(With apologies to Anthony North):
Some largely nonpartisan things that have been bugging me about the electoral process in the United States recently, and not so recently.
MONEY: It has long been an issue, and there have been a series of legislative actions, Such as McCain-Feingold trying to limit the effect of money on the campaign. However, in January 2010, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court decided that corporations and unions have the same First Amendment rights as individuals, and as such may now directly and expressly advocate for the election or defeat of candidates for federal office, as long as they do not coordinate their efforts with campaigns or political parties. Without getting too wonky here, social welfare organizations may engage in some political activities, so long as that is not their primary activity. As a result, there is a lot more election spending this cycle than ever before. GOP political operative Ed Gillespie said last week on ABC News, and someone said similarly on NBC’s Meet the Press, that the American people do not care about outside spending; I care– a lot.
RANCOR: With that much money, candidates are even more willing and able to run negative, misleading, even inaccurate advertisements. One can and should debate the issues, but it’d be nice if they could get along better while doing so.
Someone’s Photoshop of 2008 Democratic candidate for President Barack Obama, and Republican candidate for Vice-President Sarah Palin
NO REAL CHOICE: A growing number of people believe a third party is needed in the US. Now, there are third-party candidates legitimately doing well this political season, but it doesn’t reflect a sustained, or sustainable national organization. My sense is that there never will be without instant runoff voting.
VOTER SUPPRESSION: Latinos for Reform is running ads on television, radio and the Internet telling Nevada’s Hispanic population not to vote on election day so as to teach Democrats a lesson for failing on the promise to deliver on immigration reform. Others have reported intimidation tactics of voters likely to vote for the opposition.
Another form of voter suppression, I believe, is the overuse of polling. When one hears that Candidate X is a “sure thing” to win or to lose, voters often lose interest and stay home, skewing the results. I’m not sure what to make of poll results anyway. I’ve read that the Republicans may win 100 seats in the House of Representatives. I’ve also noticed another poll, which includes people whose only phone is a cell phone, Democrats lead by 6 points on the generic ballot.
All that said, and in particular, in response to the voter suppression tactics, I encourage people to vote at every opportunity. Not only do I believe it is one’s civic duty, but, for me, it is a personal necessity. I’ve had ancestors who could not vote, so I would be dishonoring those who fought for the ballot not to exercise the franchise.
Did you ever notice that a large number of the Amendments in the US Constitution, after the Bill of Rights, deal with voting?
Amendment 15 states that race or previous condition of servitude (i.e., slavery) is no bar to voting (1865), passed right after the Civil War.
Amendment 17 requires that US Senators be elected by popular vote, rather than by the state legislature (1913) – someone please explain to me why some candidates this year have indicated repealing this amendment?
Amendment 19 provided for nationwide women’s suffrage (1920), though some individual states had allowed women to vote earlier.
Amendment 23 gave the Presidential Vote to Washington, DC (1961) – now if they could only get a voting member in Congress.
Amendment 24 bars the imposition of a poll tax as a requirement for voting (1964), eliminating that particular voter suppression tactic.
Amendment 26 set the voting age at 18 years (1971); unfortunately, statistically, the group least likely to use it.
So VOTE! And if you’re elsewhere in the world, VOTE when your next chance occurs.
