Voters Deserve Better Choices
I’m one of those people who take my right to vote seriously, and I can’t remember the last time I didn’t vote in a local, state, or national election. Unfortunately, I also can’t remember the last time there was a candidate on any ballot that I was actually excited to vote for. In most cases, the best choice we are presented is between the lesser of two evils. We consider ourselves to be the greatest democracy in the world, but we can’t seem to come up with candidates who are actually worthy of holding public office.
We must figure out a way to recruit higher quality candidates, and to minimize the institutional advantages that make incumbents virtually impossible to unseat. There are a handful of simple steps we could take to solve the problem, but just as the courts have declared term limits unconstitutional, these proposals would probably face a difficult challenge.
One of the first steps we could take is to shorten the election cycle. In most other democratic countries, the entire election process takes place in a period of six to eight weeks. Ours seems to be continuous. John Edwards is probably sitting in a pancake house somewhere in Iowa right now drumming up support for the 2012 caucuses. The level of narcissism and megalomania required to subject oneself and family to the current process should be an automatic disqualification for office.
In 2004, Joe Lieberman ran for re-election to the Senate at the same time he was running for Vice President. This means the people of Connecticut had even fewer choices than usual. Is it possible to vote for the lesser of one evil? We currently have 3 members of the Senate campaigning for the presidency. Presumably, serving in the Senate is a full-time job, yet these folks have been on the campaign trail for the better part of 2 years already. What other job allows you to take a two-year paid leave of absence to campaign for a different job? Certainly no corporate executive would be afforded this luxury, so the likelihood of recruiting candidates with real world management experience is pretty slim. My solution is simple; ban the practice of holding one office while campaigning for another. Faced with that choice, any sitting Governor, Senator, or member of the House would have to think long and hard before launching a bid for the presidency.
The single most effective change we could make is to require an option to vote for None Of The Above on every ballot. This would represent a real choice beyond the lesser of two evils. If None Of The Above wins, a new election with new candidates would be required. With a shortened election cycle, we could repeat this process a dozen times and still choose a president faster than we do under the current system. Eventually, we’re bound to come up with a few candidates worthy of our votes.