Metro Active
October 27, 2004
After the Election: Taking the
next steps toward Democracy U.S.A.
By Steven Hill
Coming down the home stretch, the push is on to re-defeat
George W. Bush. Everyone from the Democratic Party, labor unions, philanthropic
foundations, pragmatic Greens and progressive media are rallying behind the
Kerry-Edwards ticket. But if the effort is successful in ousting Bush, then
what? What are the plans beyond the November 2004 election? Allow me to point
toward some badly needed direction.
Even if John Kerry is elected, that will not change the fact
that representative democracy in the United States is severely broken. It's
gotten so bad that even the New York Times and Wall Street Journal
have made the case for the overhaul of key institutions and practices. Unless
American democracy is remade in fundamental ways, progressives can forget about
enacting much of the usual list of desired changes in foreign policy,
healthcare, corporate regulation, labor laws, the environment, media and civil
liberties. A functioning democracy is a prerequisite to having an economic
system that works for everyone instead of just the rich and powerful.
Usually, so much of the well-intentioned progressive effort
seems scattered. The challenge is, can we imagine a common vision that lasts
beyond this November's election? In my mind, such a common vision must have at
its forefront the remaking of our broken democracy.
But "democracy" and "representative
government" are not just fuzzy terms; they involve precise institutions and
practices, and we know a good bit now about which of those institutions and
practices are best, particularly for enacting a more progressive agenda. They
include public financing of elections, free media time for candidates, full
(proportional) representation for legislatures, instant runoff voting for
executive offices, overhaul of the unrepresentative U.S. Senate, abolition of
the Electoral College, universal voter registration, fair ballot-access laws,
inclusive political debates, a national elections commission to develop fair and
efficient election administration and a right-to-vote constitutional amendment.
We also need a more robust public broadcasting sector funded by consumer fees
(like consumers pay for cable TV) instead of by a fickle Congress.
Let's call this the Democracy U.S.A. agenda. Sure, it's an
ambitious one, but we will never significantly impact the broader social,
economic and foreign policy agenda until we change the rules of the game that
are blocking progress. In other words, until we remove the boulders in the road,
there will be no passage. The Democracy U.S.A. agenda is what will remove the
boulders.
Already, publications like The Nation and others are
asking "what's next" after November. Conspicuously missing from their
vision is a stirring call for remaking our democracy. I've spoken with many of
these leaders, and too many of them find these systemic barriers to be
bothersome inconveniences into which they are not going to invest much time or
resources. That's troubling, because that attitude will lead progressives down
still more dead ends.
For instance, most of these progressive and Democratic party
leaders do not want to deal with the fact that the antiquated 18th-century
methods we use to elect the president, the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House favor
Republican and conservative candidates over Democratic and progressive ones due
to built-in, systemic reasons. It's like having a foot race where Democrats and
progressives start out 10 paces behind Republicans and conservatives, election
after election.
The presidency and the Senate are skewed because they give
more representation per capita to low population states, which today are mostly
the conservative states of Bush's Red America. This has real-world impact on
national policy and federal tax appropriations, with Red America receiving more
in federal taxes than they pay out, even as they gripe about big government and
welfare cheats.
The House is skewed because the Democratic vote has become
highly urbanized and can be packed into fewer districts. The fact is, when the
national vote is tied (or even when the Democrats have more votes, like Gore did
in 2000), the Republicans win more House seats than Democrats.
Democrats and progressives will make little progress on the
broader national agenda until we address these barriers that affect all three
branches of the federal government (since the conservative Senate confirms
conservative Supreme Court and lower court judges).
After the November election, no matter who wins, progressive
activists, leaders, funders, Democrats and non-Democrats must become focused on
enacting the Democracy U.S.A. agenda. The Democrats should do this not only
because it is in their self-interest, since current methods favor
Republicans/conservatives, but because making our democracy more fair is the
right thing to do. In other words, at this point, what is fair and right favors
the Democratic party.
New Democratic party leaders like Barack Obama seem to be more
open to these ideas, as are Howard Dean, Congressmen Jesse Jackson Jr., Dennis
Kucinich and others. Let's hope they are the future of the party, because now is
the time to push the Democracy U.S.A. agenda out there boldly.
The overhaul of our democracy is the pressing issue of
our times. It is a steep hill to climb, but climb it we must. Without more
focused attention on the Democracy U.S.A. agenda, progressive ideas and policies
will continue to languish near the sidelines of American politics, rather than
the center.
|