Columnist Jon Ralston: Election Day worth the wait

Friday, Oct. 15, 2004 | 5:12 a.m.

"Clark County Commission candidate Jerry Tao was sued for slander today by incumbent Chip Maxfield, only four days before the election."

-- Possible news item

"On the weekend before the election, Rep. Jon Porter today acknowledged that his son is in the health insurance business and potentially could benefit from the Medicare bill he voted for -- only 24 hours after his opponent, Tom Gallagher, acknowledged that he could not name the mayor of Henderson or say where the Galleria mall is located."

-- Less likely news item

"One day before the election, President Bush directed his agencies to reverse course on Yucca Mountain, thus ensuring the project will never be built."

-- Fanciful news item

IF YOU VOTED Saturday or plan to vote early in the next fortnight, you are either lazy or moronic.

More so this year than any other -- your vote really might matter more than ever from the top on down -- voters who don't wait until Nov. 2 to use the most precious right they have are doing a disservice to themselves, some candidates and the Founding Fathers. Forget the scenarios above if you will. But doesn't it worry you that if you cast your vote before Election Day, you might miss something, even a chance to (this is a heretical thought) learn more about someone or something?

Imagine how the republic has devolved from the erudition of the Lincoln-Douglas debates to today's diminution of discourse with arguments about a lesbian daughter. And yet the more things change, the more they remain the same -- we have evolved from the 1884 personal attack on Grover Cleveland's putative bastard -- "Ma, Ma, Where's Pa? Gone to the White House. Ha ha ha" -- to Internet conspiracies about the presidential candidates that range from the bizarre to the insane.

And so the biennial wail about so-called negative campaigning reaches a crescendo, creating a convenient excuse for the slothful and negligent, the willfully ignorant and the sheepishly sheep-like.

In the greatest age of information in the history of the universe, half the Southern Nevada electorate will vote before all the obtainable information is in, ruminating about how they don't know and don't want to know.

Sample, hardly fanciful dialogue:

"I'm off to pick up the dry cleaning, hon. I think I'll pick up a six-pack and vote, too."

"Sounds good. Who are you voting for in those Family Court races, dear?"

"No idea. If there's a woman, I'll probably vote for her."

Most of you reading this have made up your mind in the presidential race, which may not be as egregious a sin. But isn't it worth waiting until two weeks from Tuesday just so you can see how low President Bush and John Kerry will go? Perhaps the depths of disparagement will change your mind about your man. But even if you say you are inflexible on the White House race, you cannot make an excuse for being so immutable on the important state and local races.

Take Congressional District 3, for example. Yes, Gallagher is a significant underdog to Porter. But they have yet to debate on television, so all most of you know is what you see on their TV ads. Why not wait until the two televised debates this week? And, perhaps, Porter will reverse himself on two others that he committed to and then recanted the commitments, coincidentally after stretching his lead?

You are playing into the hands of all incumbents with advantages if you vote early. Their campaigns are geared to push you to vote before any adverse information surfaces -- information that may be sensational, may be true or may be scurrilous. But why not take the time to find out instead of throwing away your vote on someone you may later find is not what you thought -- or even worse?

And sometimes it's worth waiting to find out more about those challengers you liked, too. What about these revelations, uncovered by my colleague Launce Rake, that show Tao tied to anonymous and potentially slanderous phone banks that are accusing Maxfield of all kinds of nastiness?

It's one thing to accuse a county commissioner of being hopelessly conflicted or in the pocket of special interests -- that's de rigueur. And Tao, a local prosecutor, certainly has been creative since he cannot match Maxfield's campaign war chest.

But Tao now has shown that he is willing to employ underhanded means to sully Maxfield, and this story will play out this week and the next. How could anyone vote without seeing what's true and what's not? There is no excuse.

And what about the races down the ticket -- for the Legislature, for judicial positions? How many people will be voting in those races without the slightest clue as to whom they are honoring with their ballot? And how many simply will not vote in those races at all, showing some responsibility with their ignorance but displaying it nonetheless and wasting their franchise?

Most of all, with the potential for voter fraud as high as it has ever been, don't you want to see to what lengths both parties will go in the final fortnight? You should.

And if you don't, you are either lazy or moronic.