While the jury is still out for several races across the country, the results are in for Missouri. I’m happy with some of the results and frustrated by others. I think the results of the races reflect what has always been a conflict in Missouri – an urban/rural conflict of interests.

Claire McCaskill easily carried Kansas City (as expected) and as I’m writing this seems to have carried Missouri by about 40,000 votes. I’ve already expressed my views on Ms. McCaskill’s campaign so I won’t repeat myself. What’s left to do now is see which of her conflicting positions she’s actually going to pursue and if the Democrats will actually be able to follow up on any of the big promises they’ve been making.

My choice for State Auditor, Progressive Terry Bunker, stood virtually no chance against the established party candidates. Personally, I don’t understand what party affiliation has to do with being Auditor. Bunker was the only candidate for the office actually bringing a specific agenda to the table in place of the typical empty campaign slogans like “prevent corruption” and “support Missouri taxpayers.” Bunker had specific, realistic plans to improve the financial efficiency of Missouri government – practical, easily implemented initiatives like energy audits. Once again, however, party politics and grand (empty) campaign slogans won out over actual, achievable plans.

The current US House Representative from Missouri District 5, Reverend Emanuel Cleaver II, was re-elected yesterday. Again, my current understanding of Reverend Cleaver’s contribution was outlined last week so I won’t repeat myself except to say that I think he is wasting taxpayer time and money. It’s no mystery, however, why a black Democratic minister is popular in Jackson County. I just hope the current momentum behind the Democrats will inspire worthwhile legislation instead of more House resolutions like the Horse Slaughter Prevention Act.

My choice for 10th District Missouri State Senator, Democrat Jolie Justus, easily beat her opponent, Republican Jerry Mounts. I think Mounts lost a battle of information. Perhaps reflecting his age, Mounts did not have a campaign website. In 2006 there is no excuse for this. Independent voters make their choice based on information, and the internet has become the most accessible, informative source available. In ignoring the internet Mounts lost votes by limiting his supporters to lever-pulling Republicans and voters who make their decisions based on 30-second television commercials. Even if I don’t agree with all of her issue standpoints, at least Ms. Justus knows what year it is.

Mike Talboy was elected 37th District Missouri House Representative – unsurprising considering he was unopposed. I glanced at his website this morning, and a message has been posted that says, “This was a fun and challenging campaign. We were victorious because of your help and hard work.” Challenging? He was unopposed! If he thinks that was tough, I don’t think he could possibly live through an actual contest. I hope he can live up to his campaign promises of supporting an increased minimum wage and legislation supporting stem-cell research… oh wait, that was already taken care of by popular vote yesterday. Well, since he’s fulfilled his campaign promises already I guess he can go ahead and take a vacation.

My choice for Jackson County Executive, Democrat Mike Sanders, easily defeated his Republican challenger, Bob Gough. Gough fell victim to the same problem as party mate Jerry Mounts – little or no information available. All I knew about him is what I had heard before leaving Kansas City 10 weeks ago – that he wants to stop what he feels is Kansas City’s pandering to the team owners in regards to the new Truman Sports Complex. His website is extremely unprofessional. It offers almost no information about where he stands on the issues, it looks like it was designed by a mediocre high school student, and there is a link to what seems to be a young couple’s wedding pictures. Like Justus, Sanders does not represent my views as well as I would like, but I’d rather choose someone I actually know something about than take a gamble on someone who still doesn’t seem to think he needs to make his views known.

Before moving on to the questions on yesterday’s ballot, I would like to mention that Missouri had a decent voter turnout yesterday of roughly two million people – about 40% of eligible voters. While I still don’t think that less than half of our voters turning out is something to brag about, it’s still better than a typical off-year election. I just hope the majority of those voters were not uninformed (or misinformed).

Missouri Constitutional Amendment 2, the “stem cell initiative” amendment, appears to have narrowly passed. I was hoping that it would not pass because I have a strong suspicion that the bill has much less to do with stem cell research than politics. The actual text of the document does so many legal acrobatics that I think we’ve only succeeded in making the issue more complicated. Time will see the effect of this amendment played out.

Missouri Constitutional Amendment 3, the “tobacco tax” amendment, appears to have narrowly failed. I don’t think the four cent tax on each cigarette is fair or necessary. Rather than using smokers’ money to pay for other people’s healthcare, why not let smokers keep their money? They’re going to need it for their own healthcare expenses in time. Personally, I think so-called “sin taxes” are ludicrous. Special taxes on alcohol and cigarettes are as ridiculous as taxing potato chips, and it adds unnecessary complexity to an already overly complex tax system.

Missouri Constitutional Amendment 6, the “tax exemption for veterans organizations” amendment, appears to have passed easily. To be honest, I don’t feel strongly about this issue one way or the other. I did support the amendment, however, because I think that veterans organizations deserve tax-exempt status as much or more than many other currently tax-exempt groups. Hopefully, this amendment will benefit Missouri’s veterans, and I don’t think the lost state revenue will be significant enough to have an impact on the budget.

Missouri Constitutional Amendment 7, the “elected officials compensation pensions” amendment, has passed with over 80% of the popular vote. I think this one was very straightforward. If you are elected to public office and commit a felony, then you forfeit your state pension. Public representatives are held to a higher standard than ordinary citizens, and asking that they refrain from committing a felony is not an unreasonable request.

Missouri Proposition B to raise the state minimum wage to $6.50 has also passed with about 75% of the popular vote. I had hoped that it would not because I don’t feel that it is an appropriate action for the state as a whole. This is perhaps the clearest conflict between urban and rural areas in Missouri. Unemployment in Missouri is currently 5%. That’s low enough that if you want a job, you can find one. The job market is strong, and if you show even a little bit of personal responsibility and work ethic I guarantee you’ll be making more than minimum wage without a government mandate. I really don’t see the minimum wage increase benefiting low-income urban populations because many unskilled jobs already pay that much due to competition for workforce. Flipping hamburgers in Palmyra may pay minimum wage, but I’m sure McDonalds in St. Louis is already paying at least $6.50 an hour to reliable employees. Now consider the McDonalds in Macon. That restaurant pays its employees less than the one in St. Louis because it makes less money. For rural employers, lower wages reflect modest profits and a lower cost of living. I’m sure the teenage employees of Macon’s McDonalds are happy about the wage increase, but I predict a lot of rural employers will be cutting jobs to accommodate higher wages. In the end, I think this is a feel-good proposition that isn’t going to benefit people in the city and will hurt some people in rural areas. Such a mandate is unreasonable for a state as socially and economically diverse as Missouri. I believe there is a case for municipal or regional “living wage” regulations (perhaps an increased minimum wage for St. Louis and Kansas City) but that’s an issue for another day.

Kansas City Questions 1 and 2 regarding fees for fire inspections and a transportation tax, respectively, are close races and the Kansas City Election Board shows only about half the precincts reporting at the moment. I’m hoping Question 1 fails because I think charging a fee for fire inspections is a bad idea. It will encourage some people skip inspection to avoid the fee, which places building inhabitants at risk. The fire inspection service is already funded through city taxes, and I feel that additional fees are unnecessary and counter-productive. I hope Kansas City voters support Question 2, the renewal of a 3/8-cent transportation tax to fund, among other things, the development of a light rail system and electric bus service. I think Kansas City could benefit greatly from a light rail system – especially if that system were to branch out to accommodate the hoard of commuters that swarm on K-10 and I-35/435 every day. Kansas City has always been a railroad city, and if city planners can come up with a solid plan to implement light rail before the transportation squeeze in Kansas City becomes critical, then I think it could certainly be successful. I also feel that there is a lot of promise for an electric bus system, and it could ultimately prove to be financially beneficial to the city as well as environmentally friendly.

So there you have it, my views on the issues on the Kansas City ballot in 2006. If you read all of this, I’m impressed. If you’re tired of hearing me rant about politics, then you’re also in luck. Hopefully after election news dies down I’ll be able to focus on other things… like the theme to Trogdor being included in Guitar Hero 2.