…don’t fix it.
It’s an old and popular saying, the origins of which are not clear. However, Jimmy Carter’s Director of the Office of Management and Budget was quoted in Nation’s Business, the newsletter of the US Chamber of Commerce in 1977:
Bert Lance believes he can save Uncle Sam billions if he can get the government to adopt a simple motto: “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” He explains: “That’s the trouble with government: Fixing things that aren’t broken and not fixing things that are broken.”
Looking at current events and at history, that observation is often accurate.
Our political system is seriously broken. Theoretically, the people are the government and the government is the people. Everyone can materially participate in the affairs of the country. However, that is only in theory. In reality, the government and the people are separate entities.
The political system is the government. The government is the political system. This arrangement is making may people rich, or more rich, and powerful, or more powerful. A majority of the citizens of the US, or at least a very significant plurality of them, want the political system to be fixed.
The US political system has been broken for a long time. However, the Democratic primary and nomination debacle of 2016 has finally drawn enough attention for a lot of people to want do something about it.
Breaking our political system took a long time. Now, having noticed and deciding to do something about it, many people want an instant fix.
Generally, the instant fix sentiment involves protest voting. Call it what you wish, voting for an impossible outcome is a protest vote. I outlined the hazards of protest voting in Checkmate! http://www.us-remake.com/?p=41. Clay Shirky has reinforced the idea in There’s no such thing as a protest vote https://medium.com/@cshirky/theres-no-such-thing-as-a-protest-vote-c2fdacabd704#.z9417p7c2.
There are two apparent ways to fix our political system and make the government and the people be one and the same.
- The method chosen by Bernie Sanders and others, is to work within the two party system that the Founding Fathers unintentionally enabled. The two political parties have become powerful, elite, private clubs. If that can be changed, the political system will be fixed. Changing that will not be easy.
This method can be facilitated by removing the influence of money from politics. That is not as straightforward as it seems. It is a subject to be treated separately.
The most important change is to begin replacing the establishment members of the party with progressive, non-establishment members. That requires starting a comprehensive program of electing non-establishment candidates to as many political offices as possible. That resolution will take some time and it will be a tough road for those who are not taking money from the corporate establishment, but it is absolutely necessary. Bernie Sanders is starting a group called Our Revolution, which will support the candidates needed for the ground-up change of the Democratic Party.
- The other method is to establish additional political parties, the method chosen by Jill Stein and many others. That approach can only work if the constitution is overhauled to allow proportional voting instead of winner-take-all voting in each state.
Doing so will not be easy. It probably involves a constitutional amendment that will establish a system of the election of President and vice president by popular vote, or at least some apportioned intermediate means. That change may allow third party candidates to become president; however, without first taking the influence of money and power from government, the chance of success is limited.
Neither process is quick or easy. Either or both are essential.
HW