Missives from the 6th Floor

Ballot, pen, and pamphlet in hand (oh, and beer, can't forget the beer) I sat down at the table fully intending to read it all, and make the decisions I felt I could, and decide which issues needed further investigation.

Instead, I'm here writing this, having given up about half way through in disgust.

Some of the tick-boxes were easy - not because I was generally educated on the implications of the decision, but because some thing made the decision easy for me. Like not voting for anyone who identifies themselves as "pro-life."

I'm not saying that basing your choice for elected office on one aspect of a candidate is a good idea, Rather, I think I'm saying that I have to vote for people who agree with my view on non-empirical things and hope that logic, well reasoned argument, and supporting testable evidence will sway them on the rest.

Somewhere in my head, I have a priority list - something like:

1. government should stay the hell out of my private decisions (which I believe covers the "right to life/pro-choice" debate, sexuality, and a whole plethora of other topics )
2. minimize waste in government - less spending, less bureaucracy, less "pork"
3. balance my desire to keep the fruits of my labor, with the need for a social safety net (the US pretty much fails miserably on this one)
4. transparency and accountability are more valuable than doing what I agree with - what's important is that the process be open, not that it comes to the answer I want
...

And I should say that I'm not even sure my ordering of those four is consistent over time, and across issues.

So I hold the limited information I have against each of those touchstones, and sometimes a decision is obvious.

Unfortunately, to apply those touchstones requires information - more than party affiliation, name, a head-shot, and a self-prepared statement I view as of questionable value, at best.

So that left me with most of the offices, and all of the measures, unresolved.

Some of the offices I don't really care about - the impact (or influence, if you like) they wield isn't clear enough to me in my daily life to justify investing the time needed to make an informed decision. And I would assert that it's generally impossible to predict the affect of selecting one candidate over the other.

Of the ballot measures, only a couple presented clear decisions to me. The ones that cost next to nothing, and give individuals more rights I'm in favor of, even though I know that most people aren't really capable of handling the responsibility that comes with the rights they already have.

Right to death with dignity?

Hell yes.

Will some number of people be hurt by, or be taken advantage of due to that law being enacted?

Undoubtedly.

The ones that are expensive... those are harder. That money has to come from somewhere - and it represents not just a tax burden, but an opportunity cost.

Light rail connecting the Puget sound area?

I love the idea.

Is this plan the right way to approach it?

I haven't a fucking clue.

I certainly don't choose to have time to read each of the measures in their entirety and perform independent analysis of the issues.

So really, it all comes back to "whom do you trust?"

Do I go with the endorsement of a media outlet? I know they have an angle.

How 'bout voting with a "trusted friend?" Well, how did they make their decision? Was it really any more rigorous than just flipping a proverbial coin? Was it myopic? Did one side or the other press one of their hot-buttons?

So 'round and 'round I go - wanting more information on which to base a decision, and seeing no practical way to acquire it.

Rational ignorance indeed.