A THOUGHT ON ELECTION CAMPAIGNS
By Publius II
Money spent on election campaigns continues to grow. This applies especially to presidential campaigns. As time passes most of these millions get wasted on candidates bashing each other over longer and longer time periods. Today this period is close to two years. Major campaigns in Britain last 6-8 weeks.
Long after thinking voters get sick of it the bashing continues because people remember this type of political ad more than others. They should not. Such ads offer no useful information.
Joe Klein spent a career reporting on politics in the US. His book is titled Politics Lost: How American Democracy was Trivialized by People Who think You’re Stupid. Klein argued that the present age of the continuous campaign has caused “a significant dumbing-down of the office (presidency)”.
Klein apparently believes that both the president and the citizens have been dumbed down. He further argued that “Presidential politics was all about character .,.. or rather, the appearance of character. Did he (or she) seem strong? Trustworthy? Care about people like me?
“The utter simplicity of it was astonishing: it wasn’t about the economy, stupid. It was the appearance of caring about the economy, stupid.” People act on their perceptions. But perceptions should be developed thru thought and discussion based in reason and not thru emotional reactions.
Not all the money is wasted. The big donors are buying special favors. After their man/woman wins it’s payback time. But there are limits to what individuals and groups can donate, right? Well, no. Politicians love money, the more the better. Therefore any law limiting contributions lacks teeth. Russian proverb: “When money speaks the truth keeps silent.”
This is one of several ways in which the elite rich get richer. This is corruption, and it will continue as long as the fat cats and their lackeys in the Congress can get away with it.
As of October 2008 Obama and McCain were still bashing as usual. By November thinking citizens were looking elsewhere for a leader. (There was one on the ballot, called Robert Barr. But the news media ignored him.)
Those who think will realize that no career politician can be a leader because nearly all are too busy accepting tainted money and handing out favors to members of the elite class. This type of public official developed rapidly after WWII when tons of money flowed into Washington daily. Politicians got the idea that instead of limited terms of service they could make a career out of politics. They gradually turned Washington into Wimp City. Pocket Gofer 3 elaborates.
Career politicians are not just thieves. They are liars. They say anything in front of cameras that they think people want to hear with no concern about truth or reality. It has been said that the only time a politician speaks truth is when he calls another politician a liar. Promises = pledges = vows = zero. All are equally empty in today’s politicized government.
They focus on the next election: as of February 2010 many were already off and running. Therefore close to half of their time in office is spent raising money. And much of the rest of their time is spent putting laws and regulations into force that are purchased by the moneybags.
It’s a good life, provided that truth does not sneak onto the radar screen. Unlike other lines of work, in politics experience is a negative asset. Philosopher H. L. Mencken: “A good politician is quite as unthinkable as an honest burglar.”
Like all other campaigns, candidates during fall 2008 pushed major change in government because they knew that is what citizens wanted. But there are far too many looters in Washington who love the current arrangement. They cover their backsides while they rake in the bucks.
No changes, thank you. Because both major party candidates are career politicians plugged into the system they know this. (If they were not the party big shots would not have put them forth as candidates.) But they preach change anyway in front of the cameras because they know that voters are disgusted with government and want sweeping changes.
What is so amazing is that this practice has become a time-worn tradition. And yet a gullible public goes on believing. A recently completed presidential election campaign is a graphic case in point. By mid-February 2009 President Obama’s star has already lost part of the luster that an unthinking public showered on him during inauguration day.
During the 2000 campaign vice-president Gore sampled the sweet taste of the highest of personal power, only to get screwed in Florida by the republicans. Human nature has preserved this taste in him.
When a congressman Ron Paul was also plugged into the system. Or, was he? He published views on government that are far different from those of the elite class. He regularly voted against measures that would benefit his constituents back home in Texas. He ran for president in 2008 as a republican so he could get some media coverage. He refused to accept dirty money.
So how did he get re-elected every two years? The answer is that he belonged to a rare and vanishing species in Washington: the honest person. It seems that his constituents have developed a skill that is rare today: the ability to recognize and appreciate honesty in public service.
But the elite class allowed him only a short leash. Economist 9/6/08: “—— and his supporters were muzzled at the republican convention.” The princes and barons fear truth and honesty and they knew that Paul had arrived with his armor in place. Jefferson said, “———- that truth is a willing and sufficient antagonist to error and has nothing to fear from the conflict, ———.”
Arthur Schopenhauer said, “All truth passes thru three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third it is accepted as being self-evident.” The kicker here is that Washington operates on stealth and fuzzing the distinction between truth and lies. Combine this grim fact with news media acting as part of government and citizens don’t know what to ridicule or oppose.
Dr. Paul is an obstetrician, so he is not exactly a career politician. He has run for president in the past (1988). Judging by the amount of money he raised this time, there are many folks who approve of his positions advocating individual liberty and small and honest government.
Over the years the two major parties have in effect fused into one. Publius II calls it the rep-dem party. Should this come as a surprise? Not to a thinking citizen: this is human nature. When citizens don’t know what is really going on and cannot touch them, why bust their butts fighting among themselves?
Thomas Paine saw this happening way back in ca. 1792 when he wrote, “While they appear to quarrel they agree to plunder.” But one may ask, how can this conspiracy remain below the radar screen? Publius II asked.
The answer lies in pussycat news media that are not doing the job. In effect they are press agents for the US government. They hype any action that might be construed as fighting among the two major parties so they “—– appear to quarrel.” The plunder part remains hidden. PG19 removes the shroud.
There was quarreling in early 2010 about health care reform. President Obama ran this one up the flagpole so high that congressmen jumped on the opportunity. They flung tons of cheap shots at one another and an unthinking public bought the appearance.
In Soviet Russia the most prominent newspaper was Pravda, which means truth in the Russian language. But nearly every Russian citizen knew this was a crock. Does this mean that Russia had and possibly still has a higher proportion of thinking citizens than there is in this country?
Could the presidency be won by a public-spirited public citizen instead of yet another career politician? Thinking citizens may see a historic opportunity to install a democracy where citizens govern themselves. Publius II’s research and writing are aimed toward this objective.
The discussion now turns to some second thoughts on voting. In a democracy citizens look forward to voting. In doing this they see an opportunity to remove ineffective public officials and put better ones into office.
Today career politicians, campaign staffs and volunteers keep flogging the importance of getting out the vote. But the reality is the citizens are just the audience.
Every four years the campaign season can be more accurately described as E.D. or “electile dysfunction.” Prominent writer Peggy Noonan has described government as a huge whorehouse where every four years paying customers get to choose a new piano player.
Ronald Reagan: “It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first.” He also offered what he considered the most frightening nine words in the English language: “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”
In percentage of eligible citizens who vote the US ranks 139th of 172 nations. This rank applies to what politicians and the media trumpet as the world’s primo democracy. There is an inconsistency here, which might baffle an observer.
The neat thing about citizens voting in a democracy is that they enjoy the power to strike fear in the hearts of their public servants. It is this fear that impels officials to listen to their constituents.
They learn from them about how their city/state/nation should be governed. Then they act on what they learned, helping people to live their dreams.
Furthermore, due to their understanding of human nature citizens realize that public officials will be subject to temptation. A lot of taxpayer money sits close at hand, and the longer they serve the greater the temptation.
Having learned the system, it would be easy to divert some public funds away from the public interest. When this happens often even the most conscientious public servant will eventually become a self-servant. Greed is one of the seven deadly sins.
Knowing this, citizens also cast votes aimed at minimizing this temptation, no matter how good the service rendered. Public-spirited public officials admit to and accept this possibility. They enter office with firm plans to serve for a finite time only, and do so. Their constituents do not allow anyone to make a career out of public service.
Every person, even if he/she does not admit it to himself, has his price. Therefore citizens do not stand for public office unless they intend to serve for only a limited period. They have learned that in politics experience is a negative asset.
This is the theory. These second thoughts will compare theory with today’s reality in the United States of America. If voting is a privilege denied to most people in the world, why do so few US citizens bother to vote?
Guidance for some of the following observations comes from Alexander Keyssar’s book The Right to Vote: The Contested History of Democracy in the US.
Veteran career congressmen have created rules that make it very difficult for any third political party to get on the ballot and launch a national campaign. They have also passed legislation that directs taxpayer money only to the election campaigns of the two major parties even tho polls show there are more independent voters than in either party.
Congressmen in office enjoy free mailing privileges denied to outside candidates. They take advantage of incumbency to spend up to 40% of their time raising huge amounts of money. In addition to this activity they accept corrupt bribes and kickbacks. The end result is that a challenger often cannot get on the ballot, much less win an election.
A prominent member of President Clinton’s cabinet, Robert Reich, concluded that “the great mass of non-voters … didn’t vote in 1996 because they saw nothing in it for them.” Nothing has changed since then, primarily because career politicians love empty elections.
The formerly treasured ability to strike fear has vanished. The typical registered voter has concluded that the only candidates on the ballot are bums and scoundrels. See Pocket Gofer 3.
Today naïve citizens are programmed to look to government for solutions to social problems. These difficulties almost invariably affect only alienated peasants. There is no impact upon members of the elite class.
Therefore all the elitists in Congress and the White House need do is pass a law or regulation that gives the appearance of doing something about a problem. Any real solution might be an inconvenience for the elitists.
As more empty elections come and go the point is reached where the elitists no longer need provide even the appearance of problem-solving. It is at this point that what was a half-baked democracy becomes an authoritarian regime.
The high and mighty no longer fear elections, so much of the money they raise goes into their pockets. Because today Washington has done such a rotten job of governing the candidates are focusing on change.
The thinking citizen knows this is a crock. There will be no significant changes. The elite class likes its posh lifestyle and so they see any change as rocking the boat.
For years there has been a movement to include a silent candidate on the list of names who are standing for every public office whether national, state or local. This candidate is named NOTA, or “none of the above.” Its presence could provide an opportunity to place real public servants in office.
If NOTA wins over all listed candidates a second election for the office must be held, and with a whole new list of candidates. No prize for guessing why voters in November 2008 searched their ballots in vain for NOTA. Career politicians know voters are unhappy with their performance in office so they are not about to provide this opportunity in the so-called Land of Opportunity. (There was one in Nevada for the 2010 senate race, but it did not require a second election.)
Before television there were ward heelers, precinct captains and city councilmen who connected with voters because they lived among them. A citizen in difficulty would go to one of these elected officials.
He/she would listen and do what he could to help. (And he would because he knew the citizen would keep bugging him until he did.) He might go to a higher official with the problem.
Television all but obliterated these people. Citizens looked to big TV personalities like Walter Cronkite to help them.
But these people did not connect to local concerns. Rather, they schmoozed with the high and mighty and so subsequent TV reporting shifted emphasis away from local concerns.
Frustrated voters then formed groups to lobby for problem solutions, and later for special privileges denied to others. But often an individual’s problem is unique to him/her. Group leaders cared little for his/her particular situation.
Furthermore the Constitution deals with individual rights and equal treatment for all under the law. Groupthink is therefore not constitutional. Whenever money is involved it is corruption.
Democracy requires that voters be able to understand the impact of government actions taken on their behalf. With this information they know how to vote for the more effective candidates. When the news media withhold information people cannot understand and therefore cannot vote intelligently.
Television is hellishly expensive, and so successful candidates must raise great quantities of money to stay in office. This means that a typical congressman has yet to meet a lobbyist he/she doesn’t like.
For just one of many examples the tobacco lobby brought wads of money to congressmen. The tobacco quota owners who sent the lobbyists got $10 billion of taxpayer money.
Many of these owners do not even own farm acreage. Some of them may have bought quotas while anticipating a government buyout.
President Bush’s approval rating dropped to near 20 percent. That of congress was about 13 percent. Two fifths or more of voters said they are angry with government.
And yet in 2004 more than 90 percent of incumbent congressmen were re-elected. This was due in part to a stupendous edge in fundraising and in part to the media keeping information about challengers from voters. And pork.
For just one example, NY’s Chuck Schumer raised $11 million even though he already had $16 million socked away. And he had a safe seat. There is probably no public record of where the extra money went.
Apparently even this edge is not enough. After each census congressmen engage in “Gerrymandering,” or redistricting.
Based on census data each redraws the boundaries of his/her district so as keep voters for the opposing party to a minimum. This is a rough explanation for the term “safe seat.” And his is why those gobs of money raised do not all go toward TV ads.
During the 2002 campaign only about 20 of the 435 members of the House of Representatives lacked safe seats. Ten of the Florida reps had seats so safe that they ran unopposed. Democracy depends on free choice among citizens.
At this time Iraq’s Saddam Hussein won 100% of an announced 100% turnout of voters. Congressional elections in the US seem to be approaching this situation.
Combined with other advantages to incumbency such as name recognition, free mailing, money-raising powers and bringing home the pork, this makes for a travesty of democracy.
Citizens who dislike the congress but vote for their man/woman because he brings home the bacon are unthinking suckers. Pork helps to keep career politicians in office while they betray the trust that citizens granted to them.
All this said, it is now clear that 11/2/10 was just another empty election; nothing significant will change and voters were suckered once again. What is amazing is that any thinking voter must realize that the government that got citizens into the current mess is ill-equipped to get the nation out of it. Logically, no incumbent should have been re-elected.
With safe seats most of the money they raise goes into their pockets and their increasing personal power makes them arrogant. They know voters cannot touch them and so they can do practically anything with taxpayer money and get away with it. This includes abuse of personal freedoms.
The Electoral College was established by the founding fathers for convenience at a time when travel was so difficult. It is still around because career politicians have found a way to exploit it for their advantage.
Not much news about this, but citizens don’t vote directly for president. A group of electors from each state records the results of voting. Then they throw all of the state’s electoral votes to the winning candidate. (There are two exceptions.)
Here is an extreme example using California. Say there are 20,000,001 citizens who vote in a presidential election. Ten million and one vote for candidate A and ten million for B.
Every one of California’s 53 electoral votes (out of the 270 needed to win) go to candidate A. The other ten million votes go down a black hole. No prize for guessing why candidates for national offices spend so much time in that state. Republican voters in Massachusetts and democratic voters in Texas have historically suffered the same fate.
Seniors are old folks who vote a lot. The old poor do not, but they are the targets of career politicians’ rhetoric.
These “concerned officials” announce benefit increases that will actually go primarily to fat cats who help them get re-elected. The appearance of caring for the poor draws votes.
Citizens under 35 make up 27 percent of eligible voters but 53 percent of the population. For those over 65 the numbers are 20 and 12, respectively.
The AARP has a lobby that looks after seniors’ interests. Like so many other lobbies it exerts influence on lawmakers to increase benefits for seniors.
The Social Security trust funds (old age, survivor, and disability) were established in 1935. The first fund was designed to receive individual workers and their employers’ payroll contributions, keep track of them, and accumulate interest.
Upon retirement the fund would pay an amount to the retiree that roughly matched what he/she and his employers had paid in plus accumulated interest. It would be divided into monthly portions according to the best guess of how much longer he would live. It is interesting to note that monthly benefits began at age 65, but in 1935 the average age at death was less than that.
So much for theory. As early as 1940 politicians saw that seniors vote a lot. So they began to raid the retirement trust fund and give extra benefits to them in order to buy their votes.
These increases reached old folks just weeks short of an election. These benefits were not earned, of course, so there went the original 1935 plan.
They did this repeatedly, looting the survivor, disability and highway trust funds along with the retirement fund. In place of the stolen money they left unsecured IOUs to be paid by young citizens (who don’t vote a lot) in the future.
Today the whole system is due to run out of money in a few years. Roughly 70 million baby boomers will be disappointed.
The term “trust fund” has become a farce. There are far fewer funds being held for retirees than will be needed, and trust has evaporated. In spite of this truth the AARP continues to support Social Security as an integral part of retirement planning.
In the past career politicians spent today’s money to buy yesterday’s votes. Today they are spending tomorrow’s money to buy today’s votes. The votes go to them, but now and in the future the huge projected debt must be paid by today’s young and future generations. Those payers who have yet to be born have no voice, so it surely seems that those alive today should act to protect their children’s and grandchildren’s rights to what they earn.
They will get no benefits from being taxed to pay a substantial part of a debt that equals about $20 trillion now, and counting. The generation gap is widening. The young will be hopping mad, and rightly so.