20. The Choices of a New Generation

For my twentieth blog here, I thought I'd write something substantial.

So, let me ask you...

Do you feel as if your vote really matters?

Recall Tuesday November 7th, 2000. Americans were voting in a hotly contested presidential election between Republican George Bush Jr. and Democrat Al Gore. But they were not the only candidates; Ralph Nader was the Green Party candidate. 

 

In the end, Al Gore won the popular vote, but George Bush won the presidency because he won more states. In the crucial state of Florida, for example, Bush defeated Gore by only 500 votes, but Nader received 100,000 votes. Pundits claimed that Nader’s candidacy split the voters and allowed Bush to win the election. In the ensuing political bloodbath, fingers were pointed, voters became distrustful, and the term “hanging chad” entered the public lexicon.

But what if we had a system of electing our officials that actually encouraged diversity among candidates and allowed multiple parties to flourish? What if officials were forced to work together in coalitions, instead of constantly fighting and getting nowhere? What if voters could truly vote their conscience? Our current two-party system has become an impediment to progress which can be alleviated by evolving a multiparty system. 

As a concerned citizen, I have spent a great deal of time researching the benefits of encouraging a multiparty system in America, and I would like to ask all of you to join me in supporting electoral reform to provide voters with more choices, force elected representatives to cooperate, and diminish ineffective centrist politics.

Did you know that in the 2000 election, only ½ of eligible voters participated in electing the president? 100 million voters did not cast a ballot, but if they had, there could have been a very different outcome. Voter apathy is caused by many things, including voters feeling like none of the candidates represent their needs or that it doesn’t matter who gets elected. However, as Pulitzer Prize winning author Alice Walker famously quipped,

“The most common way
people give up their power

is by thinking they don’t have any.”

Regardless of the reasons, the problems remain the same. Because each party must reach towards a majority, neither can take extreme views. The result is two parties who are very similar. The policies and the government change very little over time, and politicians from different parties cannot work together to solve problems without appearing turncoat.

Any new ideas get watered down so as to be ineffective, or thrown out altogether. Worst of all, this system does not provide the best leaders, it only provides the most electable leader. Each party wants to win, so the person who has the best chance of winning is the one selected to run. These days, that is often the person who can get the most financial support, which means the person we put in power is the one most beholden to special interests and corporations instead of the American people.

In October 2012, Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Christ Hedges wrote in his regular column for Truthdig.com that,

“The corporate state has successfully waged a campaign to disempower voters and citizens. By intimidating voters with the message that Americans have to vote for the lesser evil and that making a defiant stand for justice and democracy is counterproductive, it cements into place the agenda of corporate domination.

 

This campaign has silenced real political opposition. It has turned those few politicians and leaders who have the courage to resist into pariahs.”

If we as citizens don’t do something to take back control of our political system, we will continue to be governed by talking heads bought and paid for by corporate sponsorship.

“But Angela,” you ask, “how do we do that?”

"Think globally, act locally" is an idea attributed to Scottish social activist Patrick Geddes from his 1915 book "Cities in Evolution.” Although that exact phrase does not appear, the concept is evident in his work. Supporting electoral reform at a grassroots level is the first step towards political change. In his 2001 manifesto, “Toward Multiparty Democracy in the U.S.,” Matt Grossman lists ten steps to effect reform:

· participate actively in local elections

· convince local officials to support electoral reform

· pursue voting rights cases

· work at state level to strengthen third parties

· convince financial donors that electoral reform deserves their support

· pursue voting equipment modernization

· support the instant-runoff voting ballot

· legislate returning control over voting systems to each state

· use the example of the 2000 election to build an electoral reform movement, and

· advise prospective independent presidential candidates to create long-term strategies for third-party viability.


These steps are not simple or easy, but this plan will work because it builds a multi-level movement for electoral reform that includes everyone willing to participate, including people from all ideological perspectives. It does not attempt to enact reform through some new party because we already have several active parties besides Republicans and Democrats, such as the Green Party, Libertarians, Socialists, or even the US Pirate Party. Instead, this plan organizes activists such as the Tea Partiers and the Occupy Movement and other interest groups working for electoral reform. The goal is to give the tertiary parties that already exist a legitimate chance at promoting a candidate so that supporting someone other than the Republican or Democratic candidate is not splitting the voters in favor of the opposing party.

Some coalitions might eventually support a particular candidate or party, but initially, in order to begin the reform process, the goal is to act as a coordinated movement rather than a party.

Can you imagine what we can achieve when our political leaders are working together instead of constantly fighting? What would that even look like?

Well, what are some characteristics of a successful government and how might you measure it? Created by economist Mahbub ul Haq in 1990, and published annually by the United Nations, The Human Development Index is a composite statistic of life expectancy, education, and income indices to rank countries into four tiers of human development. Not surprisingly, according to the current report released in March 2013, 8 out of the top 12 countries on the list effectively use a multiparty electoral system, including Sweden, Japan, The Netherlands, Iceland, Finland, Norway, Canada, and Ireland.

In these countries, no single party enjoys a majority; instead, multiple parties form coalition governments. Voting can take the form of an instant run-off ballot in which voters rank the candidates in order of preference rather than simply selecting a single candidate.


Because this type of system forces elected officials to work together, politicians can stay busy doing their jobs instead of always campaigning or fundraising to keep their jobs. Citizens enjoy things like universal health care, high standards of living, high rates of employment, excellent public education, low crime rates, few homeless, and most importantly, peaceful and safe living conditions.

Doesn’t that sound more like
the American dream

instead of the nightmare we currently face?

 

I implore you to become active in your local elections, support candidates who promote electoral reform, share these ideas with your friends, and most importantly, VOTE!

In conclusion, the current two-party system has become an impediment to progress which can be alleviated by evolving into a multiparty system. In order to heal the division caused by polarized politics, we must support electoral reform together! Your vote does count, honor the work that was done to get it for you and use it! After all, to paraphrase Plato, the chief penalty to someone who is too smart to engage in politics is to eventually be governed by his inferiors. Vote to make multiparty elections the choice of a new generation!

Bibliography

Frey, W. H. (Ed.). (2012). Voter Turnout. Retrieved June 8, 2013, from Social Science Data Analysis Network website: http://www.ssdan.net/content/voter-turnout

Geddes, P. (1915). Cities In Evolution. London, UK: Williams.

Grossman, M. (2001). Towards Multiparty Democracy in the U.S. Retrieved May 25, 2013, from Multiparty.org website: http://www.matthewg.org/multiparty/ch7.htm

Hedges, C. (2012, October 29). Why I'm Voting Green. Retrieved May 26, 2013, from http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/why_im_voting_green_20121029/

Lindley, C. (Ed.). (2001). Sweden; Japan; Denmark; Germany; Finland; Norway; Ireland. Retrieved May 26, 2013, from World Audit website: http://www.worldaudit.org/aboutus.htm

Martin, W. (2004). The Best Liberal Quotes Ever: Why the Left is Right. Sourcebooks.

Plato. (380 BC). Republic (Vols. 1; 347). Athens, Greece.

United Nations Development Program. (2013, March). Human Development Report 2013 (K. Malik, Author). Washington, DC: Gilmore.

US Gov. (2011, December). 2000 Official Presidential Election Results. Retrieved May 24, 2013, from Federal Election Commission website: http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm