Democracy is Failing

An article in Foreign Affairs explains the problem but offers no realistic solution.

Below are some excerpts from the article in Foreign Affairs: LINK

Any attempt to repair democracy while leaving elections at its center is bound to fail because elections create a professional political class that is unsuited to genuine democratic rule. As she puts it, members of this group, “whatever their personal, individual qualities,” cannot create “assemblies capable of either fully democratic representation or smart, optimally beneficial legislation.” One reason is that elections select for a particular type: those who seek power and are prone to be corrupted by it. These are, as Landemore writes, “alpha types, the charismatic, the daring, the entitled, the arrogant, even those with no shame whatsoever, and sometimes even the downright psychopathic.

…

In the United States, the party primary system is an obvious source of dysfunction. Turnout in primary elections—when parties choose their candidates for a general election—is extremely low, sometimes only 20 percent of eligible voters, and those who participate tend to be more ideologically extreme than the public as a whole. This system gives politicians powerful incentives to appeal to partisan minorities rather than broad coalitions of voters.

…

In the United States, years of gerrymandering have helped ensure that at least 80 percent of seats in the House of Representatives are firmly in the hands of one party, encouraging politicians to cater to intense partisan minorities.

This gives me an opening for my favorite recipe to fix our broken democracy (USA edition). We do not need to eliminate elections or replace self-serving politicians with citizens committees (as elaborated in the above article). We need only to make a relatively small adjustment in the system to remove the largest corrupting factor. Getting this done may not be too difficult.

For members of Congress and state legislatures, the main (or only) goal is to remain in office, i.e. win elections. That requires collecting lots of political money for the next election campaign. The main sources of political money: PACs that pool money for business and political interests, and very wealthy persons who can afford to donate large sums (in PACs, anonymously). The secret deals the politicians make are mostly the opposite of what is really needed by the nation and the people. Because so many voters are ignorant, disinterested, or gullible, this system works well - for politicians, corporations, and the very rich. This is the core problem of our democracy. It thoroughly pollutes both the election process and the lawmaking process. There is a remarkably simple solution that could replace our fake democracy with a real one: long single terms of office.

Why would this be an improvement? Single terms may not have much effect on the corrupt politics of getting elected, but once in office, a politician could focus on something other than their next campaign and the necessary political money. Some might actually work to improve the welfare of the people. Some may even become honest enough to speak the truth about difficult social and economic problems, instead of lies and platitudes designed for mass appeal and low controversy.

I suppose that some politicians, once elected, would still take money to influence legislation, or simply go on vacation for their entire term. Therefore an effective system to throw the bums out is also needed: recall elections can do the job, especially if they are easy to initiate.

The two-year term for the House of Representatives is especially destructive - House members are in permanent campaign mode.

Long single terms (e.g. 10 years) would effetively remove lifelong professional politicians. 10 years is not a career. The candidates would tend toward those who have already gone down a normal career path, e.g. workers, professionals, academics …

The Constitution made this mess and needs fixing. Fixing the Constitution is hard, but the magnitude and clarity of the problem should be enough to make it politically possible. A strong President would be needed to lead the charge. Most current politicians would likely fight this idea, so give them a break by making them free of the new law, but not their successors in office. After a few legislative terms, the system would start to heal. This seems realistically possible.

Have you noticed which (R) politicians are speaking out against our corrupt and incompetent president? It is those who do not plan to run for re-election, and no longer need the political money system managed by their party. This is an indication of how our politics could change with single terms of office - it would help politicians be more courageous and less corrupt.

Political parties are the 2nd most corrupting factor, but that is for another day.