Wednesday, March 28, 2007 Got a question? Get an answer. Send an e-mail to Dear Mr. Mullings Dear Mr. Mullings: In the Men's NCAA Basketball Tournament why doesn't the overall number one seed play the winner of the play-in game which, by definition, should be the 64th (and therefore weakest) seed. Many I wondered about this as well but after taking some time (and a few glasses of wine) to think about it I do believe I have come to an answer. First, let's talk about the concept of "seeding." There are 64 teams in the NCAA Basketball Tournament - four "regions" of 16 teams each. These are called the "brackets." Seeding ensures that the best teams can't play each other until late in the tournament. It would not make for good television if the brackets were drawn by lot and, say, UCLA (by luck of the draw) was placed to play Florida in the first round. The NCAA has a bunch of guys who sit in a room and pick the best four teams. The "seed" each of the four brackets with one each. In 2007 the four "number one seeds" were: North Carolina - East Florida - Mid West Ohio State - South Kansas - West Florida was determined to be the "overall number one" seed in the tournament; Ohio State was "overall number two." Therefore the brackets were laid out so Florida could not play Ohio State unless and until they both made it to the championship game. All this is done on the Sunday before the Tournament starts. In the first round, the number one seed in each bracket plays the number 16 seed. Number 2 plays number 15. Number 3 plays 14, and so on. In each bracket the number 8 team plays number 9 which means two very evenly matched teams have to go head-to-head right off the bat. Now, to the play-in game. In 2001 it was decided that 65 teams (including winners of small conference championships which gain an automatic "bid" to the tournament) would be chosen but the 64th and 65th teams would play a game on the Tuesday prior to the opening of the Tournament (which is always on the ensuing Thursday) to see which advanced to actual 64-team scramble. Logic might dictate that the 65th team should play the overall number one team but that would be wrong. Inasmuch as the play-in game is on Tuesday that would mean that the overall number one team would not know its first opponent until late Tuesday night - a disadvantage because all the other teams knew their opponent the previous Sunday. Therefore it falls to the fourth "number one seed" (this year, Kansas) to have to suffer the indignity of playing the 65th team; with only a day-and-a-half to prepare. Since the tournament expanded to 64 teams, no #16 has ever beaten a #1 seed. Dear Mr. Mullings: Do residents of the District of Columbia get to vote in Presidential elections? Peter Yes. Residents of the District of Columbia do, indeed, have a vote for President. They also have a vote for Delegate to the US House. However, that Delegate (currently Eleanor Holmes Norton) does not have a vote on the Floor of the House (although she does have a vote on the Committees to which she is assigned). In the election of 2004 the District's three electoral votes went to John Kerry in a nip-and-tuck election which ended: Kerry - 202,970 (90%) Bush - 21,256 (9%) The residents of Puerto Rico, Guam, and American Samoa do not have a vote for President. With the Democrats in control of the House, there is a strong move afoot to give the Delegate from DC full voting rights. In order to balance things out, a deal was struck to add one vote from DC (a Democrat) and add one vote to Utah (which would be Republican). The bill (H.R. 1433) was pulled from the Floor a week or so ago when Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tx) attempted to amend it by adding language which would do away with the District's ban on gun ownership. The Democratic leadership assumed that too many Democrats would vote for the repeal rather than risk the wrath of the NRA (of which I am a proud member) and their many constituents who are also members. I have discussed this issue with many senior Democrats in Washington, DC and have made the point that the residents of Washington don't seem to care much whether their Delegate has a vote or not. I have recommended that, to demonstrate the depth of feeling about this issue, they organize a general strike every - say - Thursday afternoon. No taxis, no busses, no non-crucial police activity, no teachers, no students going to school ... That generally ends the conversation. Dear Mr. Mullings: Last week you wrote that Hillary could choose Bill to be her running mate. Isn't that a violation of a Constitutional requirement that the President and Vice-President be from different states? 837 of you sharp-eyed Mullings Readers That's not quite correct. The 12th Amendment begins thus: The electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; So, if the President and Vice President both lived in (and won the electoral votes from), North Dakota, it would simply mean that the Veep would probably get three less electoral votes overall than the President. If, however, the President and Vice President both lived in, say, Texas then the 34 electors (32 for the number of Members of Congress and two for the US Senators) would have to vote for a Vice President who lived somewhere else. This happened in 2000 when Governor George W. Bush picked Dick Cheney to run as his Vice President. Cheney, who had been a resident of Dallas, heighed it up to Wyoming and established residency there. He had some claim to that as he had been a Congressman from Wyoming. In the case of the Clintons, it would be a simple matter for Bill to move back to Arkansas. Actually, this might have additional benefits for the Clintons. This, from the State of Arkansas web page dealing with residency when filing for divorce: A spouse must be a resident of the state of Arkansas for at least 60 days prior to filing for the divorce and the divorce will not be finalized until a 3 months waiting period has passed after the initial filing. If Hillary won the election Bill would (a) be Vice President and (b) Single again. Upon taking the oath of office, he would probably substitue for the more familiar "I Do" the phrase: "Whoo Hoo!" Last one Dear Mr. Mullings: I was fascinated by your note a few weeks ago that you spent hours on flights watching your video iPod. Mine seems to last no more than 2-3 hours playing videos on battery power. Have you found a suitable aftermarket portable power source? Brian Alesandria, Va The new Fifth Generation iPod appears to be able to go about three hours doing full video. I also have my Fujitsu laptop which will do another three hours on videos. I have extended the battery life of my laptop by copying the video files to my USB flash drive (4 gb) so the hard drive doesn't have to run continuously. Just two days ago I found a terrific website in London Maplin.com which offered for sale a solar power supply which, it promised, does "not need sunlight, only daylight" to be able to charge iPods, cell phones, and the like. I ordered one and will report on its efficacy when I get it. Don't tell the Mullings Director of Standards & Practices but I also bought a "Satellite in a Suitcase" which appears to be a deal whereby one can set up a satellite receiving system from any location and ... well, I'm not entire certain what happens then, but I'm VERY certain that no one else sitting at the Starbucks in Old Town on Saturday mornings will have one. See you next week. Rich Got a question? Get an answer. Send an e-mail to Dear Mr. Mullings                                     Click here to return to the Secret Decoder Ring page Copyright © 2007 Barrington Worldwide, LLC