Light/Breezes

Light/Breezes
SUNRISE AT DEATH VALLEY-Photo by Tom Cochrun

Tuesday, November 24, 2015

NOT SURE


   The protracted Presidential election process is like a window into American character. What are we seeing?
    From this view I see the case that big money is so powerful it has created an industry, electioneering and it is at odds with good government. Getting elected in America has almost no connection with governing in America. They are different orbits, different universes. What it takes to get elected has almost no connection with what it takes to govern. In fact so much effort is spent on raising funds it should raise flags the system is at least out of kilter if not broken.  
      A member of the US House of Representatives will spend as much if not more time raising money for re-election than she or he spends on doing the people's work.  Members of the Senate are also trapped, but with 6 year terms, they can attend to governing and legislating. Maybe it's time to change house terms to 4 years, if we can't reform campaign spending. 
    This election window also exposes the damnable situation in which the Republican party finds itself. The evangelical, right wing and loony fringes control the nominating process and have driven the party to being out of touch with the majority of working Americans. Real Republicans are forced to play to the right and still they find themselves trailing vanity candidate Donald Trump and Dr. Ben Carson who is so unqualified to be a President he belongs in the Sarah Palin zoo.
    It also exposes the travesty of making New Hampshire and Iowa important. Those two states have long eclipsed their real  value and role. It is not the fault of New Hampshire and Iowa. The fault is with the media and the parties.
    Campaign reporting has digressed to numbers and carnival. It is more about the process, the horse race and personality than substance. Journalism has been dumped for entertainment, hype and gotcha. True, there is a refining process in being exposed to 24 hour coverage and examination but it has gotten so silly as to be almost pointless. Why should performance in Iowa and New Hampshire dictate a candidates true viability everywhere else?  It is because the system is so top heavy with money and contribution momentum and because the media has top loaded those two states and their own process in the hype circus that life is imitating bad art.
     The best chance at a cure is old advice.  Limit campaign spending.  Shorten the campaign cycle. Make it impossible for candidates to transport their war chest to any personal use. Get rid of PACs. For their part the media needs  a serious season of self evaluation and analysis. News managers need to realize the point of the campaign is not to build ratings, sell advertising, aggrandize careers, but to examine true and relevant issues and the women and men who are asking to be hired by the public.

10 comments:

  1. Simple answer, corporate media companies love these long, drawn out horse race campaigns. More advertising dollars. And I'm convinced there are no journalists working in TV or cable. Can you imagine television journalists of the 60's, 70's or 80's having a serious one on one with any of the Republican candidates? Why are William Kristol, Eliot Abrams, Arie Fleischer even on TV? Fleischer is the only Presidential Press Secretary in history given an immunity letter when the Bush presidency ended. Peggy Noonan? It's a joke.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It certainly is land office business for media. As for the the time travel question, yes what's great confrontation that would be!

      Delete
  2. All of your suggestions at the end are correct, and being so pretty much guarantees they will not happen. One person/one vote has pretty much become a joke, with the engineers of the electoral process having the proper 'take' of the voters attention span and apparent intelligence. With Trump, I think the American people would finally get the president they deserve. Kind of nilistic, eh?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I wonder if the British campaign model would work here, big money guarantees it won't happen. An electorate revolution would be required to change the system but not going to occur. your remarks are spot on.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dean-
      Good of you to check in. I wonder if there is a "breaking point" that might/could/would spark that electorate revolution.

      Delete
  4. I wonder if the British campaign model would work here, big money guarantees it won't happen. An electorate revolution would be required to change the system but not going to occur. your remarks are spot on.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Also in the equation should be the voter. Why are the politicians (the buffoons and slime balls) who do not represent their electorate reelected? Why has the public, for the greater part, not given voice to the progressive erosion of our/their rights?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gerrymandering is a tough trick to get around, or better to get rid of. Weakened national party strength, of either stripe, plays into the hands of the fringe and those candidates with money. Time was when parties vetted their candidate. Now anyone who can afford a pollster and campaign staff can run and there is precious little that a party can do to stop them. Trump and Carson are cases in point.

      Delete
  6. The Citizen's United Supreme Court ruling allowed a flood of cash into the political system and effectively transformed us into an oligarchy instead of a democracy. We need a Constitutional amendment to overrule the Supreme Court's decision.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Good to have you back in the conversation. Your observation about the Supremes is spot on!

    ReplyDelete