Once the people we sent to Congress seemed to want to "do good", and to promote their political philosophy in legislation. Now it seems that politicians seek to stay in office and to assure the power of their own parties as ends in themselves.
Getting elected costs a lot these days. The media delivers votes, and buying media time costs money. Campaigns last interminably, so media coverage is required for a very long time. We do not put public-interest limits and demands on the media, nor do we provide public funds adequate to allow candidates to compete with those who draw on political contributions.
Moneyed interests find it cost-effective to donate money to candidates in order to foster their own financial (and other interests).
I don't see many politicians getting elected who do not manage to surround themselves with enough donors to raise a lot of money to use the media effectively to influence voters. Politicians can do this more effectively if they are in a majority party. The longer a politician is in office, the more power he/she acquires in the seniority based Congressional power systems. Thus the longer a politician is in office, the more power has been accumulated, the more influence the politician can exercise on the part of his/her supporters.
The country is split between red and blue states. State legislatures controlled by one party gerrymander the electoral districts to favor that party. Very few sitting federal legislators are beaten in the primary elections, and very few seats go to the other party in final elections.
The candidate who seeks election and power as ends in themselves seems to have an advantage over the candidate who will not broker influence for power, or the candidate who puts ideology before electability.
Is American democracy broken? If not, how long can it resist the current trends? If so, can it be repaired?
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment