A Civic Culture

[G Gocek <gggman@att.net>]

A Civic Culture

Reviewing the summary comments of participants for the last two weeks of this dialogue, I can not say that my opinions on policy specifics regarding campaign finance reform have changed. Hopefully this lack of transformation, for myself and for those departing with sustained original preferences, is not due to inattention or a rigidity prohibiting openness to other points of view.

Instead, I believe that campaign finance reform may be one of those litmus test issues that in some sense reflects a core set of beliefs about the fundamentals of democracy and self governance. Some may emphasize liberty and the risks of unconstrained public power. Other may see community impacts and the value of equal voice in addressing important public issues. But the key characteristic we share, even with our divergent perspectives, is that public processes do count, merit our attention, and stimulate our participation by word and deed.

While this may not offer a "Eureka" moment of stunning discovery, it does unfortunately represent an increasingly distinctive defining characteristic of our times. I will help lead the discussion next month of a book published last year that many in this audience would be interested in, if they haven't read it already, Bowling Alone by Robert Putnam. The author notes a continually declining level of civic engagement over the second half of the 20th century, from the local neighborhood group to national political campaigns. What made in Tom Brokaw's phrase "The Greatest Generation" so great may not have been the endurance to survive the Depression or even the fortitude to win World War II. Instead, acculturated by those encompassing social traumas, that population cohort came of age with and sustained through productive lifetimes a public spiritedness to resolve group problems with a will, making mistakes along the way but learning and striving to make the necessary adjustments. Too often, this now seems to be a way of living at best honored in memory but ignored in practice.

The impact of special interests in American politics is nothing new, extending back to the origins of the republic. Even our hallowed Constitution enshrines the 3/5 enumeration of  "property" for the sponsors of the "peculiar institution" of slavery that took nearly 100 years, a sanguinary civil war and subsequent amendments to efface but whose consequences are still yet to be fully expunged. Hopefully an effective electoral system will be reached along a more accelerated track!

The plaintive notes raised by comments on the insidious and even invidious nature of money in politics reflect the concern that it's an increasingly insiders game. When economic self interest seems to be the only driving factor stimulating any level of sustained participation, the dollars of a few far outweighing the silent (or vanished?) minority, the future may seem bleak indeed. But it also worth remembering that the great "Robber Barons" shopping for the best politicians that money could buy eventually found that the store was soon closed with the subsequent advent of the Progressive Era. Life does seem to be about balances, and perhaps even greater degradations of political processes are only a precursor of the more dramatic improvements to come.

The catalyst for such evolution is the sometime faint, but ever continuing voice of an engaged citizenry. This forum serves the function of identifying the presence of those like-minded folks who do their best to keep themselves and everyone else attuned to worthy purposes. We may not agree with some of what we've heard, but we should salute all for their expressions and consider such are a real element of what it takes to set things straight. Our numbers, as engaged participants, might not be as large as we'd like. But we're here, following that article of American faith, humble beginnings are not impediments to great conclusions.