What with our recent economic meltdown coming so close to a presidential election, you can bet there will be a lot of panicky votes. You probably won't like the results, either.
As I write this, there's a strong backlash against the Republicans, as well it should. It doesn't matter how long ago the seeds for economic disaster were sown. It doesn't matter who is at fault. It doesn't matter, really, that this is happening with a Democratic majority in Congress. The current president is Republican, and this is happening on his watch. End of story, at least as far as the voter is concerned.
But the voters are so panicky right now, they may end up putting the whole government in the hands of one party -- a scary scenario no matter how you slice it up.
Think of it. What the crisis is doing for Barack Obama is the very thing that no amount of stump speeches, whistle-stops, or campaign bucks can do. Right now he'd have to screw the pooch in unprecedented fashion to lose. Like what onetime Louisiana Governor Edwin Edwards once said about his own reelection chances, he'd have to be "caught in bed with a dead woman or live boy" to lose (the joke was on him; Edwards lost that race, making voters wonder which one it was).
Meanwhile, bad news from Wall Street and Main Street is killing Republicans in Congressional and Senate races, too.
Here's the problem, though. It'd be real bad news if the Democrats pull off a sweep, and this has nothing to do with them being Democrats. It would be just as bad if the Republicans took the trifecta.
Y'all remember that stuff from your high-school civics classes about the three branches of government. Executive, legislative, and judicial. (If you don't 'cause you slept through those classes, I can't say I blame you. It's pretty boring stuff.) But the Founding Fathers were totally against the idea of a central seat of power (i.e. a king) and wanted the power broken up some. That's the whole idea behind a three-headed government; each piece limits the authority of the others. As it should be. The federal government should be weak, inefficient, laughable.
OK. A democracy -- or a republic like ours -- morphs into something else, something really objectionable, if all this power is in the hands of one bloc, one party, one anything. This is especially true when the times are as uncertain as they are now.
This does fly in the face of the old wisdom that had voters pulling the lever for a straight-party ticket. Maybe that worked at an earlier time when the populace was not as well informed as now, but voting "the bullet" isn't as common as it once was.
In past elections I've registered as a Democrat, a Republican, and an independent, and have yet to vote a straight party ticket. And I probably never will.
During the Clinton years, the legislative branch spent most of its time in Republican hands, and lawmakers screamed about all the gridlock in government. And yeah, there was gridlock. Things were not getting done at the federal level. But times were good, the economy was good, and many people noticed something.
Gridlock is good.
Gridlock created an extra set of checks and balances, preventing the federal government from doing some real damage.
Take these thoughts with you to the voting booth:
Too much power in the hands of a few is a dangerous thing.
Spread the love.
Throw your vote one direction for the President, another direction for the House and Senate.
Keep 'em separate, where they're less likely to get together and really mess up the garden party.
As I write this, there's a strong backlash against the Republicans, as well it should. It doesn't matter how long ago the seeds for economic disaster were sown. It doesn't matter who is at fault. It doesn't matter, really, that this is happening with a Democratic majority in Congress. The current president is Republican, and this is happening on his watch. End of story, at least as far as the voter is concerned.
But the voters are so panicky right now, they may end up putting the whole government in the hands of one party -- a scary scenario no matter how you slice it up.
Think of it. What the crisis is doing for Barack Obama is the very thing that no amount of stump speeches, whistle-stops, or campaign bucks can do. Right now he'd have to screw the pooch in unprecedented fashion to lose. Like what onetime Louisiana Governor Edwin Edwards once said about his own reelection chances, he'd have to be "caught in bed with a dead woman or live boy" to lose (the joke was on him; Edwards lost that race, making voters wonder which one it was).
Meanwhile, bad news from Wall Street and Main Street is killing Republicans in Congressional and Senate races, too.
Here's the problem, though. It'd be real bad news if the Democrats pull off a sweep, and this has nothing to do with them being Democrats. It would be just as bad if the Republicans took the trifecta.
Y'all remember that stuff from your high-school civics classes about the three branches of government. Executive, legislative, and judicial. (If you don't 'cause you slept through those classes, I can't say I blame you. It's pretty boring stuff.) But the Founding Fathers were totally against the idea of a central seat of power (i.e. a king) and wanted the power broken up some. That's the whole idea behind a three-headed government; each piece limits the authority of the others. As it should be. The federal government should be weak, inefficient, laughable.
OK. A democracy -- or a republic like ours -- morphs into something else, something really objectionable, if all this power is in the hands of one bloc, one party, one anything. This is especially true when the times are as uncertain as they are now.
This does fly in the face of the old wisdom that had voters pulling the lever for a straight-party ticket. Maybe that worked at an earlier time when the populace was not as well informed as now, but voting "the bullet" isn't as common as it once was.
In past elections I've registered as a Democrat, a Republican, and an independent, and have yet to vote a straight party ticket. And I probably never will.
During the Clinton years, the legislative branch spent most of its time in Republican hands, and lawmakers screamed about all the gridlock in government. And yeah, there was gridlock. Things were not getting done at the federal level. But times were good, the economy was good, and many people noticed something.
Gridlock is good.
Gridlock created an extra set of checks and balances, preventing the federal government from doing some real damage.
Take these thoughts with you to the voting booth:
Too much power in the hands of a few is a dangerous thing.
Spread the love.
Throw your vote one direction for the President, another direction for the House and Senate.
Keep 'em separate, where they're less likely to get together and really mess up the garden party.
No comments:
Post a Comment