Walking to the local precinct this morning, my husband and I took in the early hours of our bustling suburban neighborhood. Where we live, there are two main neighborhoods within walking distance. One direction heads toward the very fashionable, fun and well-manicured homes surrounding Adams Avenue. The other direction heads toward the mostly working-class and urban City Heights area, where our voting precinct was assigned.
Leading up to today's race, I noticed a difference between these two neighborhoods -- besides the curbside appeal of immaculate lawn care -- in the disparity of political yard signs from one area to the next.
Near Adams Avenue, I'd guess the majority of homeowners displayed their political choice for not only the mayor's seat, but also for whom they favored as district representatives and even as judge and city attorney. This morning's walk of six blocks to our polling place revealed one lonely purple and white sign favoring Todd Gloria, and nothing else.
Can the difference in outspoken support for one's choice of candidates be attributed to lower income and working class citizens not being as interested in local politics?
Michael from City Heights
June 03, 2008 at 07:36 PM
I find it odd that people in the lower income brackets aren't involved politically, especially now. Unlike their higher income neighbors, they haven't figured out how to game the system, taking as much government assistance as possible while skillfully reducing their tax bill. We may see the advent of universal health care and an expansion of other government programs that support the poor and middle classes if the Democrats sweep the November election. It seems to me that the poor have everything to gain through political involvement this election season.
Maybe I should be grateful that a large portion of the population isn't connected politically. With few exceptions, citizens from all socio-economic backgrounds and political parties have their hands out, looking for freebies from big papa government. But only a small portion of the population has perfected the art of using big government to its advantage. What kind of mess would this country be in if everyone developed that skill?
Alma Sove
June 03, 2008 at 09:08 PM
Thanks for posting your comment, Michael.
I think you're right, it doesn't matter which socio-economic background or political affiliation folks come from, but American's dependency on government benefits has become a paternalistic one.
It would be a true revolution if everyone developed an aversion to government benefits. It would also bankrupt a lot of businesses.
I'm curious what you meant by citizens using big government to its advantage. What are your thoughts about the advantages of big government?
Greg from South Park
June 05, 2008 at 06:11 PM
Aren't there a disproportional number of illegal aliens in City Heights.
This area, known as "little Tijuana" is severely blighted and needs to be "deep cleaned" by major redevelopment a la CCDC.
Alma from San DIego
June 05, 2008 at 07:43 PM
Hi Greg,
Thanks for leaving a comment, although since I can't hear the tone of your voice I'm not entirely sure you're not joking.
Assuming you're serious, sounds like you would be against reforming eminent domain laws, since you refer to severe blight as evoking a (technically) non-profit developer's "deep cleaning" touch. But I wasn't aware the CCDC's job proposals included working w/I-C-E, only to "facilitate redevelopment" in private/public works.
Assuming you're kidding, nice one. District 3 community leaders are in a battle-to-the-death right now w/the CCDC Redevelopment Agency.
