RE: It's Apathy and Education

[Sarah McUmber-House <mcuhouse@nemonet.com>]

No question that you are right about apathy and education going a long way to deter the democratic process in this country. 

However, I disagree with you about what causes the trouble with them. Certainly many of our youth (thank goodness not all, as witness the number of young participants in this very discussion) could know a good deal more about how their own nation operates, and feel more responsible to exercise their right/responsibility to vote. 

As much as we may want to blame that on the institutional school system, and somewhat rightly so, it is also the lessons on politics that they receive at home and out in the world that dull their enthusiasm. Who wants to participate when it seems imminently clear that your vote doesn't count? Or that your voice will not be heard? Or that the issues that affect you don't seem to matter to the powers that be.

People will be more likely to act when they think they can actually have some effect. If campaigns can be brought under control to the point where any qualified person can run, where the issues are the focus rather than backstabbing, when officials leave their office unstained, the population, at least a good bit of it, will take notice. I think we will see more participation, and a much more trusting populace. 

You claim that the television is the only viable information source for the masses, and you may be right. Simply limiting the campaigns to a certain amount of money, and giving equal free air time on the television to all candidates would still inform those masses, without the exhorbitant sums of money you say they need to get their message out. Public funding would afford access to all, without the pressure to perform for anyone other than the public's good. This isn't more regulation, rather, less interference.

I also think that negative ads, though previously effective, are beginning to backfire. Several candidates are finding themselves facing disgruntled constituents over just that issue, and some people actually have the audacity to say "no" to it by not voting for that particular candidate. The incredible level of rudeness that has become the "norm" in this country needs to have a little scrutiny, but that is another issue. 

When one person's freedom of speech infringes upon another freedom and privacy, we get trouble. When candidates have only so much time, they may find it wiser to try to make themselves look good, by, say, presenting their own views on the issues, rather than spending their time and effort trying to torpedo their opponents. They will not need "unelected bureaucrats" to censor them, they will have their voters to worry about.

Yes, we can learn a lot from our founders - "...liberty and civic virtue are not replenished..." by PAC and corporate buy-offs. Only by eliminating the monetary imbalance can we set the sails right.