In the last installment of “Jersey Tawk,” I described the inspiration and template for the column, which would be to “get under the skin” of Mainers hostile to those of us from away.
It seems I got a bit carried away.
In my haste to make a point, I failed to remember some of my other rules for the column: be funny (or at least try) and more importantly, be positive.
I don’t mean be positive in the up-with-people, everything’s great, cheerleader sense; but to balance my criticism with solutions. They don’t have to be good solutions or very realistic ones, but if I’m going to take shots at other people then it’s only fair I give others a chance to return the favor. In that spirit, I’ve suggested everything from cloverleaves and overpasses for Route One to skyscrapers for Scarborough.
As for not bringing the funny, I’ll blame the season, which seems to have affected me with some sort of disorder (they should come up with a name for that). Now that we’re getting more sunlight every day, I’m hoping that will resolve itself.
In an attempt to make amends I want to go back to my last two columns and take myself to task for being too clever by half.
About a month ago, I wrote the Maine caucus system is “dumb” and irrelevant. I stick by the first part but it looks like I’m going to need to address the second.
First things first: the caucus system is out of style with the times. I believe it is theoretically a really great way to pick a candidate. Practiced as it is in modern times, there’s a lot to be desired. In both Cape Elizabeth and South Portland 108 people voted in their respective Republican caucuses. That seems odd as South Portland has a significantly larger population, but proportional to their populations, I’m willing to guess that there are more Republicans in Cape Elizabeth. (This could be easily verified, but I’m on deadline here). In either community, 108 people is a tiny minority of residents – or even likely voters apt to pull the elephant’s tail come November. Few can say there is little interest or information about those running for president, so there must be other reasons for the low turnout. I suspect it has something to do with the inconvenience of committing to the caucus process. We can lament all we want about the state of civics among the polis, but the fact is a huge majority of people simply opts out of the process. Maine should explore abandoning the caucus and adopt an open primary system with all parties hosting their primaries on the same day. If the name of the game is enfranchisement open primaries are the answer. If the game is keeping the selection process the province of a small clique of party and candidate activists ( and there are some good reasons it should be), I can understand sticking with the status quo.
Now, about the caucus being irrelevant.
In that month-old column, which followed the New Hampshire primary, I wrote that Mainers had likely seen their last campaign commercial (national spots don’t count). On Tuesday night I watched, twice, a Barack Obama commercial aimed at getting young Democrats to Sunday’s caucuses here in Maine. It’s a good commercial and you’ll likely see it again as well as more from the Hillary Clinton campaign. Super Tuesday yielded no decisive victor on the Democratic side and the two candidates will now fight for every last delegate they can get. Maine suddenly is now relevant. You can say it always was, and I’ll simply point to the Republican version. If you promise not to do that, I will admit to being completely, totally and utterly half-wrong. That’s as good as you’re going to get.
Two weeks after my “Maine caucuses are dumb” column, I wrote what many interpreted as a “Mainers are dumb” column. That it was misinterpreted is my failing as a writer and to many, I owe an apology.
I learned that column deeply hurt some people I care about who have a great deal of pride in both their state and their success in breaking out of the entrenched poverty trap I so cavalierly described. It hurts when someone puts you down. It makes you mad when the one who does it has had all the breaks and you’ve had none. I should know better than to be that guy.
If I could go back in time and revise what I wrote, I would have made clear that no state, indeed no society, has every figured out a perfect system of social security, economic liberty and liberal education.
If I implied that Maine has cornered the market on dependency, poor health and ignorance I wish to correct that characterization. New Jersey, for instance, right now has many more people in the worst economic circumstances than Maine ever will. Poverty and all the attendant ills I described are not character flaws inherent in those who find themselves in its suffocating circumstances and furthermore, each of those ills – dependency, obesity and ignorance – can be found well represented across the socio-economic scale.
My friends, I’m thinking of two in particular, have shown that people blessed with intelligence, ambition and industry exist everywhere. They have done more and gone further than this writer, who as the saying goes, was born on second base.
Well, that wasn’t very funny, was it? Plus I never got around to my suggestions for improving Maine.
Look’s like I have the subject of the next installment all figured out.
Stay tuned.