|
I apologize in advance for the length of this post, but I’ve been thinking about this for a long time, and I thought I’d post it to see if anyone has similar feelings. Obviously, there is a great deal wrong with our political system. I cannot believe that the system of government we currently have is the same one envisioned by the founders of our country. The following lists a few of these problems, along with my solution.
The Two Party System
How many times have you voted in a general election? How many of those times were you truly excited by your choices? Did you agree with your candidate on the majority of the issues, or was he or she just the least objectionable option? Was there a candidate from a minor party that really appealed to you, but had no realistic chance of winning? Well, welcome to the two party system.
With the current system, we really only have two choices in just about any election. Think about it, can you even name the last president that was not a Democrat or a Republican? It was Andrew Johnson, who wasn't really elected president and whose party affiliation was ambiguous at best. He called himself a member of the National Union party, but ran for re-election as a Democrat. Before that, it was Millard Fillmore, a Whig, all the way back in 1853. Because of this system, candidates are forced to align themselves with the major parties just to have a chance at being elected. Occasionally, a third-party candidate will ascend, but about all they accomplish is a possible skewing of the election to one of the major party candidates, as Ross Perot may have done for Bill Clinton, and Ralph Nader for George W. Bush.
Even members of Congress have to toe the major party line. Sure, we have Bernie Sanders, who calls himself a Democratic Socialist. There’s also Joe Lieberman, a former Democrat but who knows what the hell he is now. The other 98 senators, along with all 435 members of the House of Representatives are from the two major parties. Does that give us a true representation of America? Personally, I find it hard to believe that 99.63% of all Americans are truly Democrats or Republicans. Unfortunately for us, if you want to make a serious run for office, you have to declare yourself a Republican or a Democrat. And you better vote the way the party heads want you to vote, or else they may throw their support – and money – behind your challenger in the next primary.
Inequitable Election Rules
Democrats and Republicans do not have a monopoly on the two party system. There is also the arrangement between the Incumbents versus the Challengers. The election rules, purposely or accidentally, favor the Incumbents, particularly in congressional elections. Elections are usually won by the candidate that spends the most money. The incumbent gets to spend his or her term campaigning and raising money. Additionally, any funds not spent on the current election are stockpiled for future elections. There are even cases in which the incumbent runs unopposed, but the candidates still hit the fundraising trail. After a few terms in office, many politicians build enough of a war chest to crush any opposition – even from within his or her own party.
The challengers don’t have this luxury. They usually have one term or less in which to build their coffers. With such a one-sided arrangement, it’s difficult for a candidate to seriously challenge a sitting office holder. The only way to truly hold elected officials accountable for their actions is to threaten them with losing their seats. As it is, this is difficult to do.
Influence Peddling
As the title character says in the film Charlie Wilson’s War, “I’m not elected by voters, I’m elected by contributors.” It's a harsh reality, but it's true, and it allows too much influence to reside in the hands of too few. Corporations – who cannot vote - have more representation in Washington (and the state capitals) than we citizens. With the amount of money currently required to run an election, candidates and our elected officials are more concerned with lobbyists, PACs, corporate donations, soft money, etc., than with their own constituencies. This has to change.
Term Limits and Campaign Finance Reform
Almost unanimously, voters agree we need to pass legislation on both of these issues – especially candidates that are challenging the incumbent or running for a vacant seat. The only problem is that, once elected, the former challengers are not that motivated to fight for these issues. Remember the 1994 midterm elections and the Contract with America? These were two of the main planks in the Republican platform. Once the GOP gained control of congress, guess which two items did not come to be. Shocking, I know. Yes, we need term limits and campaign finance reform. I’m just not very confident that our representatives will ever – ever – pass such legislation.
What We Need
We can no longer trust the majority of elected officials to represent the voter. There’s no way to get individual laws passed that will help with all of these issues. The only way to do it is to enact a single bill that will directly or indirectly impact each of them.
We need a law that will put the power back into the hands of the voters.
We need a law that will remove corporations, lobbyists, and special interest groups from the election process.
We need a law that will force our elected officials to represent you, me, and the citizen’s of the United States.
We need public financing of elections.
If our elections were financed publicly, there would be no need for the constant fundraising that is currently the norm. Corporations would lose most of their influence, as they would no longer be donating to the campaigns. The sleazy, Abramoff type of lobbyist would be extinct, as would most of the special interest groups. Soft money would also be eliminated, and candidates would have no need to form PACs.
The two major parties would lose influence. The parties would no longer be allowed to spend money on the campaigns, so the candidates would not be as beholden to them. Since the parties would not wield as much influence, candidates would be free to vote their consciences instead of simply toeing the party line. This would lead to some candidates leaving the major parties for the parties that more closely align with their own beliefs. Wouldn’t it be nice for a candidate that leans left on most issues, but is staunchly pro-life, to not have to kowtow to the Democrats? Or another that is conservative on most things, but is an avid supporter of gay rights, being able to vote that way instead of how he’s instructed by those that control his purse strings? Instead of just the Democrats and Republicans, you could see Socialists in the Northeast, Green Party on the Pacific Coast, Protectionists in the Midwest, Labor Party in the Rust Belt, America First in the South, Progressives and Libertarians scattered throughout and, yes, even the Alaskan Independence Party. Obviously, these are just generalizations, but the elections results would better reflect the true demography of the individual constituencies. We would have many more voices expressing many more opinions. More than just two, anyway. And wouldn’t that be a better representation of America.
Since they wouldn’t be busy doing the bidding of big business, candidates would have to reconnect with the people who put them in office – the voters. If not, the new rules would make it much easier to replace the non-performers. Heck, you might even see congressmen actually living in their districts. But the main benefit is that we’d have what, in effect, would be term limits.
As I said earlier, this has bothered me for many years. I have obviously not researched this topic enough to know all of the ramifications, and I do not pretend to understand the logistics that would be involved. I have no data to back up my suggestions of the ripple effect of public election financing. This is just a SWAG. All I know is that we need a change. This system hasn’t worked in so long that I doubt those who were in power when it did work would even recognize the system we have now. If we don’t do something soon, it might be too late.
This might not be the best idea, but it’s all I’ve got.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(136 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
