Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 11:04AM This is weird.
I just read a study based on a survey of over 9,000 migrants in Mumbai. The top 3 reasons for migration: employment, marriage and family feuds.
Family feuds are number 3?? There is an interesting story in there somewhere. The study is detailed, but didn't elaborate on this particular finding.
The Census of India does not list family feuds as a reason for migration.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008 at 9:56AM Part of the controversy over the results of the 2000 election was about people who were registered to vote in two states and had actually voted twice.
This morning, I realized that I too could engage in this deception. It is surprisingly easy for some people to vote twice or more. All you need are residences in two or more states, which I don't think is very uncommon. Most students enrolled in a university out of their home state could do it. I could do it, since Tristan and I recently moved to North Carolina... its only my scruples that stop me.
I've already voted in Maryland. Since my polling place is near our condo in Baltimore, and I am staying with my parents in Potomac, I sent away for an absentee ballot, filled it out and sent it in. So there's one vote.
Vote number two, if I wanted, could be cast when I visit Tristan in North Carolina this weekend. I could show up at an early voting center in Orange County, where you can register and vote at the same time. To prove my address, I can use a non-state issued form of identification, like an electricity bill. Tristan could also use his Carolina student ID.
We are both registered voters in Maryland. But unless there is a national registry of voters-- and I don't think there is, since voter registrations are done by states-- there is nothing preventing us from registering twice.
Its very worrisome that the only thing preventing me (and many others) from casting two votes is either honesty or ignorance. After looking into this briefly, I learned that some double voters have been prosecuted... though I bet many others fall through the cracks. Voting twice can get you 5 years in prison.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008 at 2:35PM Yesterday I heard a talk by a McCain adviser about the candidate's position on foreign policy toward Asia. I can't refer to him by name because his talk was off the record.
He said that one of his biggest worries for US strategic relationships with Asian countries is how the United States' handling of the North Korea nuclear weapons issue has affected our credibility with Japan and South Korea. I think he was referring to the controversy regarding how the United States tried to cover up the fact that Pakistan (a U.S. ally) was a middle man in a transfer of nuclear material between North Korea and Libya. Or maybe he was referring to the Bush administration's general diplomatic process. But his point was that there is a trust problem that U.S. diplomats need to address. He said that whatever the U.S. does next, its actions have to be lock-step with Japan and South Korea, implying that maybe he thinks the United States has been working at cross purposes with these countries lately.
He also told an interesting story about his conversation with a high level Bush administration person, who you have definitely heard of but I won't name because he said it was off-the-record. He had called to question that person's planned absence at a summit of Southeast Asian countries. He described various reasons why it was important for this official to show up, which sounded fine to me. And that official said something along the lines of "If you want Southeast Asia to take you seriously, you have to show you're serious on the Middle East peace process." Meaning that the Middle East was sort of a vehicle for the United States to be effective in diplomacy in other regions as well.
I was surprised because it sounds like a dangerous approach, pinning diplomatic success in Asia to progress in a very difficult conflict. But the McCain guy didn't offer commentary on that... just that it was an interesting window into how some members of the foreign policy establishment think.
