Voting in Poland

Poland has voted today, two years ahead of schedule, after corruption scandals brought down the coalition between conservative/nationalist Law and Justice (PiS), left-populist/xenophobic Samoobrona and the right-Catholic/xenophobic League of Polish Families. The Kaczynski government has been notable for its lack of foreign-policy acumen, and its perhaps overzealous prosecution of the "removal of ex-communist influence" from government bodies, as well as the corruption issues which have generally involved Samoobrona.

Recent polls showed the more classical-liberal Civic Platform (PO) of opposition leader Donald Tusk leading PiS by a couple of percentage points. Either way, a coalition would be necessary, with the most likely partner for PO being Left and Democrats (LiD), a grouping of the former ruling Democratic Left Alliance as well as splinter parties from that party, the Social Democratic Party and the Democratic Party, and another center-left party, the Union of Labor. LiD lags in the polls and will take under 20 percent in any event, but shares with PO the trait that they are pragmatic and not insane ideologues. Hence the two groups seem the most natural partners.

So far, turnout through 16.30h is far ahead of the 2005 turnout--nationwide, 38% compared with 27% two years ago. The Kaczynski government (yes/no) is a clear wedge issue. Whereas in 2005 abstention was 60%, it appears that more than 50% will probably turn out this time.

Results as they come.

Symbols, but not actions

Props to Barack for not needing a flag lapel pin to love America.

Makes me proud to live in a state where every morning I have to say "Honor the Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible."

Ukraine results coming in

Results from the Ukrainian parliamentary election are coming in. This is Ukraine's third election in three years as the country continues to try to resolve the East-West tension (with the more Orthodox, Russian-speaking east supporting current PM Viktor Yanukovich and the Catholic, Ukrainian-speaking west supporting President Yushchenko).

Ukraine is rather unique in that it has a 450-seat parliament which is allocated entirely based on proportional representation in one nationwide constituency, with a 3% threshold. Moreover, the lists are closed. This system is tailor-made for abuse, as there's an obvious ability to get big businessmen ("oligarchs") and questionable characters in automatically by putting them high on the list. (Of course, this was happening well before Ukraine made the switch to this electoral system, anyway.)

At any rate, there's little reason to expect a large swing one way or the other. Because most voters are choosing a party on the basis of their religious/cultural leanings, they vote the same way each time. I'd wager that the number of swing voters is exceptionally low. There have been stories about how both sides are getting American advisors to make their policies more media-friendly, but I'm not sure who exactly needs to be convinced one way or the other.

The BBC is currently reporting that exit polls show 45 percent for Yuliya Tymoshenko's bloc plus Yushchenko's "Our Ukraine" party, next to 35.5 percent for Yanukovich's Party of Regions. This may have been influenced by what looks like, at first glance, slightly higher turnout in some "orange" regions. However, we'll have to wait to see what the full regional breakdown looks like.

Russian presidential term limits

Article 81.3 of the Russian constitution states: "No one person shall hold the office of President of the Russian Federation for more than two terms in succession."

So if Putin steps down (surprise!) and Zubkov takes over before the elections, Putin could run again, right? Just another theory.

Another fun quote: "Acting Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov said Wednesday he has no doubts parliament will approve the head of the country's financial regulator as the new premier. He also said he was sure the new government will continue the course led by the dismissed government."

Well, of course.

Shocking: NCLB needs changes!

A Daily Kos journal talks about Jim Cummins, the researcher whose work deals mainly with second language acquisition, something I spend a lot of my time dealing with. It's a good read on the defects of NCLB, especially in relation to English language learners (ELLs), if you're not familiar with the issue.

I post at more length on the other blog, and I promise to extend my thoughts over there soon.

AKP carries the day!

With results coming in from most constituencies, it's clear that the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) is going to take the Turkish election. Three parties--the AKP, the "secularist" CHP and the nationalist MHP--will win seats in the parliament, along with Kurdish independents (really members of DTP running as independents) in the southeast.

Really, who would have thought that a hard-line, uncompromising strategy from Turkey's ruling generals would fail to carry the day? Seriously, it looks like most Turks have really cast their lot with AKP not so much for solidarity with their ideological goals--whatever those are--but to show the generals that their peculiar "secularism" no longer holds any weight in Turkey and that they disagree with discrimination against Islamist candidates.

For once, BBC has a decent map of the results, here. Currently with about 60 percent of ballot boxes reporting, we have:
AKP 48%
CHP 20%
MHP 14%
independents 6% (not all of which, of course, is for independent candidates who will be elected)

Canadians aren't civic, too

It seems like we always hear about how Americans don't know anything about the United States. Or maybe we don't always hear about it; regardless, it's true. Most native-born Americans couldn't pass the citizenship test.

But, apparently, they have the same problem in Canada! And while most first-generation immigrants can still pass, native-born Canadians do dismally--and are doing worse now than they did 10 years ago. Only 40 percent of native-born Canadians would pass their citizenship test. This Globe and Mail article has more, with Canada Day tomorrow (July 1). The test is linked to from the article; I got 17 of 19 (although with multiple choice).

Sprawl doesn't kill people, people kill people

As an amusing aside, I link to: "The Phony Problem of Sprawl." Unfortunately, a majority of Houstonians would probably find no problem with it.

As a fun enrichment game at home: find as many dubious statements as you can. Then, compare with your friends. Cross off a flaw that you both have. The person with the most remaining wins!

By the way, checking comment #2 counts as cheating, kind of.

Might want to say that more softly...

In a move sure to play well on Iraqi TV, George Bush apparently said that Israel is a good standard for Iraq to work towards, as quoted by the BBC:

"In places like Israel, terrorists have taken innocent human life for years in suicide attacks. The difference is that Israel is a functioning democracy and it's not prevented from carrying out its responsibilities. And that's a good indicator of success that we're looking for in Iraq."

Right. And Israel faces multiple suicide bombings and car bombings on a daily basis as well as sectarian death squads working within its army and police force that are leaving thousands dead. Uhhh, wait a minute... when was the last suicide bomb in Israel again? Oh yeah, but Hamas sporadically fires ineffective missiles at an isolated border town. Same thing as Iraq, pretty much.

Anyway, Iraqis, the point is that Israelis aren't letting a few stray missiles here and there prevent them from carrying out their responsibilities! Figure it out already, if you want to be like Israel! Take advantage of your freedom! (By the way, Iraqis, a good way to unite your population is to fight a foreign war. Maybe try that out... invade a small neighbor or something...)

Houston is... a big city

First, consider these facts:

• Houston is larger than Los Angeles (but has just over half the population).
• Houston is almost twice as large as New York City (yes, all five boroughs) in land area.
• Into Houston, you could fit...
• Philadelphia, 4.3 times
• Seattle, 6.9 times
• Washington D.C., 9.4 times
• Boston, 12 times

Now, I just want to know how many roads Houston has--as far as just square footage, or even just length. For those of you who ever played SimCity, it reminds me of when you would build too many roads and maybe try lowering road payments under 100%, and the road would start turning into rubble. Yeah. That actually happens somewhere... it's called Houston.

Past that, though, is the question... why is Houston so freaking big? Turns out (not surprisingly) the answer has something to do with Texas annexation laws and such. All the information that follows can be accredited to what I gleaned from a Texas Municipal League document I read on the Web a few weeks back (the TML is pro-annexation, note):

• First of all, there are two kinds of cities in Texas: home rule cities (I think that's what they're called) and other cities (I don't remember the name... general law cities I think). Anyway, point being that home rule cities can make their own ordinances, and general law cities can't.
• But also, home rule cities can annex up to five miles beyond their limits, pretty much whenever--although some laws have made it a bit tougher. The only thing they can't do is annex another home rule city. They have the obligation to provide services within a couple of years to whatever land they annex.
• The point of this (according to TML) is that cities don't get screwed over: they get the tax base of an expanding area, unlike in other metropolitan areas, where these areas would incorporate into suburbs and not give the city any tax revenue, hence making the city a blighted area and downward spiral, etc. (so if this is where we are with annexation, imagine where we'd be without it...)
• TML also states that cities don't really get much revenue from the state government; hence, they need that local tax base to keep going. (I would argue that a probable effect of some of this is to hinder improvements in more well-off areas, whose inhabitants are more able to collectively act and otherwise don't want to pay more taxes to improve poorer parts of town. Hence why the roads suck even in good parts of town--if the city were able to raise taxes to pay for them, that still wouldn't be the infrastructure most in need of work.)
  

Now, what would I say if I were dictator? I'd say that at least some zoning regulations are in order, and the ridiculous growth out should stop in favor of "filling in the gaps," i.e. the vacant lots that are everywhere. But hey, what do I know?

I'm alive!

Really. I'm not dead. However, I am caught in a whirlwind of a tornado of a twister of things, and it's really been enough for me to follow what's going on with the French and Belgian elections and everything over in Gaza, let alone comment or do any sort of strategic analysis. Once July hits, I should have things a little easier.

Few surprises in Spain's autonomic elections

Spain's elections in the Autonomous Communities today produced very little in the way of drama or surprise; indeed, the results were pretty much the same as in 2003. The opposition Partido Popular (PP) did seem to make more gains, relative to the ruling Socialist Party (PSOE), taking a greater percentage in Madrid.

It appears that the only government which may change hands is that in Navarra, where a potential Socialist-Nafarroa Bai-Navarra United Left coalition has won more seats than the local conservative parties. (Nafarroa Bai--"Navarra Yes"--is a combination of the Basque nationalist parties EAJ-PNV, EA and Aralar). However, the ability of these parties to come to agreement is far from certain.

Note that the most volatile Communities, the Basque Country and Catalonia, did not hold elections; neither did Galicia or Andalucia.

Meanwhile, the opposition Partido Popular took the most votes in the municipal elections in all of Spain, with a margin of about 157,000 votes (0.7%). This is a slightly greater margin than the PSOE's victory in the same in 2003, and gives the PP some confidence, as since 1983 the winner of the municipal elections has won the following general election.

The Continental League debuts

Yet another new independent league--the Continental League--made its debut tonight, including in League City, Texas, where the hometown Bay Area Toros faced the traveling-team Texas Heat. The Continental League is one of eight independent leagues to play this year; together, the leagues total 64 teams, including probably the most famous independent team, the St. Paul Saints of Mike Veeck.

The Bay Area Toros are apparently run by a former Rice assistant athletic director; they play their home games at a high school, Clear Creek HS. (This is a larger high-school ballpark than I'm used to in the Northwest; it seats at least 1,000 in its bleachers, though it has no seat backs.) Overall, they seem like a well-run operation.

Tonight's game was well-attended in relation to the stadium, as there were few empty seats. Notably, the focus was on baseball, not on gimmicks; the crowd seemed into the game, and a large percentage stayed until the end of a game that went 10 innings and took almost four hours. The league president was there and went around meeting fans, and overall the environment was very positive. (The quality of play at a glance seemed around Class A ball).

As would be expected, the park was the only real negative. In addition to the lack of seat backs, the park is oriented towards the northwest, meaning some serious glare. A chain-link fence between the backstop and the field interferes with vision. The only real solution is to succeed at the gate and eventually get a new park (as was already discussed a few days ago in the Chronicle).

I'm quite surprised that the Continental League chose to begin play this year, given that it has only three home markets--two in the DFW market, plus League City (situated between Houston and Galveston). The track record isn't good for leagues that begin without at least a few solid home teams. The Houston area, however, would seem ripe for independent league play; in a market of over 3 million, the Astros are the only game in town once NCAA baseball ends.

I meant to provide pictures, but I forgot my camera, so that will have to wait for the next game... perhaps tomorrow.

[Final note for those in the Northwest: Clear Creek HS was attended by none other than Jay Buhner--"the Bone"! There's a name I hadn't heard in a while...]

Update: Hey, it's me on the Toros homepage! Check out this nice pic...

PCL baseball in Reno won't be successful

Looks like there's an agreement to move an unnamed Pacific Coast League team (Tucson? Omaha? New Orleans? Las Vegas?) to Washoe County, aka Reno-Sparks, Nevada. The following are the smallest five PCL markets, plus Reno:

17. Reno, NV, 410,000
16. Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA, 534,000
15. Colorado Springs, CO, 599,000
14. Tacoma, WA, 767,000
13. Albuquerque, NM, 817,000
12. Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA, 823,000

Note the following:

• The Iowa Cubs, with the smallest market in the league, have been quite successfully managed and continue to outdraw their market by the largest ratio. This is an outcome that is by no means guaranteed, and the Midwest is one of the top minor-league regions in the country.
• Colorado Springs and Tacoma are regarded as weak markets.
• Omaha is doing quite poorly.
• Albuquerque, with a renovated stadium and a second chance (after their original Dukes took off), has been supportive--and has almost twice as many people as Reno.
• Nick Lachey is a part-owner of the Tacoma Rainiers (not really relevant, I guess...)
  
• Reno's independent-league efforts have failed, although the Golden League is giving it another shot this year.

All in all, clearly someone thinks this is a good idea, but there were people who thought the West Tenn Diamond Jaxx were a good idea. I'd predict a decent first couple years, followed by a fall-off to attendance near the bottom of the league; to be fair to the PCL, there aren't many good markets left, and with some teams struggling, this may look like the best of the bad options, but you wish that they'd just make things work rather than move into a probably doomed market.

And they say all parties are the same...

Well, maybe. Apparently in April (see El Mundo), the Socialist Party of the Canary Islands (PSC-PSOE) got caught copying the platform of the party Ciutadans (C) of Catalonia. Yes, different parties, from different parts of the country, with pretty much the same platform. It's not just "pretty much the same"... it is the same:

From "125 measures for the first year of a Socialist government: for change in the Canaries" [PDF] (my translation):

We reaffirm the right of the citizens of the Canaries to refer to the Defensor del Pueblo, who is also defender of Canarians; to defend their rights and freedoms when those are threatened by public powers, whether they be autonomic, local or national.

From "100 proposals to improve Catalonia" [PDF] (again, my translation):

We reclaim the right of the citizens of Catalonia to refer to the Defensor del Pueblo, who is also defender of Catalans; to defend their rights and freedoms when those are threatened by public powers, whether they be autonomic, local or national.

The second is the original; the first is the copy. (What, you couldn't tell?). Now, no more comments on how all those politicians are identical!!

This is part of the lead-up to tomorrow's Spanish municipal and autonomic elections--more on those as the results come in.

Farmers Branch: why not STV?

A judge has ruled that the Dallas suburb of Farmers Branch cannot enforce its new ordinance against renting apartments to illegal immigrants. The judgment apparently held that the city created its own way of determining whether or not a resident was legal, a responsibility that belongs only to the federal government.

I would be against this ordinance for a couple of reasons: first, because it seems likely to lead to some harassment of people who are legal, but happen to be Hispanic; second, because if all communities adopt similar ordinances, it probably won't cut the number of illegal immigrants, but it could have a very substantively negative impact on the conditions they and their children live in.

What interests me more, however, was further down in the article:

The federal suit, on behalf of three Latino voters who live in Farmers Branch, claims minorities are underrepresented because of the at-large city council system.

It seeks the creation of single-member districts, in which a city council member is elected to represent a specific section of the city. Both large and small cities with diverse racial makeup use the system, said Rolando Rios, the attorney leading the suit.

Activists say if the method had been in place, at least one Latino candidate would have been elected to the council and could represent the group. All five council members are white men.

This assumes that the only or, at least, primary way to represent a voter is by racially descriptive representation. This may be true on this issue, but as the article notes, all five current members of the council are white men. What about women? What about representation on the basis of nonracial issues?

Instead, the plaintiffs would have the city box itself into a racially charged model of electing its City Council by creating seats "reserved" for Latino voters (much like, of course, the U.S. Congress), at the expense of other forms of representation, and at the expense of "disenfranchising" the minority-majority white population in the "Latino" district.

Why not ask, instead of a district model, for a proportional representation model--in particular, the single transferable vote? STV would maintain the system of citywide representation while representing what voters want to see represented.

This is just, of course, a microcosm of the U.S. system in general: if we just took measures to make things more proportional, there'd be no need for ridiculously gerrymandered districts [warning--PDF] to satisfy someone's exclusive concept of "representation." Then the Texas legislators would never have to go to Oklahoma again!

Welsh Assembly MMP: not quite proportional

The results from the Welsh Assembly elections are in, with some interesting results:

Labour - 29.6%, 26 seats (43% of seats)
Plaid Cymru - 21.0%, 15 seats (25% of seats)
Conservative - 21.5%, 12 seats (20% of seats)
Lib Dems - 11.7%, 6 seats (10% of seats)
local independent - 1 seat
others - 16.2%, 0 seats

The facts that most jump out are:
(1) Labour won a disproportionately large share of seats, despite the MMP system, and
(2) Plaid placed ahead of the Conservatives despite a slightly smaller regional vote share.

Both of these issues stem from characteristics of the MMP system that Wales (and Scotland) use for elections. The Welsh system has 60 seats, with 40 elected in single-member constituencies and 20 elected from the five regions (four per region) as compensatory list seats. The two features that lead to the outcomes noted above are:
(1) The system does not compensate for overhangs. Every region has 11-13 seats, of which 4 are compensatory and the rest are from single-member constituencies. Taking South Wales West as an example, Labour won all 7 single-member districts (63 percent of the seats already) but took only 36 percent of the PR vote, meaning it deserved only 5 of the 11 seats. In the version of MMP used by Germany or New Zealand, Labour could keep the 7 seats, but an additional 6 seats would be awarded to other parties, increasing the size of the legislature by two. Not so in Wales (or Scotland)--the extra seats are scrapped, meaning fewer seats for the others.
(2) Compensatory seats are only 1/3 of the Assembly. Enlarging compensatory seats to 1/2 of the Assembly, even if overhangs are still not included, would mostly eliminate the problem.


The overhangs described in (1) give Labour five extra seats in the Welsh Assembly. The big loser was the Conservatives. In the regions where Labour took extra seats in constituencies, the Conservatives were generally the party that lost the compensatory seat which was no longer allocated. This happened in North Wales, South Wales West and South Wales East. (The Lib Dems also lost two seats in this way).

If overhangs were incorporated into the electoral system, the results would have been:
Labour - 29.6%, 26 seats (40% of seats)
Conservative - 21.5%, 15 seats (23% of seats)
Plaid Cymru - 21.0%, 15 seats (23% of seats)
Lib Dems - 11.7%, 8 seats (12% of seats)
local independent - 1 seat
others - 16.2%, 0 seats
The Assembly would be enlarged from 60 to 65 seats.

Labour would still enjoy a disproportionate share of seats, but not by quite a large margin.

Elections for Turkey

The Constitutional Court made its unfortunate, yet predictable, ruling today, "upholding" the secular system by rejecting democracy. The response of PM Erdogan was the election call. In a previous post I noted how the opposition's argument has little actual merit--the New York Times, too, noted that the decision was more political than legal.

Abdullah Gul is the only clear presidential candidate because he is the candidate of a party that holds very close to 2/3 of the seats (the necessary majority). Note that this is possible because of the antidemocratic 10% threshold for the National Assembly. As a result of this threshold, AK took about 65% of the seats with 34% of the votes in the previous election, as only two parties qualified for parliament. This threshold exists because of the fear of marginal Islamist parties.

While AK obviously is on a much different position in the political spectrum from myself, were I Turkish I would support AKP as the best party to lead the country toward full democracy. In fact it is doubtful whether any other party could accomplish this! In this role AKP has been thrust into a liberalizing position, whatever the natural tendencies of its leaders such as Gul and Erdogan. In order to defend their right to be in the political spectrum, AK figures must reach for legitimation to liberal democratic rights--meaning that the Islamist party is (quite effectively) enacting economic reforms needed for EU membership and supporting all-around political reform and liberalization. Quite unlike some other places.

Well, we will see the electorate's opinion soon enough.

Will Canada have a majority government again?

Referring, of course, to a single-party majority government.

I would argue that the days of single-party majority government are permanently over.

A Conservative majority would require the hold on the West to continue, plus about 2/3 of Ontario and half of Quebec. This is the most likely scenario for a single-party majority but still unlikely due the continued failure of the Conservatives to catch on in Ontario, and the large constituency that simply will never vote Conservative.

A Liberal majority would require a virtual sweep of Ontario, as in '93 or '97, a return in Quebec, and a sweep of the Maritimes. That is to say, all the conditions of the '90s--but the right wing isn't divided anymore. The only alternative would be a Liberal reemergence in the West, which is not on the immediate agenda.

Nobody else will be close to a majority anytime soon.

Especially given the impetus in many provinces (BC and Ontario most notably) toward electoral reform, it seems likely that Canadians will eventually tire of the cycle--not necessarily of minority government per se, but of votes not translating correctly into outcomes. This heralds a change toward PR on a federal level, and possibly coalition majority governments. But I would predict there will not be another federal single-party majority government--and in the unlikely event there is, it will be Conservative.

Turkey elects a president

Turkey's presidential election has been the focus of some speculation for a while, as current Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan mulled a bid for the position. His moderate Islamist AK Party decided instead on Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul (the same one who served as PM while Erdogan was not in the parliament immediately after AK's victory). This is a good decision, as Gul is generally seen as more statesmanlike and diplomatic than Erdogan; it may benefit AK as well, since Erdogan can remain at the party's head in upcoming elections.

Now, since AK is Islamist, this has of course caused a wave of angry reactionism from the powers that be in Turkey about how this somehow threatens the secular system (nevermind that an Islamist agreeing to become part of the system strengthens its relevance and creates more buy-in from all Turks; cultivating popular acceptance has never been as big a priority as crushing opposition for the Kemalist government). Anyway, the opposition CHP has organized big demonstrations in Ankara, and today the army apparently issued a warning to the government.

Meanwhile, CHP is challenging the election in the Supreme Court on some sort of grounds that 2/3 of all deputies need to be present (they stayed away from the Grand National Assembly for just this reason). I can find no justification in the Turkish constitution for this:

Article 96 Quorums Required for Sessions and Decisions
(1) Unless otherwise stipulated in the Constitution, the Turkish Grand National Assembly shall convene with at least, one-third of the total number of members and shall take decisions by an absolute majority of those present; however, the quorum for decisions can, under no circumstances, be less than a quarter plus one of the total number of members.

Article 102 Election
(1) The President of the Republic shall be elected by a two-thirds majority of the total number of members of the Turkish Grand National Assembly and by secret ballot. If the Turkish Grand National Assembly is not in session, it shall be summoned immediately to meet.
(4) If a two-thirds majority of the total number of members cannot be obtained in the first two ballots, between which there shall be at least a three-day interval, a third ballot shall be held and the candidate who receives the absolute majority of votes of the total number of members shall be elected President of the Republic. If an absolute majority of votes of the total number of members is not obtained in the third ballot, a fourth ballot will be held between the two candidates who receive the greatest number of votes in the third ballot; if the President of the Republic cannot be elected by an absolute majority of the total number of members in this ballot, new general elections for the Turkish Grand National Assembly shall be held immediately.

There is no other condition for a quorum, so the AK Party's contention that the quroum to meet is 1/3 of the members seems correct, and the CHP's demand for a new election immediately seems to come from nowhere. If the Constitutional Court rules in favor of CHP, and bows to the army, it will set Turkey back yet again, especially in the eyes of Europe. For the sake of freedom in Turkey it should be hoped that the Court will stand up to this attempted intimidation--part of the same reactionism that was part of the Orhan Pamuk and Elif Shafak prosecutions, that characterizes the continuing intimidation of legal Kurdish groups and activities, and the murder of Hrant Dink.

The first debate!

From my delayed viewing of the first Democratic candidates debate on MSNBC...

Hillary Clinton: Worst response was the first part of the debate, on Iraq. Repeated the insufferable line about how we gave Iraqis the "opportunity for freedom." Her health care response started interestingly, as she emphasized the middle class that already has insurance but is struggling to afford premiums, then she went on to say something along the lines of getting the most out of our current system before we pay any more for something else. What does she mean by that? Her website has no policy, so I don't know! She did take the opportunity to redirect a possible criticism of Obama (opportunity handed by the moderator) into Bush criticism.

Barack Obama: Barack was, as usual, pretty generic. His health-care response was straight out of The Audacity of Hope. He took a few opportunities to emphasize the need for a national movement. Three candidates had a question on the abortion decision, and all three took different angles; Obama emphasized women's choices in concert with families, doctors and clergy (he didn't miss the chance to throw that in). My favorite answer of his was actually to the question "what is your biggest mistake of the last four years?". He was the only one to answer nongenerically, saying that he should not have left the Senate during the Schiavo case but should have stayed to fight for families' privacy.

John Edwards: I was unimpressed with Edwards on Iraq (he seemed smug about his position) or on his wealth. His SCOTUS response was to emphasize the need for a Democrat to appoint the next justices--predictably for a trial lawyer. He did win points for having the most specific health-care response.

Bill Richardson: I wasn't actually aware of some of Richardson's positions before the debate. He was good on Iraq--the most specific and committed of any of them. Said if he were president he would withdraw everyone before 2007 is out. On health care, said that there's a lot of waste and that it should be cut, and no raising taxes, but no specifics. Top three priorities: out of Iraq, energy independence, climate change.

Joe Biden: Biden wins points with me for saying "If we want the best students in the world, we need the best teachers in the world." Otherwise, his response on Iraq seemed to be a mandate to the Iraqis! Good responses on gun control, the NAACP and South Carolina, and on his mistake ("overestimating the confidence and underestimating the arrogance of this administration"). When asked if he'd be able to be president despite some of his notorious errant comments, stated, "Yes."

Chris Dodd: I don't think he said too much to stand out. He put a lot of emphasis on his experience and political background, which isn't necessarily the way to go. Good responses on why welfare recipients should not have drug tests, and on justifying civil unions by "thinking if it was your own kids" (though I disagree with his opposition to gay marriage).

Dennis Kucinich: Alternated between awkward (which he always is), unrealistic (international peacekeepers in Iraq!), and somewhat decently principled (in response to abortion, America needs a "culture of life" that includes a lot more than just abortion). But hey, we should support his campaign because it "comes from the heart."

Mike Gravel: Who is this guy? He tried to grab attention by criticizing Iraq and the other candidates over, and over, and over again, hijacking a question about nuclear energy and turning it into terrorism and why the war was wrong. Rambled about Congressional strategy to pass a law to end the war in Iraq. Tried to engage Barack in an argument (along with Kucinich) while Hillary stood in the middle rather awkwardly. Says all the "top-tier candidates" "scare [him]" and seems to imply they will support an Iran invasion. He might get a little attention, but not sure what he'll get out of that...

Overall: No huge winners or losers; this was really more of a warmup. Richardson is a rational guy with a couple policy stances that seem a little off with the base. Obama, Clinton and Edwards said nothing new. Biden is probably the biggest riser.

Computer problems lead to book use!

I've meant to comment on a number of pending issues, but instead I've had a lot of computer problems. My computer contracted some sort of bug that made the CPU run very slowly and wasn't picked up by any spyware/malware programs, so I ended up having to do a system recovery. Now I can't access my old documents through some sort of Windows quirk--they're sitting there, but I can't get into the directory!

While dealing with that, I've been able to catch up on some reading. I read large parts of Philip Short's Mao: A Life the other night, a book which I started a few months ago, and I've been reading parts of Chernow's Alexander Hamilton as well. Both appear to be excellent biographies of memorable figures in world history. Short describes Mao as a master politican during the years of the PRC, extremely sensitive to criticism, especially as he got older, but also extremely concerned with his legacy--a legacy which he ended up failing to protect (to the benefit of the Chinese). Hamilton, a remarkable figure, emerged from an impoverished background on the island of Nevis, and took advantage of the unique times he was in to be one of the most profound shapers of the United States and our current system. I'm looking forward now to completing both books in order. I also finished Doris Kearns Goodwin's Team of Rivals a couple of weeks ago; I will post some sort of review as soon as I catch up with life, and Windows XP.

Reckling Park grandstand

As promised, a few more pictures of Reckling Park on the Rice University campus. Today the Owls defeated UCF 8-0, sweeping the Golden Knights in the weekend series. Rice is now 13-2 in conference play and 33-11 overall.


A look at the grandstand from right field.
The main entrance behind home plate, looking out.

Home plate entrance is on the left; this is the exterior down the first-base line.

France's first round: lack of surprise is a surprise

Looks like the polls were more accurate than anyone wanted to admit. With about 64% of votes counted, Nicolas Sarkozy of the UMP has taken over 30%, with Ségolène Royal, the Socialist candidate, taking just under 25%. François Bayrou of the Christian-democratic UDF is around 18% and perennial nationalist candidate Jean-Marie Le Pen has 11%.

Extremely high turnout, probably around 85%, was advantageous to the main candidates. It seems many, many people turned out because they did not want to see a spoiler candidate (i.e., Le Pen) in the second round. And those who voted Le Pen last time as a protest this time either voted for a main candidate or for one of the other candidates. The polls did not hide any Le Pen votes as Sarkozy votes this time around.

What does this mean for the second round? Well, Sarkozy has made a very strong showing. He needs to net some of Bayrou's following while also managing to convince those who voted for Le Pen to come around to him--i.e. appeal to the center and to the right. Royal has a tougher time, as she will probably take the vote going to the smaller leftist candidates, but absolutely needs a strong majority of those who voted for Bayrou. This is possible, if she can continue to frame Sarkozy as too extreme and liberalizing.

All that said, the polls going into today were showing a very narrow (2-4 point) Sarkozy lead in a hypothetical runoff. Still, I give Sarkozy a 60-40 shot at this point.

Oh yeah... how did I do? Well, I accurately stated that the two major candidates would make the runoff, but definitely underestimated their percentages, and overestimated Le Pen. Everyone, including me, was looking for a surprise; but the only surprise was the turnout, not the percentages.

Interesting facebook stats...

are available now, thanks to the newest (yes, another) design of facebook. Looking at the networks for U.S. News's Top 28 national universities (why the top 28? Because that's as far as I got), some interesting notes:

• The #1 interest, at every school, is the suitably generic "Music." #2 is almost always "Reading" (understandable exceptions: "Skiing" at Dartmouth; "Movies" at USC).
• As for that music, 25 out of 28 schools had Coldplay #1 in mentions. The Beatles, Radiohead, and Jack Johnson were the most common #2 and #3; some combination of those two popped up almost everywhere.
• In movies, the two most commonly cited movies were Fight Club (#1 at a majority) and Wedding Crashers. As you move down the rankings, Wedding Crashers becomes more prevalent. The only school with a different #1 was Harvard (Love Actually).
• TV provided an interesting pattern. Almost everywhere, the top program was "Family Guy" or "Grey's Anatomy." A top predictor of which was #1 was provided by whether there were more self-identified male or female students. "Family Guy" schools averaged +5 percent male. "Grey's" schools averaged +3 percent female. (One school--Princeton--had "24," then "Family Guy," then "Grey's"; it is +7% male).
  
• And for the readers, "Harry Potter" as a generic category was #1 at all schools. #2 was split between several books, the most common being The Great Gatsby and The Catcher in the Rye, with no discernable pattern showing.
  
• As for self-identification of sex, the top male school was MIT (44%) and the top female school UNC (46%).
• Students at the very top schools tended to be more discreet about their political leanings and relationship status. At the top 10 schools, an average of 57 percent revealed no political affiliation; at the remaining 18, the average was 51 percent. The gap was even more profound for relationship status (52 percent versus 43 percent).
• As for that relationship status, 40-45 percent of those divulging tended to say "single," and at all schools, 32-36 percent of those responding said "in a relationship" (of course, this counts facebook-only relationships). At most of the 28 universities, from 6 to 8 percent of all in-network people stated "married," and from 2-4 percent said "engaged." "It's complicated" almost always netted 2 percent of the network and "in an open relationship" (almost always fake) 1 percent.
• The top school for singles, relative to those responding, was UCLA (52% single), with USC (51%) a close second. The lowest proportion of singles was Harvard (37%).
• Finally, as for political affiliation, on a scale of 5 points for "very liberal" and 1 for "very conservative," and excluding "libertarian," "apathetic," and "other," the top 28 broke down as follows:
• Most liberal: UC-Berkeley (3.85), Yale (3.82), Brown (3.80), Columbia (3.77)
• Most conservative: Notre Dame (3.02), Vanderbilt (3.11), UNC (3.16), UVA (3.40).
  
• Note for Huskies: UW (not one of the 28 included) comes in at 3.48, towards the middle of the ranked schools.
  

You'd think these are a somewhat accurate reflection, despite the inclusion of some alumni.

Reform in Ontario?

Exciting developments in Ontario, where the Citizens' Assembly, a randomly chosen body of citizens from each of the 103 current provincial ridings, decided to overwhelmingly endorse reform to an MMP system. The system the Citizens' Assembly provides would combine 90 ridings with 39 province-wide closed-list seats--i.e. minimal change while providing proportional outcomes. It is already facing the predictable opposition from the main parties and establishment, and must clear a 60 percent threshold to pass, but it certainly deserves support. See democraticSPACE for more.

The NDP has come out in support; BC and PEI have already rejected reform, though BC seems likely to move to STV (having voted 58 percent in favor last time, Note: the approval threshold was 60 percent) in 2009. New Brunswick is currently studying the issue.

Correction: New Brunswick is actually done studying the issue; the Commission on Legislative Democracy proposed an MMP system with 36 riding and 20 closed-list seats in 4 regions (also recommending that the new system prohibit riding candidates from running on a list, and vice versa). However, it is unclear if the new Liberal government will call the referendum, which was promised by the previous PC premier, Bernard Lord. This would be sadly appropriate, as the Liberals just won the 2006 election despite losing to the Conservatives by 1,400 votes.

A big weekend for elections

It's a big weekend for elections, with Nigeria at the polls now and France voting tomorrow. In Nigeria, I would predict a ruling-party win, violence, and denunciations by the opposition--in other words, I am taking the easy guess. In France, I predict that despite all the talk of Bayrou or Le Pen possibly spoiling, that Royal and Sarkozy will go to the second round; however, I think that Royal will be substantially closer to Sarkozy than the polls have stated, and that both will be around 22-23 percent with Bayrou and Le Pen no more than 4 points behind.

In other election news, Manitoba Premier Gary Doer has called elections for May 22.

Photos of Reckling Park

It's more expensive to see a game at Rice's Reckling Park--$7 in the bleachers down the lines and $10 in the upper reserved--but the park has more of an atmosphere than UH's Cougar Field. Renovated and reopened in 2000, the park maintains somewhat of an older atmosphere through its brick exterior and concourse building (I'll take photos of that this weekend). However, it is comfortable, has great sightlines and has a nice modern press box behind the stands. I enjoyed the atmosphere--as with many college baseball games, many in the crowd knew each other, and I saw at least four or five other people keeping score near my section!

Skyline of the Med Center part of Houston.
Down the home-team side.
Rice's playoff appearances--the program has been competitive on a consistent basis since the mid-'90s.

Am I the only one who'd never heard of Don Imus?

Don Imus no longer has a job due to his comments, which seem to have enraged a large portion of the blogs that I read on a regular basis.

I generally agree with them, but I have little to add, because to be honest I'd never heard of the guy before this whole thing. Is Don Imus more well known on the East Coast? Or am I just not in his demographic? Or is it neither, and I'm just out of the loop? I feel like everyone else knows more than me about this one... at any rate, nothing out of the media really surprises me anymore, and I'm more interested in the linguistics of the issue than the story at hand.

Franken posts some good numbers

AP reports that Al Franken has raised almost as much campaign cash as Norm Coleman so far despite not even starting until February. Franken has received big donations from figures such as Tom Hanks, Larry David, Lorne Michaels, and Kevin Bacon.

Quote of the night: "Franken has held two fundraisers in California this year -- one in Los Angeles and one in California, said his spokesman, Andy Barr."

New Baltic governments

In Finland, after the surprising surge by the conservative National Coalition (Kansallinen Kokoomus) in the March parliamentary elections, KOK will be incorporated into the new government. If all goes well in upcoming talks, the government will be formed by Finnish Center (Suomen Keskusta), the party of PM Matti Vanhanen; the Kokoomus; and two smaller parties, the Swedish People's Party (Svenska folkpartiet), which is always in government, and the Greens (Vihreä Liitto). Helsingin Sanomat provides more detail on the coalition negotiations.

One might expect that the new government platform will have something to do with lowering some taxes, increasing competitiveness, and perhaps doing something in the direction of a guaranteed minimum income (giving recipients more flexibility). One question HS brings up is what position will be awarded to wildly popular Sauli Niinistö, the 1994-2001 party leader and '06 presidential candidate (who almost defeated incumbent Tarja Halonen and relegated PM Vanhanen to a distant third). Niinistö served as finance minister in both Lipponen SDP-led governments (1995-2003), but that post apparently will go to current party chair Jyrki Katainen. Possiblities include foreign minister or speaker of the Eduskunta. (Apparently, the latter is a fairly prestigious position; the previous holder of the office was ex-PM Lipponen himself).

Governments in Finland tend to be supermajorities so that no small party can hold the coalition "hostage." The last government, KESK+SDP+SFP, met this criteria as Keskusta and SDP together held 108 of the Eduskunta's 200 seats. This time, KESK and KOK together hold 101 seats, a razor-thin majority; SFP holds 9, and the Greens 15, giving the coalition a total of 125 and not allowing either Greens or SFP to hold out on any particular issue.

SDP leader Eero Heinäluoma has criticized the Greens for participating in the government; this really just seems like sour grapes, especially before a platform is out. Hence we will have to see what comes of the negotiations. (Who knows... maybe the notorious Vanhanen's purported liaisons with a Green MP had something to do with it? Don't take my word for it, check out all these links in Finnish I can't read).

Meanwhile, in Estonia

The Center Party (also KESK, since Estonian and Finnish are family members) has been kicked out of government in the new post-election scenario. The new government (already sworn in on 5 April) seems rather awkward at first glance, incorporating the conservative Pro Patria/Res Publica Union and the Social Democrats as well as the free-market Reform Party of PM Andrus Ansip.

I have absolutely no idea what has led to the formation of this government, and the only suggestion I would have is that perhaps the Center Party's reportedly more pro-Russian (perhaps better to say less anti-Russian) stance got it booted from government, along with personal rivalries and the close finish between Center and Reform. This was probably more galling for the Center Party, which had the most seats of any party in the previous coalition; Reform surged ahead of Center to become the largest party in parliament. Hence electoral calculations (rather than policy) may have played a role, though that's pure conjecture.

As far as policy goes, it appears the government will cut the flat tax from 22 to 18 percent. The new government also reiterated its determination to remove the Soviet war memorial from Tallinn.

Update: This blog has a lengthy analysis of the Estonian government formation.

I am not talking about garden implements!

The continuing controversy over broadcaster Don Imus's comments has had a beneficial side effect for me: I can spell a new word! Maybe.

The New York Times reports that Imus's offense was to call the Rutgers women's basketball team "nappy-headed ho's." Now, if we break it down, "ho's" is the plural form, and we come up with the singular form ho' (the apostrophe cannot, of course, be part of a pluralization, unless done incorrectly). This would make sense, since the word omits the following "r" sound of the original ancestor word. However, were the singular to be spelled ho, then ho's is a clear grammatical error.

AP, via ESPN.com, disagrees with NYT, however, using the plural "hos." This form seems to leave open the dangerous possibility of pronouncing the word "hoss," as in "Ol' Hoss."

How, exactly, are these cases decided at a newspaper? Majority vote? Or is the word ho' really in somebody's Style Guide?

Addendum: In no way do I condone the comments Imus made, by the way, but I haven't followed it closely so I have nothing to add to that discussion; there's plenty in the mass media. To me, honestly the more interesting aspect is this linguistic one.

Who wants Howard to run?

A poll done in Australia at the end of March (posted here at Angus Reid) says 55 percent of Australian voters want John Howard to lead the Coalition into a new election.

The only question is... which voters? Only 38 percent of Australians say they'd vote for the Coalition. If I'm a Labor voter, I may want to see Howard running. Just like as a Conservative Party member I wouldn't want to see Gordon face a challenge...

Shots of Cougar Field

The Houston Cougars played the UAB Blazers this afternoon in the finale of a three-game C-USA series, the Cougars emerging victorious 10-3. The crowd was tiny, due perhaps to (1) Easter, (2) unseasonably chilly weather and (3) a simultaneous Astros game; tickets were $7, perhaps a little more than I'd like to pay but not bad (the red reserved seats lower are $10). Given the paucity of fans, I was able to claim a first-row bleacher seat right behind the plate and keep score, something I hadn't done in a couple of years. (As for the "chilly weather," I thought it was pretty much perfect, but I assume many locals would disagree).

I took the opportunity as well to take a couple photos of Cougar Field, next to Robertson Stadium on Elgin St on the UH campus. It's a nice field and looks just like a comparable lower minor-league park from what I can see. Quite a contrast to Husky Ballpark, which looks temporary (because it is) and is in a beautiful but horribly windy location on Lake Washington...

A modern scoreboard sits in right field.
The grandstand with an enclosed press box and a roof on the upper seats.

In the game itself, the Blazers struck in the top of the first, but Houston scored four in the bottom of the first and knocked out the UAB starter. UAB had very little patience at the plate, letting the UH starter out on 5, 9, 16, 9, and 8 pitches in the first five innings. He finished having thrown 76 pitches in 7 innings. Cougar batters showed a good eye and walked seven times, which was key in the victory. The linked article above provides an overall summary.

As I left, fans were already arriving for the bigger sporting event of the night, David Beckham's Galaxy debut against the Houston Dynamo... I will probably be back next weekend, however, as Houston hosts crosstown rival Rice in a three-game series.

Phone solicitation!

What is it with the inability of phone solicitors to deliver their lines with some sort of emotion? I've received two calls so far from Obama For America, and while I'm sure the operators are volunteers who are convinced of the mission of the campaign, they don't convey it to me! What they are able to convey is that they've been sitting next to the phone too long. (They also thanked me for my donation in February. What donation?)

At any rate, I just get annoyed by donation calls, being newly out of college and not particularly affluent, and I wish they weren't so necessary. Can't say they haven't been effective despite it all, though.

Most... ridiculous... writing... ever

Well, not quite, but check out this blogger on conservative National Review, about the British soldiers.

Choice quote:
"In any case, there was no evidence of torture or mistreatment in any of the filmed cases I have seen. They look just fine. You can't fake that."

Wonderful. Also, via Daily Kos, check out the article from The Guardian which explains how Blair turned down flat American offers to use military ops to pressure the Iranians.

What lies beyond the northern border

Word is that the Washington Post will close its Toronto bureau. In and of itself, not that big of a story, except that there will be no more American newspaper correspondents based in Canada. At all. Yes, there's been a lot of cost-cutting at paper media, but there can't be just one correspondent to our north?

Of course, since Canada is the same as the U.S. anyway... just change the tagline from "Los Angeles" to "Toronto" and it'll sound right, won't it?

Medal of Honor goal almost reached!

The Seattle P-I reports that fundraising is almost done for the memorial to honor UW's Medal of Honor recipients.

Congratulations are due to those who have been behind this effort from the beginning. Medal of Honor winners have done a great service to their country and represent the UW showing the same courage, selflessness and model character we would desire of all alumni.

I had a longer post witten, but really, no need to dredge up past controversies...

Change afoot in Turkmenistan

Once a week the Turkmenistan Project (part of George Soros's Open Society Institute) posts digests of the news from that Central Asian country. The news of late has been very positive, on a relative basis. Since the death at the end of last year of president-for-life Saparmurat Niyazov and the inauguration and then "election" of Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov, the country has already been opening up:

• Berdymukhammedov has abandoned daily recitation of the oath to the leader, which is now for special occasions only, and replaced the word "Turkmenbashi" with "President";
• The year of secondary schooling dropped under Niyazov has been readded, 23,000 teachers rehired, and foreign languages put back in the curriculum;
• Pensions which had been dropped to veterans, agricultural workers and others as well as maternity benefits are being restored;
• The Academy of Sciences will reopen;
• Health clinics outside Ashgabat (closed by Niyazov--actually by Berdymukhammedov when he was Health Minister under Niyazov, not that he had a choice) are to be reopened;
• Internet cafes have opened, and seem to be relatively free in terms of content, but are too expensive for most Turkmen;
• The president has restored communication with Azerbaijan after eight years of silence and is restoring ties with others as well.

While it is certainly more boring to read the digests than it was when Turkmenbashi was ruling, the Turkmen people have every reason to celebrate. The negatives: the blatantly rigged election (inevitable) and the detention of an opposition leader in Bulgaria after a Turkmen request to Interpol. The goal of Berdymukhammedov is probably to establish a stable authoritarianism as elsewhere in Central Asia, but really, who knows?

Price discrimination at Dodger Stadium

The L.A. Times reports on price discrimination in baseball:

The Dodgers sell tickets in the field box section for $20, $30, $35, $37, $40 and $45, depending on whether you buy on game day, before game day or as part of a full-season, partial-season or group ticket package.

What's the ticket price? The Dodgers offer you 104 answers in all.

Inevitable as prices climb higher. To put those higher prices in perspective, with some numbers from when I was tiny and not yet aware of baseball,

In 1987, the Angels sold tickets for $8, $7, $5 and $3 and the Dodgers for $7, $6 and $4, with every seat on the same level at the same price.

Hmm. If I count the Dodger increase as 500 percent ($7 to $35, $6 to $30, $4 to $20), that's 8 percent every year for 20 years. And they wonder why you can't get kids interested in baseball anymore... maybe if they could go to more than one game a year there'd be a better chance.

Québec: reactions

Well, to update my favorite story, in Sherbrooke it appears that the reason for Charest's speedy recovery was indeed the counting of the advance votes. In 2003 Charest won the advance votes by about 1,000 votes; it would appear that he won them by a similar or even greater margin this time, as he was trailing by up to 700 votes during the count, then recovered to win by over 1,000.

Reactions from the Canadian blogosphere include:

democraticSPACE reflects on where the projections went right, and wrong.

Paul Wells has much to say.

Antonio reflects from Quebec.

Calgary Grit last night, and on Boisclair--in particular, his statement that 2/3 for the opposition = PQ victory.

Red Tory the night of; on the aftermath; and on Dumont's "autonomism".

Notes on San Diego

As I mentioned a while back, I took a vacation to San Diego a couple of weeks ago. I figured a couple of comments were in order:

First, there is a light-rail system, called the Trolley. Started in 1981, the Trolley is now 51 miles long, but of course, since it's a transit system built into a preexisting city, and a spread-out one at that, its utility is limited. Some of the stations don't seem to be close to anything, in particular, and you can't get to the beach or airport by trolley. I had a difficult time understanding the termination of the Blue Line and Green Line at Old Town. The Blue Line comes north from San Ysidro and terminates at Old Town, while the Green Line runs east from Old Town to Santee. I'm sure there is some traffic-pattern reason for doing so, but I have no idea what it was, and it was inconvenient for me, thereby making it a bad thing...

According to the Wiki article, plans are underway to run a line up to La Jolla, which would have really cut down the time on our trip to the UCSD campus. We bought the four-day passes for $15, which were a decent value considering we stayed (relatively) close to a trolley station and the passes are also valid on the bus.

Part of the Old Town station.


The other comment I have is on Petco Park. We went on the tour (very entertaining and informative). My favorite feature of the park is the integration of the historic Western Metal Supply building... followed up by the fact that Padres owner John Moores (who got his start in software in Houston) owns pretty much all the buildings around it.


All in all, despite the needed improvements to the transit system, San Diego is a great city and I hope to be back sooner rather than later. (And hey, compared to Seattle or Houston, it's tough for me to really say anything negative about transit!)

Québec returns come in

Well, yesterday I was going to make the fearless prediction that Dumont's ADQ would beat one of the major parties in the vote percentages, but I didn't. Maybe I will look dumb for not doing so by the end of the night. With 11% of the votes in, it's neck-and-neck.

8:07 CT The CBC has already posted a "Charest reelected" article. Do they know something we don't? According to the returns so far, with about 15% of precincts reporting in Sherbrooke, Charest is trailing by 126 votes to the PQ candidate.

8:14 CT Well, they've pulled the article from the main site, and Charest still trails. Boisclair and Dumont, on the other hand, are leading comfortably. Wouldn't it be crazy if the PLQ emerged with the most seats but Charest lost his own riding?

8:25 CT ADQ and PLQ are still leading in 45 circonscriptions each with PQ behind holding 35. The popular vote is closer, PLQ first, ADQ just behind, PQ a couple percentage points back. Boisclair's probably done, and it's looking more and more like Charest really could lose Sherbrooke; he's trailing by over 300 votes and 30 percent of "bureaux de vote" (I know I shouldn't say "precincts") are reporting.

8:42 CT Charest's chances don't look too good. Not being able to watch Canadian TV in Texas, I have no idea what's being speculated. Who takes over if Charest falls in Sherbrooke? Deputy premier Jacques Dupuis? The PLQ is still leading the overall seat count...

8:43 CT And I'm resolving never to silence my own fearless prediction, ever again.

9:49 CT Interestingly, Charest is closing the gap late. With about 15% of polling stations left, he's back within 250 votes. Probably about 3,000 votes are still out, so it's certainly possible he could pull it off.

9:57 CT Whoa. The one polling station that just reported apparently had something like a 140-vote advantage for Charest, who's pulled within 110 votes in Sherbrooke. Meanwhile, yes, there is an election going on in 124 other ridings. About 94% of polling places have been counted, and somehow, first-second-third are the same in the vote totals as in seat totals, despite the total mess that has been created.

10:23 CT Huh?? Another three polling places have come in for Sherbrooke and Charest now leads by something like 700 votes. Apparently, everyone, their mom, and their dog here voted for Charest.

10:33 CT OK. Charest was trailing by 250 votes after 182 stations were counted. With another six stations in, he's now up by 915 votes. How, exactly, did he manage this? In 2003, he did not win a single polling place in Sherbrooke by a 200-vote margin--only a couple by a 100-vote margin (according to my very quick glance at the data) and now he's managed to make up over 1100 votes in six? Perhaps some reporting polling places hadn't counted all their votes?
It should be noted additionally, and should have been taken into account, that the PQ dominated the 2003 advance vote, probably by a 1300-1400-vote margin, which accounts for much of the early lead held by PQ candidate Forgues this time around if it held.
Not that I'm casting aspersions or anything, it would have just been a lot more interesting as an observer if Charest had lost, and I've got no personal stake in this. But there will certainly be enough action on the horizon regardless.

10:49 CT Anyhow, whatever the case, they say Charest won the riding by about 1300 votes (half his margin of 2600 from last time, and down from 47% of the vote to 37%). The overall results in the province, with over 99.5% of polling places in, show:

Liberals: 33.1%, 48 seats
ADQ: 30.8%, 41 seats
PQ: 28.3%, 36 seats

Boisclair may be done as PQ leader. Big surprise for the ADQ, which exceeded even the most optimistic polls. The Liberals, usually the party with the smallest "winners' bonus" due to their large margins of victory in anglophone ridings, have a relatively large margin this time with ADQ and PQ splitting lots of ridings. The big question is what this heralds for the provincial political scene--three parties? realignment of constituencies? all of which is beyond my abilities to look at tonight, but which will undoubtedly lead to some interesting consequences. And probably another election fairly soon.

lolcats

I generally don't comment on changes to my links, but... please welcome the newest addition to my "Other Links," I Can Has Cheezburger?

An example of their fine work:

Québec heads to the polls

Jean Charest's Liberal government (no relation to Stéphane Dion's federal Liberals) in Québec goes to the polls tomorrow to seek a renewed mandate. Polls make it a very close race between the usual second party, the separatist Parti Québécois, and the conservative Action démocratique du Québec, a third party for years, which has surged to within striking distance of the top two.

DemocraticSPACE projects a minority Liberal government, with the numbers being:
Liberals, 35.7%, 55 seats (of 125)
PQ, 29.6%, 47 seats
ADQ, 25.9%, 23 seats

ADQ emerges far weaker because its support is spread throughout the province. The PLQ is always somewhat disadvantaged (relative to its percentage of the vote) by winning supermajorities in anglophone West Montreal. Therefore, percentages don't generally translate neatly into seat totals.

Whatever the total, there are major shifts in the Québec political landscape underway, and this election will not be the end of the story.

Do Husky renovations make sense?

Washington AD Todd Turner has decided that he wants to pursue major renovations to Husky Stadium. Last December, renderings were released (see the Seattle Times) that show a brick-and-glass exterior. The Seattle P-I more recently reports that there are two options being presented to an ad hoc university committee: either (1) do the full renovation--probably $200 million or more, or (2) spend $70m on smaller projects to keep the stadium functioning. The project is more urgent right now because Sound Transit will be working on the light-rail line in the area and improvements to SR-520 from 2009 to the mid-2010s and it makes sense for all work to take place during the same timeframe.

Now, as much as I love the Dawgs... does it make any sense for public money to go to another great football stadium? Especially with the Sonics seeking public funding for a new arena as well? Husky Stadium being part of UW, it's my impression there won't be a whole lot of non-UW events taking place there... the renovations would eliminate the track... and Turner has admitted that a lot of fundraising has already been conducted for the new Legends Center, narrowing his base for the new renovations (not to mention, the team isn't too great these days).

I'd put the odds of success pretty low, and deservedly so. Still, I'd hope against hope they find a magnanimous donor who loves Husky football and hates academics (therefore ensuring that his/her football donations don't preempt academic donations)...

Parliamentarism in Africa: or, why not?

A dispute between Parliament and President João Bernardo Vieira in Guinea-Bissau appears as though it will boil over. The three main parties in parliament--the former only ruling party PAIGC, the main opposition PRS of former president Kumba Yalá, and the other opposition party PUSD--have agreed on some sort of "pact of national unity," the main point of which, undoubtedly, is to dismiss the PM Aristides Gomes, a Vieira ally, and impose their own candidate on Vieira, who does not have his own party.

While Guinea-Bissau has (for no really good reason) been a long-time special interest of mine, the question this dispute raises is broader: why on earth have so few African countries tried a parliamentary system? Even as the continent converted to democracy in the 1990s, very few chose a parliamentary system.

A bit of history: essentially all the former British colonies started as parliamentary systems. Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Nigeria, Ghana, The Gambia, Sierra Leone, Mauritius, Botswana, the Seychelles--all adopted a Westminster-style system with first-past-the-post voting after independence. In almost all, the prime minister eventually decided he wanted to be president, the post of Governor-General was eliminated, and a parliamentary system became a presidential one, generally around the same time as opposition parties were also banned. This repeated over and over, from Nkrumah in Ghana to Kaunda in Zambia, Mugabe in Zimbabwe to Banda in Malawi to Kenyatta in Kenya. On the other hand, the former French colonies were presidential systems from the start, imitating the Fifth Republic.

And today, even as new constitutions have been drawn up or constitutions revised, parliamentarism remains untried except in a few cases. South Africa has adopted an essentially parliamentary system, as has Namibia; Botswana has retained its system since independence (though without a change in ruling party); Ethiopia has adopted parliamentarism, but its democratic credentials are very questionable, especially after 2005. The most notable attempted reform was Kenya, where Mwai Kibaki's National Rainbow Coalition swept to power promising to establish a parliamentary system (President Kibaki promptly discarded most of the promise, and the watered-down constitutional amendments were rejected in a referendum).

More countries have adopted proportional representation, though most are presidential democracies. Many of the French-speaking former colonies, in particular, have proportional representation (a by no means complete list includes Senegal, Togo, Benin, Burkina, Mali, and Niger). SA and Namibia also adopted PR, and Burundi and Rwanda use PR. The rest (especially the ex-British colonies) have retained FPP.

It seems as though ethnic politics could be one key reason for the leaning toward FPP. Parties which can win, regionally, in FPP among their own ethnic group have no incentive to let broader-based parties emerge as competitors and may prefer their guarantees under the existing systems. This does not explain the tendency toward presidential systems, however. One would think the advantages of a parliamentary system--in particular, nonfixed government service that allows for non-confidence votes--would carry the day at least in some cases, were democracy to be the primary objective.

So then, the question is--Who wants a fixed, independent executive, and why? The existing elites may be the answer. Perhaps the fixed presidential term creates more perceived stability. Remember, too, that the president is therefore responsible for most patronage, especially distribution of foreign aid and top jobs--and with weak political parties, he can form personal coalitions in the legislature to support him. Therefore, support flows to the president, who dispenses patronage, and elites do not have to worry about the party that they support losing a parliamentary election; support is transferred to the new president, and things continue as before.

Secondly, many (though not all) transitions were begun by existing strongmen. Rawlings in Ghana, Kerekou in Benin, Diouf in Senegal, Kaunda in Zambia, Banda in Malawi, Moi in Kenya, Museveni in Uganda, Kagame in Rwanda, Chissano in Mozambique, and others all hoped to win reelection to their positions in the new, more open system. Abolishing the importance of their own job was not on the agenda. (Again, the exception was Ethiopia, but we see how the possible threat to Meles Zenawi's rule turned out...).

In South Africa and Namibia, where PR-parliamentary systems were adopted, there has been less risk to elites--the winners were clearly known in advance (the liberation movements, ANC and SWAPO, have dominated despite highly proportional systems). If presidentialism is the side effect (yet also cause) of instability, perhaps as democracy starts to take root in some countries, insecurity diminishes, and (not necessarily linked) economic institutions become more secure, we will see a push for parliamentarism or at least the adoption of PR in some countries where FPP is still in charge.

As for Guinea-Bissau, donors (who must be called upon for anything relevant to happen) are, not surprisingly, uneager to fund a new election, so it seems likely that some sort of solution will be worked out. If not, of course, the military could always step in again.

Ice cream for girls?

From Sweden, it sounds like there's a sordid new corporate plot...

According to GB, the 'Girlie' ice pop signals a "sense of summer", "star status" and "a disco feeling".

The Swedish Consumers Association however uses an entirely different word: "gender-profiling".

"Girlie, GB's new ice pop, is pink and has make-up inside the stick. It says a lot about what GB thinks about girls and how they should be," said the association in a statement.

It seems likely to fail, however, as its fate is already known:

"I question whether there is a demand [for the ice pop]," said [Consumers Association] secretary general Jan Bertoft.

Well... if there is no demand for the ice pop, why even try? Let alone market other products of its type? If it were to succeed, what would be next? Pink backpacks? I shudder to think about it...

This does pose an interesting question (if not an original one), especially for an American like myself who is used to anything and everything being marketed. The sorts of statements above are a rather quintessential example of the Nordic model to me. What is the greater good? Free production despite possible social consequences, or the maintenance of identified limits to preserve society? I think I know what most Americans believe...

Finland: SDP gets the boot?

Finland has held elections. Unfortunately, due to vacation, work and the previously mentioned car accident, I don't have time to analyze at great length. A previous post briefly discussed some issues in the election. It appears that the SDP (Social Democrats) campaigned more from the left in this election and there was some tension between the coalition partners.

The big winner in this election was the conservative (economically free-market) Kansallinen Kokoomus (translated as National Rally or National Coalition). The Finnish electoral system is open-list PR in regions; the leading vote-getter nationwide was Kokoomus's popular Sauli Niinistö in the large Uusimaa constituency (the suburbs of Helsinki). Overall, Kokoomus gained 10 seats and increased to 22.3% of the vote, its second-largest percentage since WWII (the largest coming in 1987, after which Kokoomus entered the government for the first time in the postwar era).

The big loser was the SDP. The party took 21.4% of the vote, its lowest share since 1962, and goes from 53 to 45 seats. PM Matti Vanhanen's Suomen Keskusta (Finnish Center) lost vote share but remains the largest overall party.

Regional voting patterns remained as usual: the Kokoomus was not really a presence in the north, but won a smashing victory in the south, taking over 30 percent in Helsinki and over 25 percent in the major Uusimaa and Varsinais-Suomi (Turku area) constituencies. Meanwhile, the Keskusta, as usual, did not figure even in the top three in Helsinki and managed only 12 percent in Uusimaa, but swept central and northern Finland, taking 43 percent in Oulu and Lapland. The best party at keeping a nationwide presence, the SDP, did so, but lost vote share mildly almost everywhere.

The main disproportionality is the 9 seats won by the Swedish People's Party--as usual, the party's vote is concentrated on the Gulf of Bothnia and particularly in the Vaasa constituency, where it won 20 percent. The SFP won more seats than the Christian Democrats despite fewer votes as Finland has no national compensatory pool.

Finally, the only party to significantly gain, besides the Kokoomus, was the mildly nationalist/populist True Finns party, which got 4 percent of the vote and 5 seats this time around.

What is the end result? Contrary to polls, the SDP lost significantly and KOK gained. The Swedish People's Party will probably stay in government, as it always does, but it looks like the SDP could get booted out for the first time since the KESK/KOK government of 1987-91 and Finland might take a somewhat more free-market turn. Either way, Vanhanen will remain prime minister.

Brief results at Parties and Elections in Europe; more complete results at the Ministry of Justice; there has been some interesting discussion at a blog called Finland for Thought, though be aware that it's written by expats in Finland and generally biased toward the rightist parties.

City frustrations

Some cities are apparently well run.

And then there is the Houston website.

I will leave the complaints about potholes, random road closures, and other such infrastructure troubles (as well as overall cluttered unsightliness, pollution and socioeconomic problems) aside for now. I want to discuss the website, the portal through which people connect to the city.

Houston's website is here. Note something about the drop-down menus on the front page. Yes, they go behind the pictures. They've been doing that for a while now.

I had a car accident today (got rear-ended by a guy on the interstate while stopped in traffic). Apparently, here the police don't come out... you go to a substation with the info to file the report. I don't know if that's common in larger cities so I have no comment on it. I went to the website to search for a station close to me (actually, I googled "Houston Police Department" and wound up at the police website, which is part of the main website). Note first that the police website uses a rather unattractive older template (only the front page of the website has really been changed). The left sidebar scrolls even though it doesn't take up the entire page, and it is unclear whether it refers to the police or the entire city (I'm pretty sure it's the latter).

I then spent a long time trying to find the listings of police stations. You'd think one of the top choices would be to know this. But no... although you can view crime statistics, there's no link for "find a station." At length I did find it (through the "Contact HPD" button--here it is). Note that the listings state that the storefront in Neartown is open 24 hours. So, of course, I drove there, and it is open 6 am to 10 pm. I arrived around 10:08 and will have a return trip early tomorrow morning.

Right.

For reference, here are some other cities which seem to have decent web designers... Seattle, New York, Chicago...

In this day and age, if you're a U.S. city and you don't have a good website, what are the odds of things being better once you actually get there? This complaint might seem petty, but as you might guess it's part of a pattern of rather greater frustration.

My short absence

I haven't posted for a while... unfortunately the (my job-related) real world has impinged somewhat on my ability to comment here.

For the next week I will be on a needed vacation on the beaches of San Diego--highs projected in the low 70s. So I will have little to say about elections in the meantime, but look forward to returning a bit rejuvenated!