People like to compare the elections to the Super Bowl. The Democrats and Republicans squaring off to see who will come out victorious. But there is a difference. After the Super Bowl, the two teams don't stop to see how they can make the seats better for the fans, work on building a new soup kitchen, or helping build up the stadium security. No, they immediately start work on how to defeat their opponent next year. Wait - maybe it has become the same. Immediately after this election, the loser starts trying to figure out how to beat the winner.
In today's climate, with about a 50/50 split (more on that in another post) there is no downtime, with the 24/7 cable and Internet cycle, you can bombard people with news you want them to hear. So as soon as the election is over, the game starts anew, with each "team" trying to make sure the other "team" does not gain any yardage. One does not want the other to have ANY success. Pass a bill that makes people's lives better - not on my watch if I don't get credit for it. Help the environment? - not if it will make it harder for me to get elected next go around. Stabilize the economy to make things fairer for all - not if my constituents do not get all they can.
Everything is viewed as a win/lose situation. Points to be scored and held for future use. Blocking is allowed (Gee the football analogy is getting stronger). One party's success is lauded over the other - if they can get any at all. This results in the smartest people NOT getting elected. Those that go end up being mere placeholders for the powers that get them elected, and we wonder why they get nothing done. If someone tries to work for the other side, they get lambasted by their own party; not exactly the environment of bipartisanship.
So what is an answer? I don't think term limits is the answer. It has some potential benefits. When you know you are term limited, you are not a s fearful of making impartial decisions as you know you will not have to face any repercussions. But soon our government will be replaced by ignorant place holders - cannot have any free thinkers in power. Increasing or reducing pay for elected officials will no have much effect. A third or fourth party will dilute some of the money and force alliances - even if temporary - in order to get things done. Has our focus become so destroyed that we can only handle a two party system?
A radical idea would be just to register people as voters. Not Democrat or Republican, not Liberal or Conservative, no classification of any kind. We are all independent. Then we need an informed voter. Standardizing basic websites for each candidate can be a starting point - devoid of party affiliation. No, you can still have your party site and ads - this is not trying to stifle free speech, just cut through the fluff and bull*&^%$. Sort of a simple resume. That way you would know if the person running was a TV star, or a career politician. It could be run by a third party so the government could not get involved. Consumer Reports or the League of Women voters - does not matter, as long as it is is a s simple, standardized and as neutral as possible.
Do I expect to see something like this in the remainder of my lifetime - no. But I put it out there as a starting point. The demand has to come from the voters. Make your voices heard long before Election Day.
No comments:
Post a Comment