|
Responsibility #4
(written prior to July 1992)
To the People of the United States of America:
In Responsibility #3, we completed the discussion of the first three shortcomings of the national election process. In proposing remedies we reached the point of establishment of final slates of nominees. For members of Congress, the state legislatures would publish the slates by June 15th of each election year. The U. S. Senate would publish the slates for President and Vice President by July 15th in presidential election years.
The period from July 15th through August 31st would be reserved, for final preparations by the final slates of nominees. The election campaign would be limited to the 9 to 10 weeks between September 1st and the normal election day, the first Tuesday (after the first Monday) in November.
In proposing specific election process phases and terminal dates, we have already partially covered the fourth and fifth shortcomings. These are that election campaigns are too long and too costly. Under the reformed election process, the involvement of candidates and their supporters would be minimal until September 1st. It would consist only of preparation and submission of application materials, to the state legislatures by all initial candidates. The field would be limited to the final slates of nominees, after completion of the state legislatures' screenings. There would be some limited expenses associated with final preparations for the election campaign, during the period July 15th to September 1st. All major costs would be incurred in the final 9 to 10 weeks.
Before taking up reforms for the short final election campaign, lets look at what savings we have achieved to that point. We have eliminated the huge costs and long time periods devoted to primary campaigns. There is no need for the political parties' convention extravaganzas.
The key to a cost effective national election process is our attitude, and perspectives, as to its purpose. If we accept the fact that the end result is the hiring by the states and the people of leaders for specific terms of office, we can put aside irrelevant arguments for maintenance of the status quo. As employers, the states and the people have every right to specify and control the employment process.
The election process should be administered and controlled by the states, individually and in concert. The purposes of the campaign should be education, communication, and discovery for the voters. These purposes should be achieved through limited expenditures of time, money and talents (shortcoming no. 6). No attempt will be made here to develop all the details. A number of dos and don'ts will be elaborated.
The main vehicle for the campaigns should be televised debates. Oh, that our children, and our children's children, could be referred back to Lincoln-Douglas like debates of the 1990s! Six to ten debates for each Congressional contest should be held in each district or state. Similarly, Presidential debates would be conducted in regions of the country. Any organization could sponsor the debates as a civic contribution (with no political payoff). In contrast to debates of the past thirty years, however, the contents and control of the debates would be the responsibility of the states. They would not be negotiable with the nominees nor the political parties. The constituents' interest criteria developed previously would serve as the principal source of questions.
Campaign literature and advertising would be controlled. The scope would be limited to the above stated campaign purposes. A truth-in-advertising rule would be imposed. No misleading and single-issue ads, no degrading and divisive techniques, would be permitted (shortcomings nos. 7 and 8). Truth-in-advertising, truth-in-lending, full disclosure, requirements have been imposed through laws on products, services, loans, investments, and franchises. Why is it not even more important to our citizenry that they be imposed on our national elections?
Equal campaign budgets would be imposed on the candidates. The objective is that voters see, know, and evaluate each prospective national leader. The objective is not which nominee or consultant, can come up with the winning slogan or campaign ploy. It is essential that national election campaigns be publicly funded. Campaign contributions by political parties, lobbies, political action committees, or any other special interest groups must be precluded. The public funding pill, to be swallowed by taxpayers, will not approach the perceived costs under
our present election process, if the proposed reforms are adopted. The benefits to the country far outweigh
the costs:
A.Success in elections will no longer rest on campaign contributions
by self-interest groups. (shortcoming no. 9)
B.The public can rest assured that access and votes are no longer bought by campaign contributions. (shortcoming no. 10)
C.Energies of the public and the government need no longer
periodically be wasted, in debating ineffective limits on campaign contributions. Non-reporting of campaign expenditures is alleviated or eliminated. (shortcoming no. 11)
Finally with respect to the election itself, we should cease the inappropriate delegation of authority and responsibility to the political parties, in the administration of the elections (shortcoming no. 12). We can expand voter participation by eliminating unnecessary restrictions to registration; particularly the requirement to register through and identify with a political party. Only a social security card, personal identification, and proof of address on election day should be required. We should utilize individual and group volunteers (without political party or political agenda affiliation) to help get out the vote. Later, under the subject matter of FAMILY, a number of recommendations will be made which will enhance and enliven the election process and thereby further encourage voter participation.
The foregoing proposals, to reform the election process, constitute a major overhaul. These changes, plus other alterations to present election and governing practices yet to be discussed, will cause weeping and gnashing of teeth. Many individual's and institution's turfs will have been violated. They will not cede without a fight. Politics is like sin; we can do with it what we will; we can control it; or we can continue to let it control us.
The reader is urged to read "Congressional Campaign Finances: History, Facts, and Controversy", published in 1992 by Congressional Quarterly, Inc., Washington, D.C. The information is pertinent to this and several other RESPONSIBILITY papers.
Publius IV
|