mayoral powers ballot measures? Jim Lynch and Kevin Dedner are two of the driving forces behind the movement to eliminate the at-large seats but they are not only endorsing today's ballot measures they are co-chairs for the campaign. Lynch and Dedner are two who have been out in the trenches collecting signatures for the ward only petition.

I would say the people of Little Rock convincingly voted in Mark Stodola to lead this city. How many folks do you think even knew the current government structure gives us a part-time mayor? I would guess most folks thought they were voting for a full-time mayor when they pulled the lever for Stodola. Mayor Dailey created the impression LR had a full-time mayor.

At 4:45, Pulaski Heights Presbyterian had registered more than 350 voters.

ARK. BLOG: I think this precinct will be very interesting. Perhaps pivotal. I vote there. It's a good government precinct. Pro-tax and progressive and votes heavily. Do these voters believe this measure is progressive? I can tell you that I know a lot of them who voted "no." Mistrust is high. Timid leadership is another problem.

Hey Mouthin! When was the last time you spoke to Kevin Dedner? My sources tell me he is extremely unhappy with this campaign and has second thoughts about his association with it. Ask him how many people in his neighborhood(s) received the mail pieces from this campaign, which to me implies they were only trying to inform, educate, sway, whatever you want to call it, only a certain area of voters. Either way, what happens, happens.

CLRCitizen,

Dedner must not be too upset. He was quoted in today's paper. Did you read his article in STAND newspaper? There is no doubt about his support.

Do you also rail on presidential candidates who choose only to campaign in targeted states or gubernatorial candidates who don't campaign in every county? Campaigns are about using resources wisely to reach voters and to turn them out. This is not a public service campaign it is political.

ConcernedLR,

I must live in a good neighborhood. I got at least six pieces of mail about the issue. My favorite was when I would get two of the same sent to two voters who lived at my house. And how exactly was I supposed to be moved by the radio advertisement?

Don't know who ran the campaign, but it felt a lot like the last jail tax campaign.

Dear mouthinfreely,

Since MOST LR voters OBVIOUSLY thought they were electing a full time mayor with Mark Stodola, I guess you have knocked me on my fanny. End of discussion.

But if were were to get all tangled up in the facts and the law, some nitpickers still believe in elections. Mark Stodola was elected to be a ceremonial mayor. The new position envisions administrative and veto authority. Although I like Mark quite a lot, maybe we should ask the voters if they really want to saddle him with this heavy burden.

I know that revealing little details (like the $160,000 salary) is not exactly what the local power brokers usually have in mind, but why not live dangerously and trust the people?

Jim Lynch and Kevin Dedner will have to answer for themselves. I have no idea why they would do such a thing.

The three "at large" seats confer a tremendous advantage, affirmative action, to the folks who like to run things, and they hate the idea of a mayor-council form of government more than anything. The current proposal is a deception designed to keep folks in the dark and real reform off the agenda.

Your argument, after all, depends on voter ignorance. You said so yourself. Perhaps you said a bit too much.
Pat Lynch

Lyncho,

Wrong again. My statement was that most folks don't understand the current powers of the office. Jim Dailey created the perception that the office was full-time when in reality it was part-time. That is not my argument for the ballot measures, just an observation. I stand by my argument that those pushing for the elimination of at large seats are supporting the mayoral powers ballot measures. Your cuzin Jim, Kevin Dedner and ACORN must not see it the way you do.

Campaigns are about putting forth the messages that bring victory. It is the job of opponents and journalists like you to raise questions. If your arguments are more persuasive you win.

BTW, I just heard Kevin Dedner on KOKY radio endorse the campaign and encourage folks to get out and vote. So CLRCitizen he must not be too upset.

Full-time mayor with administrative power and a salary commensurate with duties I can see.

I don't favor veto power without all-ward representation, and I'm not sure why we would make the former a certainty and the latter a possibility.

But seems like the measures will stand or fall together.

Equity,

You do make a difference by not voting... you invalidate any opinion you might have had about the matter. And, no, I don't care which way you vote, but by choosing to not vote you are handing the election to the majority (whoever it may be.)

ArgentaGirl,

By choosing not to vote you are agreeing to join the majority. But, that does not invalidate your opinion any more than being the voter on the winning side who later realizes a mistake was made and chooses to change sides.

Can you really invalidated the opinions of those who voted for Bush/Cheney and not believe they made a mistake? Can you really invalidate those who chose to abstain and allowed Bush/Cheney to win and realized that they made a mistake. Being on the winning side by default by abstaining does not invalidate your ability to decide that the winning side is wrong.

The interesting thing about this debate is it assumes that one side is right and one side is wrong. If I choose to go to the polls and hold my nose and vote for or against an issue/candidate that I don't fully agree with does it give me a stronger position from which to complain? The reality is, I (and many voters) often don't fully like any of the candidates in a race. I'm forced to make a decision if I vote in the election.

I'm concerned I'm just encouraging them if I go hold my nose and vote. I really don't want either outcome and know I'm going to be stuck in a bad situation regardless. So, sometimes, I make the decision to stay home so that the politicians don't get a further deluded notion that somebody else thinks their half-baked ideas are any good.

Doesn't mean I'm not actively involved. Just means I fully respect the right of citizens to be disgusted by politicians and the political process....and still have opinions.

I'm not sure why all the bother with tinkering around with the mayor's power is the issue?? It seems to me that LR should simply have adopted the strong mayor-council system of governance for its city government. The city-manager form of government is what should have been on ballot. Up or down! The vast majority of cities in AR use it and it seems to work out okay for those municipalities. The cities of Fayetteville, Hot Springs, and Maumelle have all abandoned the city-manager form of government in the last 15 years or so. Little Rock remains the only city in AR of any consequence that retains this type of municipal governance. Why do to they insist to clinging to some antiquated concept that the city-manager form doesn't involve politics in city government? All government involves POLITICS at some level!!