Elections: What’s At Stake?

To the Editor:
The 2014 election and the one to follow in 2016 could be pivotal regarding the kind of America we’ll have. Will it be a nation of, by and for the people, or a power-politics playground?
Washington has always been about political power, but there were times when compromise was possible and the good of the nation, not its politicians, occasionally prevailed. Statesmen even existed: those capable of putting nation before self or party. Where have they gone?
Politics is so toxic now that those high in government view their jobs through the prism of political advantage, with debilitating side effects. The nation is divided by environmental concerns, by gender, economic class, corporations, immigration and racial and ethnic special interests. Their influences benefit politicians who exploit them to raise campaign money, get elected and re-elected. What’s your hot button? There’s a politician ready to push it.
Other bad effects include greater dependency on government, a decline in personal responsibility, self-reliance and freedom of choice. It’s unrealistic to expect a nation to be totally united on such a wide variety of issues. But it’s reasonable to expect real leadership from those in power toward finding consensus, setting priorities for a militarily strong, economically robust, job-rich nation, respected around the globe.
Strong leadership is key. Instead, we have deep partisanship and ideology, which stifles the creative energy and economic growth of this exceptional nation, as our global clout diminishes. Consider Washington’s “leadership” triangle. At the apex is President Obama. The other two corners find Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker of the House John Boehner. These men should be pursuing consensus, healing divisions within in their organizations and between Congress and the White House. The president should set the tone. He should be leading the quest for consensus. We have quite the opposite.
Harry Reid won’t work with Boehner, is a lap dog to the president, keeping House bills and House-amended Senate ones (over 300 combined so far) from reaching the Senate floor. Obama complains about Congress (the GOP House mostly) but isn’t really serious about working with them, preferring executive orders and regulatory excess. Congress whines about executive-branch overreach, but weakens its own power by poor House/Senate cooperation. What to do about this?
Corrections will take time; a job for young and future voters, not folks like me in the winter of our lives. For starters though, we can let our elected House and Senate charges know we expect them to support cooperation by choosing leaders committed to it over partisanship. Voters can’t directly select or depose congressional leaders. This time though, voting to give Senate control to the GOP will remove Harry Reid as Senate majority leader. He’s a huge partisan barrier to compromise. The GOP House majority will likely hold, but Boehner‘s speaker-ship could be in doubt.
To 2016’s underwhelming field of potential presidential candidates, let’s send a message: the next president must be the mediator/negotiator-in-chief, nurturing cooperation between houses of Congress and the administration, putting the nation above partisanship and ideology.
Going forward, we should give thought to congressional term limits. A constitutional amendment by the states, without Congress, may be required. It’s difficult, but allowed (Article V). The Founders gave us our Republic, as Franklin said, “If we can keep it!” Can we? Only if we have the will to do so. That must include using our best weapon against bad government: casting our votes as well-informed, thoughtful citizens.