Point Austin: It's That Time Again
If you haven't voted, aren't voting, aren't ready to vote – wake up!
By Michael King, Fri., Feb. 10, 2006
Whatever the outcome, District 48 voters shouldn't be surprised to see Howard's or Bentzin's names again on their March (Dem or GOP) ballots, since this week's vote will suffice only for the months from now until January, and in November we'll have to do it all again. Considering there's a good chance of run-offs in a couple of other races – again, the four-candidate race in District 47 comes to mind – we may be talking about these primaries well into April.
But don't shift your attention to spring football practice just yet. A brace of opening events over the last week for the May municipal elections reflects that we won't really be able to catch our political breaths before a new set of yard signs, robo-calls, and door-hangers materialize. The mayor's race, where Winsome Will Wynn faces off against Mayor Very Pro Tem Danny Thomas (and a parenthetical Jennifer Gale), and the Place 5 race, where two student wannabes will apparently challenge Brewster En Route to the Middle of the Dais McCracken, figure to be fairly perfunctory. Not so the Place 2 and Place 6 races, where two trios of candidates seek to replace, respectively, term-limited Raul Alvarez and Danny Thomas. And if that's not enough, a menu of charter amendments – domestic partnership benefits, municipal judge terms, maybe open government and aquifer protection – may also turn up for our meditations on the May ballot (see "Council Campaign Season Opens," p.24).
Then, barring run-offs, they'll leave us alone for a while.
How Independent Are You?
In all seriousness, it's the sort of year that raises questions about the efficacy and organization of U.S. elections, and how well we're being served by our current political arrangements. Elsewhere in this issue (p.32), Amy Smith takes up the Curious Case of the Unknown Candidates, recounting how the gubernatorial contenders for what was once the dominant Texas political party are trying desperately to get the attention of a few major donors and a few million potential voters. Here at the Chronicle, we have yet to have our official editorial conversation about Democrats Chris Bell and Bob Gammage. The unofficial consensus is that they're really nice guys who appear to be swimming a little far from shore.
So we feel empathy for those would-be Dem primary voters who are wondering how best to spend election day – depending on your neighborhood, there are a handful of contests that bear close attention, but statewide the primary ballots (on both sides of the aisle) remain largely soporific: incumbent vs. nobody, or else incumbent vs. nobody-at-all. This year, however, that brings up a new question – for those of you who are drinking Kinky's Kool-Ade, or even Strayhorn's Sloe-Gin Fizz. If you truly wish to "Save Yourself for Kinky" (or God forbid, for Carole), and want to be able to sign one of the ballot petitions the two "independents" (mavericks? sidewinders?) will roll out as soon as the primary (and any run-off) dust has settled, you must not vote in any primary with the governor's race on the ballot. Those are the tyrannical terms of the Texas election code, which also insists that you can sign only one petition in the brief (30- to 45-day) period allowed for such petitions to gather a cool 45,000 signatures. The Legislature has long since decreed that any measurable variation from the Tweedle-GOP and Tweedle-Dem Duopoly must leap through a series of restrictive hoops to challenge the dominant order.
For the moment, I'm remaining agnostic on what to recommend, although that will also be a subject for the Chronicle's endorsement deliberations. Should we tell potential voters to dodge the primaries, including many important down-ballot races, in order to sign for Kinky or Carole – not only to keep their options open, but to fight the idiotic Texas election code? Or should we tell voters – especially, say, in those combative Westside House districts – that this election is simply too important, too much a potential watershed, especially for public schools, to risk sacrificing any vote for the long-shot chances of gubernatorial independents?
Taking Your Chances
While it's tempting to treat electoral politics as no more than show business for ugly people – our guess is even Kinky might not argue with that – the truth is, most of the day-to-day and week-to-week work, as on public school finance at the Lege, is done by down-ballot folks who don't get much credit for time or labor. Political parties exist, in principle, as expression of community will and values, and are intended to reflect broad distinctions in public opinion about public priorities, goals, and the way government is supposed to work. Of late the GOP has had a field day in Texas and in the nation, and the result has been extreme militarism abroad and radical public privation at home.
Unless we can figure out how to make a major change, from the bottom up, those skewed priorities are likely to remain in force at least until the end of the decade. Those of us contemplating voting "outside the box" – or more simply continuing in the laissez faire pattern of not voting at all – should do so fully cognizant of the consequences. 
Got something to say on the subject? Send a letter to the editor.
