Power to the People

A book recently published by the Brookings Institution Press (2008), Democracy in the States — Experiments in Election Reform, is a broad look at how we vote in America... and the changes we could make to expand the franchise. This in-depth work examines virtually every aspect of the electoral process and gives voice to the complaints that keep many people away from the polls. (It should be duly noted that my step-daughter, Bridgett King, a political science doctoral candidate at Kent State University, is one of the contributors to this impressive work.)

A recent unfortunate occurrence in the 11th Congressional District (the untimely passing of Stephanie Tubbs Jones) is bringing the way we vote into sharp focus. Although we are now armed with impressive technology, we still vote via antiquated methods. Many other countries around the world are far ahead of us in terms of democratic processes when it comes to voting. We now have the capacity for direct democracy, but we allow our political leaders to continue to use largely unfair processes. A good place to start educating oneself is with the groundbreaking 1995 book Tyranny of the Majority: Fundamental Fairness in Representative Democracy, by Lani Guinier.

On Sept 11th, 330 members of the Democratic Party's 11th Congressional District executive committee will meet to determine who will replace Tubbs Jones on the ballot for the November 3rd general election. However, a group of 19 "influential" Democrats will have met by then and will have arrived at a consensus as to which of the seven candidates vying for the position to recommend to the executive committee. So, while we have 630,730 citizens in the District (as of the 2000 Census), only 19 people will get the opportunity to determine who will represent us in Congress. What's up with that...?

Well, one reason is that politicians tend to hold the opinion that we, the electorate, are not politically astute enough to make decisions for ourselves. While there is some evidence that the American voting public can at times prove pretty stupid (we need look no further than the White House), it still should be our decision to make — not theirs.

With direct democracy (via phone, computer and mail, with proper security in place ) the citizens of the 11th Congressional District would be able to determine for themselves whose name would go on the ballot to replace our beloved Stephanie. Don’t buy the specious excuse that the integrity of the process can’t be protected utilizing newer methods, it can. It's really past time that the electorate demand real voting reform; indeed, we will never get it until we demand it. Remember, power is never ceded, it has to be seized.

It's Gut-check Time for Obama

If further proof is needed that decisions made on anything other than logic have a way of coming back to haunt, then one need to look no further than Barack Obama's selection of Joe Biden over Hillary Clinton as his running mate. This illogical choice to fill the veep slot opened the door for McCain to counter with Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, a move that has energized — some might even say electrified — the previously standoffish right-wing of the Republican Party for the septuagenarian.

No matter that Palin's résumé is as thin as an Alaskan boarding house sheet; she solidifies the red-meat-eating, gun-totaling evangelicals, and all the other wing nuts that were threatening to stay home on Election Day, thereby allowing McCain to go after the more moderate Republicans and independent voters. Obama has effectively given this unlikely tag-team a legitimate shot at the White House... something the Republicans didn't previously have.

While there were innumerable reasons (many even logical sounding) for Obama to eschew selecting Hillary — such as her high negatives in the polls and potential (with Bill in tow) to out outshine the top name on the ticket — the fact is, she is every bit as electrifying as Palin, and brings a whole lot more to the table: Mainly 18 million voters. Admittedly Obama will — in all likelihood — capture a good two-thirds to three-quarters of Hillary's supporters even if she is not on the ticket, but in a contest as tight as this one is now shaping up to be, every vote will count.

One way for Obama to be assured that he doesn't get overshadowed is to stay in the Senate... (the foregoing sentence is just a backhanded way of saying "lose the race for the White House.") This race may get so tight that it comes down to losing with Biden or winning with Hilary.

In that case Biden will just have to conveniently get sick and drop out of the race (who cares if the Republicans scream that it's a ruse — they can't prove it, can they?), thus opening the door for Obama to make the selection he should have made all along: Hillary. This would be a bodacious move to be sure, but one that just might be necessary if he wants to occupy the Oval Office. Better to correct your mistakes (no matter how embarrassing that may be) than to go down the tubes with them.

Obama has gotten this far on superior organizing skills, a better understanding of the emerging role the Internet plays in politics, and a charismatic style — but now it's gut-check time; his guts, his time.

Running for the presidency requires real strength; strength enough to stand up to advisors (and even your own wife) and say, "In the end, I'm calling the final shots around here." And once elected, to possess enough strength to say the same thing to the Clintons -- and make it stick. If Barack Obama can't strap on his nuts and say (and mean) those tough things ... then maybe he just isn't strong enough to be president of the United States.

From Cool Cleveland contributor Mansfield B. Frazier mansfieldfATgmail.com

(:divend:)