Home plan candidates press miracles time bombs china drug war entitlement titanic race sham democracy Two Americas WWIII wasted vote
 

Sham democracy (and what to do about it)

The prima facie case

The prima facie case that America suffers with a sham democracy is straightforward.  Recent elections results ape those of the Soviet Union’s Politburo:

·        Exhibit A. While Congress “enjoyed” a 40% approval rating during the 2004 election, 98% of its incumbents were reelected. 

·        Exhibit B. California’s Assembly and Senate incumbents enjoyed a 100% reelection rate that year. 

·        Exhibit C. Only five incumbents (out of 435 seats in the US House of Representatives) lost their reelection bids in America’s 2002 general election.

Upside-down democracy: Politicians select voters

America’s framers designed the US House of Representatives as “the people’s house”, the legislative body that was intended to be closest to the people. Characteristically, modern Democratic and Republican politicians have “improved” on James Madison’s idea: The people no longer chose their politicians; modern politicians choose their voters. That is, using modern computer technology, the Democratic and Republican politicians design their own districts to maximize the reelection prospects of incumbents.  They have thus effectively rigged the election process. 

Are sham elections the most obvious bipartisan corruption?

People of good conscience on all parts of the political spectrum can civilly disagree – even on war and peace.  Freedom of conscience demands that we honor each other despite these policy differences.  But when Democrat and Republican politicians corrupt our election rules by effectively guaranteeing their own reelections, they cross a line. 

Arguably the most obvious corruption of our two major parties is their insistence on partisan redistricting.  With it, these politicians design the federal and state districts to maximize the reelection chances of incumbents.  Effectively, these politicians choose their voters in their scheme of “up-side-down democracy”. 

Why it’s important

We pay a big price for sham democracy. 

In 1800, Americans enjoyed the choice of two intellectual giants: John Adams and Thomas Jefferson.  In 2004, our choice was more modest: George W. Bush and John F. Kerry – two very privileged gentlemen with mediocre academic records and undistinguished careers. 

Based on results, these gentlemen were the best our bipartisan establishment could produce.  But they were far from the best that America had to offer.  They are simply the pedestrian products of our scandalously uncompetitive, corrupt election system.  America’s world-class professional athletes and entertainers testify to the power of competition to produce excellence. 

What to do about it in California

As in 2004, the outcomes of all 153 races for state and federal legislative offices in California are predictable, this year.  All incumbents will win.  So, all other votes are protest votes. 

While a vote for any Libertarian candidate is a vote for liberty, this year it is also a vote against shame democracy.  In fact, voting for "minor" party candidates is the only way that voters have to register a vote against sham democracy.  A vote for a losing major party candidate is a protest vote with a muddled protest message and an endorsement of sham democracy.