2012 Elections

It Is Still Congress' Economy

2012-09-21T16:27:54Z

Congress passes the laws. We are a nation of law. If government and economy are failing Americans, voters need to look to Congress for action. The White House is the branch of government responsible for executing the laws which pass Congressional and Supreme Court muster, as stated in the Constitution. It may be a presidential year election, but, if the American people want to see better government and economic conditions, they must look to replace the Congress that fostered this Great Recession through absence of oversight and regulation and inaction in addressing the jobs and debt issues.

U.S. Dilemma: Two Ways Out

2012-06-22T12:10:44Z

For all the rhetoric and political power plays in Congress, there is still no budget, no jobs bill, no recent economic stimulus, no new infrastructure development and advancement, no law to end deficits and address the national debt.

There are only 2 ways out of this, make Congress a one party government, or, vote both parties out until their replacements agree to honor the will and needs of the American people. The latter option, though difficult, is the more plausible of the two.

RealDealism

2012-04-01T00:02:08Z

I came upon an interesting term, realdealism. It is defined here as: "Realdealists almost exclusively are realists verbally, but in their minds, they are often aspiring to what they want to transpire or do. However, their more realistic faculties prevent them from ever taking it up verbally...most of the time." I think a more specific definition, at least in terms of today's political environment, is a person with an objective awareness of what would be more ideal, and the rational ability to discern and promote ways of making those ideals a partial reality, at least. I am a realdealist. Why aren't there more? ]]>
These same folks, I find, share an ability to understand common sense, logical approaches, to solve complex issues. They understand that if government is to improve, those in office who are responsible for government as it is, must first be removed from office. Most understand that the political parties are fundamentally a part of the problem, since, they prize election victory above all other principles and objectives, and are quick to abandon other principles and objectives to secure their reelection. This directly leads to bad governance designed to promote reelection instead of the greater good for our nation and our people.

So. What's the problem? The problem is that realdealists are not organized to support and enhance each other's efforts to improve our nation and future. To effect the changes they seek, they require financial competitiveness with the political parties to share their realdealism with others. They require an organization to target specific elections and incumbents for unseating. And finally, they require the ability to recruit and promote candidate challengers who are committed to RealDealism and won't be bought off by wealthy special interests offering the financial means to reelection.

VOID, (Vote Out Incumbents Democracy) has registered with the FEC and IRS as a very different kind of political action committee (PAC) to promote the growth of realdealism as shared by its supporters. VOID has raised more than $15,000 to begin its efforts. What VOID needs now is growth in supporters, donations, and responsible volunteers to keep RealDealism from being corrupted by either the political parties or, special interests intent on keeping the failed system intact, and in their favor.

If not you, then who will step forward? As VOID's founder, I committed the last 6 years of my life to bringing VOID into existence. I am immensely appreciative of the support and best wishes of so many over these last few years. However, VOID must now go viral, and frankly, I don't know how to make that happen. I want to hear from you. All ideas are welcome and will be treated with respect, whether adopted or not. I need your assistance and support to grow VOID and the ranks of realdealists who must take VOID over from me, for their own.

I look forward to hearing from you either here in the comments section, or by email by clicking here. Thank you for your time in considering what is said here.

First Steps: Hope And Courage

2011-12-14T06:42:15Z

No journey is ever begun until hope fills the first steps.

The American people want a capable government, able to bring back a robust economy, and healthy future for all American's benefit. Poll after poll reflects an approval rating of Congress in the teens or less. It is a gross distraction under any president's administration to accuse the president of being responsible for the incompetence and ineptitude of Congress. Our Constitution stipulates that Congress legislates and our President executes what Congress legislates. We are entering a presidential election year, and while the media wants to focus on the presidential race, it is the Congress which voters must attend to.

]]> Failure to execute current law is not the source of most American's loss of faith in government. The source of the problem is this. Too many in Congress are unable or unwilling to act in the best interests of the people and the nation. They are acting instead on behalf of their special interest campaign donors, their Party or, a gerrymandered percentage of their constituents in their home state.

Unless voters can encourage themselves and each other to vote out incumbents routinely, until such time as Congress is filled with those dedicated to the welfare of our nation and all her people, America literally has no plan for curing what ails her. Our Congress is riddled with the cancer of greed and power, money influence and special corporate interests. And that cancer is growing inside our Congressional body. The American voters must administer the radioactive treatment on Election Day after Election Day, which will force this cancer into remission.

It is a daunting task to ask Americans to find hope and courage to act when the fate of our country is looking so bleak. The challenge remains, however, to go out and actively help fellow Americans to accept the reality of this cancer, and to accept the cure. It is a challenge because it calls for voters to abandon political party and ideology. The goal however is worth the challenge. We will restore to our nation a Congress of, by, and for the American people. A daunting task - a worthwhile end.

We each, individually and collectively, will continually suffer the consequences of a failed America. Go forth and vote for individual candidates who are committed to the reforms which will eradicate this cancer growing in our Congress, our political parties, and within the body of our nation's future.

Fear of, and cowering from, the future is not an option. We are not North Koreans. Action requires the courage to step forward. Action requires hope filling the first steps toward achieving the objective. Our forefathers and mothers mustered within themselves the courage and hope to act appropriately when our nation's future was threatened. Are we lesser Americans than they? It is a false pride that says, "I am an American", while failing to act appropriately on America's behalf.

Those of us who understand the truth of what is said here, have a duty and obligation to ourselves and our country, to help our fellow Americans come to the same understanding, regardless of difficulty or hardship.

Half the Vote.

2011-10-31T17:30:37Z

Would you drive half a car, fly half a plane, drive a nail with half a hammer, or get half a flu shot? Some politician might use this photo to sell this car arguing that you only have to fill the gas tank once, the entire time you own it. Believe it or not, there are millions of voters who would believe the politician and vote for them.

]]> In America, on average, only about half of eligible voters exercise that right. Most of those who don't vote will justify their behavior with something like: "My vote won't make a difference". Most of those who do vote, believe in the potential of their vote making a difference. It is surprising, the consequences of everyone voting, or not voting, in 2012. Let's take a look.

Everyone Votes

In the case of around 90% of eligible voters showing up to vote, several consequences would break down the system for that election.

1) One consequence would get everyone's attention. The polling stations are ill-equipped to handle that many people wanting to vote. Lines would be interminably long, frustrations and anxiety would rise, fights would break out as people's frustrations and boredom of standing for hours in line reached a breaking point. Is there any excuse at all for America's democratic system failing to at least provide for the potential of nearly every American voting?

The political parties and machines operate on the assumption that turnout will range from 20% in non-presidential elections to as much as 65% in a presidential election year. Both parties work toward the end of keeping the opposing party's voters from showing up in numerous ways.

2) A consequence specific to the 2012 election would very likely be a wholesale rout of incumbents from office in the U.S. Congress. The polls indicate that only 9 to 13% of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing. Additionally, only about 1/3 of Americans approve of the job their own representatives are doing. Obviously, there is enormous incentive by both the Democratic and Republican parties to insure that the maximum voter turnout is not the case in 2012. Their objective will be to maximize their own base's turnout while minimizing the opposing party's base turnout as well as Independents who could swing the election one way or the other.

3) Another consequence would show up huge in employer's pocketbooks. If around 90% of eligible voters voted in 2012, that day would record an enormous spike in employer's costs for doing business that day, as half or more of their work force was absent for half the day, (or more due to long voting lines) to cast their vote. It is hard to imagine why most employers would not join the Why Tuesday? crowd in calling for weekend elections in this event.

No One Votes.

Now let's consider the case where virtually no one shows up to vote in America.

The first and most obvious consequence would be the reelection of nearly every incumbent, except those cases where the challenger had more family and close friends showing to vote than the incumbent did, (possible, though not likely). As VOID has said many times since its founding, if the people don't vote, the politicians will reelect themselves.

The second consequence would be that these politicians would govern like dictators or Kings with birthright to power. With no threat of public reprisal at the polls, they would agree upon rules and laws that favored their incumbency and punished those who would challenge their authority.

The final result would be that one or the other Party would gain control of the lawmaking process long enough to pass laws and rules that virtually eliminated the other Party's power, and America would become a one party State like that of China or the Soviet Union.

The power of the vote cannot be overestimated. With the vote, Americans can potentially throw the entire personnel of elected leadership out of office and hand victorious challengers new orders on what results the public expects from them, lest they be thrown out of office, as well.

Since politicians will reelect themselves if given the opportunity, one of the primary functions of the public vote is to pose the threat of voting incumbents out of office. If politicians take seriously that public threat on Election Day, they will govern in ways that meet the approval of the majority of voters.

Since, the politicians in Congress are NOT governing in ways that meet the approval of the majority of voters, one can only conclude that these politicians do not fear the anti-incumbent potential of the voters. And there is historical evidence to support this view of our current politicians. In 2010, a near record year for the anti-incumbent movement, very nearly 3 out of 4 incumbents remained in office. Our politicians go to sleep at night comforted by the fact that regardless of how they govern, they have a 75% chance of being reelected. And if they govern to appease their reelection bank-rollers, their reelection odds go way up from there, since, with the money of their bank-rollers they can control the information the voters have access to around election time.

The system is rigged in favor of incumbents, and against the public and voters. Wall Street bank rolls the incumbents that favor Wall Street greed. And after the election, Main Street Americans foot the debt bill for all that favorable treatment for Wall Street. Wall Street, after all, has to be compensated for all those political contributions and lobbying costs to elect their protective incumbents. Wall Street doesn't work for free! Never has. Never will.

Only some vote.

When only about half of Americans vote, the majority of votes will go to the Two Parties in control. Therefore, the Two Party system is maintained, and the corruption of power by those two parties continues, without challenge or threat from Independents, third parties, or public mood or sentiment. The corruption of power in the absence of full participation public voting cannot be overestimated.

The majority of Americans in polling say they expect their representatives to strengthen this injured economy. Yet, every measure to do just that has either failed in Congress, or, sits idly on some clerk's desk gathering dust because the opposition Party won't allow it to come to the floor for a vote. The Two Parties in our government are using the government to wage political warfare with each other, and the American people are the collateral damage of that war.

Signs of our Times

Poverty in America is rising at an alarming rate, (15.1% in 2010), with an estimated 43 to 47 million Americans fallen into that category. The Middle Class that hasn't fallen into poverty, is dropping down in rungs on the Middle Class ladder. The upper 1% have seen their incomes rise hundreds of percent in the last few decades, while the middle class has seen their incomes rise about 40%. That means enormous sums of money that used to flow through our economy as consumption and production dollars, enriching nearly everyone in the consumer production cycle, are now absorbed into the financial markets as investments (increasingly overseas). In other words, this investment money is not flowing through our economy to create jobs and wealth and debt management for everyone, but, instead is being put to work by the wealthiest 1% to earn even more money in overseas economies.

We are a net import nation. This means that ever more of our consumer dollar is being sent to support job creation in other countries. Even the wealthiest who are earning more money on their already doubled, tripled, and quadrupled incomes, are, when they spend some of it, buying goods produced increasingly overseas (Rolls Royce, Bentley, Cartier, etc.).

Increasingly, as American dollars ship overseas, so too will go Americans with middle class savings for their retirement years, where their U.S. Dollar will buy the same goods and services for 60% or less of what they would have to pay in the U.S. for the same goods and services. India is already attracting US customers for medical care and treatment through a Tourist Medical Industry that provides quality surgical operations and treatments at half the cost of the American health system. Approximately 5.2 million Americans now have permanent residence overseas. Increasing, but small, numbers of these, are renouncing their U.S. citizenship every year.

Frustration with a broken political system and government is rising dramatically in all the polling data. This is giving rise to public demonstrations and protests, and increased public service costs to monitor and maintain order for these demonstrations.

States and municipalities are increasingly cutting public service expenditures to keep from bankrupting, and the losses of jobs in the areas like police, fire fighting, education, waste management, water treatment and provisioning, point directly to a future with increasingly negative outcomes for the public at large in American towns and cities, and even rural areas eventually and consumption and demand remain at or near flat.

The role of the voter.

Diminishing voting turnout is not what democratic elections should be about, especially in America: Egypt maybe; not here. A large number of States are, this year, proposing, or considering, legislation to make it harder, or impossible, for groups of Americans to vote. Some groups targeted are young college students, the elderly, the infirm, the poor and low wage workers, and millions of Americans who don't believe they can afford to take the time off from work, without negative repercussions.

Conceptually, the remedies are elementary. Politically, they are extremely difficult, unless Americans vote anti-incumbent until such conditions change.

One change needed is to move to a national Election Day holiday on a Weekend and require employers to provide a minimum half day off to all employees on Election Day, or extend the voting period out over 7 consecutive days so that everyone at work and school has the opportunity on their day off, to vote. In addition, facilitate one-time proof of eligibility registration and a nationalized registered voter database, duplicated by each State, and cross referenced with a nationalized birth and death database. These measures would virtually insure everyone the opportunity to vote, as well as secure everyone's right to vote, while ending the potential for many kinds of voter fraud.

A fundamental flaw with a Two Party system is its inevitable legislation toward the end of creating a one party system. Such a system will always work cooperatively through an agency like the Federal Elections Commission to discourage the formation and ballot access to Independent and third party candidates, not to mention minimizing their potential for fund-raising by making regulatory requirements prohibitive.

One of the primary purposes of the current political funding mechanisms is to preserve the power of the two party system while preventing the ascension of any third party or Independent movement from posing a threat to the power of the Two Party system.

There are no limits, however, on the extents to which one of the two parties, seeing its own demise in future elections, will go to protect its power in the two party system. This truism predicts that when one Party is so out of favor with the public as to risk losing its Two Party membership into the future, that party will go to the most extreme and corrupting measures to protect itself.

Some of those extents will include bringing government to a grinding halt on measures the nation needs to be addressed, with devastating consequences to the nation and people.

Another extremist measure will include leveraging the power of money in elections to offset the backlash of the public through propaganda and misinformation media campaigns. (We have already seen evidence aplenty of this taking place.)

Still another measure will be to change the laws to disadvantage the voters of the other party, or, change the rules within government to disadvantage the other Party.

Belief and Voting.

The act of voting requires that the voter believe that their time, effort, and consequences of voting will be worth it. From another vantage point, one of the objectives of a political party is to make the voters supporting the other party believe their time, effort, and consequences of voting, won't be worth it. There is general agreement that education is the most significant socio-economic predictor of voting behavior.

We have therefore, created a system in which each Party engages in misinformation campaigns to erode the other Party's voters belief that voting is worth it, and issue based Political Action Committees engage in efforts to restore in voters the belief that their vote will make a difference, if only on that one particular issue.

Central to this system is propaganda, information, and misinformation. (Is it a coincidence that America's education system is also declining?) The net result of such a system is to divide the people on so many fronts, that the two party system need not fear the voter on Election Day. The hope is that voters will be so confused as to not even bother to vote, or so torn between their choices, that they become single issue voters siding with one Party or the other.

The remedy is a consensus amongst the American people and the belief that acting on that consensus on Election Day will make a difference. That consensus now exists. Most Americans believe that our Congress is failing them. All that is left is for those Americans to register to vote, and vote anti-incumbent. If the reelection rate dropped to below 50%, both Parties would be forced to salvage their political futures by governing in a way that the majority of Americans would approve of.

Do your part.

Persuade a family member, friend, or acquaintance to vote, and to vote out incumbents and vote in challengers. It is far more important today, that our politicians get this message that the people are back in control of Election Day, than it is to choose better candidate. Any challenger will do, they will be just one of 535, and a bad one will on serve only one term.

Corruption in America

2011-10-12T12:11:58Z

"To destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day." --Theodore Roosevelt.

There is a general perception among the majority of Americans today that our political system is corrupt and our government is failing as a result. Most recently, the Occupy Wall Street demonstrators speak to the very same kind of corruption which Theodore Roosevelt spoke of back in the 1920's. When government legalizes bribery and blackmail, these do not cease to be acts of corruption. This is precisely what has taken place in American government and politics, corrupting our system to the point of growing demonstrations in our American streets.

]]> . This is the single most egregious source of corruption of government by business. It is a Frankenstein resurrection of the 'Unholy Alliance' between politicians and the wealthy in the business world which Theodore Roosevelt spoke of. The political parties have become the bag men carrying the 'legal bribes and blackmail' from Wall Street to Capital Hill.

If the Occupy Wall Street and Tea Party founders, who denounced this corruption of our government, are to succeed in reducing the corruption, they must commit to the daunting task of accomplishing a Constitutional Amendment. Specifically, they must force passage of an amendment which prohibits corporate person-hood and the funding of election campaigns by the business and incorporated entities (which includes unions). So far, the Occupy Wall Street crowd has not set forth an agenda for action other than to arrive in the streets in groups and express dissatisfaction with the status quo.

It is not hard to understand why, either. The instant the Occupy Wall Street "organizers" establish a political policy initiative for change, the business world and political parties will immediately seize upon the their agenda to promote it as a danger to society and America's future, with 100's of millions of dollars of support for waging this war against the Occupy Wall Street crowd. This is a real dilemma for the Occupy Wall Street movement.

In a nutshell, if they don't promote concrete policy initiatives using their anti-incumbent vote to enforce it, politicians will pay lip service to their concerns without actually changing anything. If however, they do advocate concrete policy initiatives, the full weight of corporate wealth will descend upon their movement to discredit their policy initiatives. There is a profound lesson to be noted by all in a little covered election recently in New York as Bloomberg reports:

Evidence that voters are angry enough to kick out their own party was apparent Tuesday night when Republican Bob Turner won a special election in a U.S. House district in New York City with voter registration weighted toward the Democrats. "We are unhappy. I'm telling you. I am the messenger. Heed us," Turner said in a victory speech aimed at Washington.

If the Occupy Wall Street movement continues to grow into 2012, it may achieve sufficient public support to, in effect, pre-neutralize the millions of dollars that will be spent to discredit the movement's political initiatives. They will, of course, have to make a very big and public deal about predicting the actions of the wealthy special interests against them, before they announce concrete steps to effect the removal of private sector money from American politics and government legislative processes.

By publicly predicting the backlash of the wealthy special interests against them, attempts by those wealthy special interests to subvert their agenda will become self-indicting, in the public eye, thus neutralizing the effect of that money in the media arrayed against the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Of course, all of this analysis assumes the Occupy Wall Street movement gets around to establishing a leadership capable of tactical and strategic action toward accomplishing their objective. To date, the Occupy Wall Street movement is leaderless, which is one of its strengths for the time being, as being leaderless provides wealthy special interests little target to spend money on discrediting.

A constitutional amendment to remove money from politics and legislation will likely take years and several election cycles to accomplish. The Wall Streeters are already attempting to demonize demonstrators as 'mobs' and people engaged in 'class warfare'. If the Occupy Wall Street movement is to become endurable, it seems clear they must align themselves with an anti-incumbent voting agenda which can publicly measure their growth and effect upon the political system. If they do this, and the incumbent reelection rate drops with each passing election, the strength and durability of their organization and growth will be self-evident, attracting ever more Americans to their ranks.

If the Occupy Wall Street movement fails to devise a way to publicly demonstrate their growing appeal and effectiveness in changing political reality, the public will lose interest, in very much the same way that the Tea Party has lost its allure to the public at large, for failing to produce positive, measurable results.

Underpinning the rise of public demonstrations by the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street movements are the fundamental issues of democracy and self-determination, and whether, or not, the will of the majority of the people can trump the wealthy special interest minority in shaping our nation's future. Many, mostly on the political right, argue that our nation was not founded as a democracy because of fears of mob rule. And they are quite accurate in that statement.

However, this is not the 18th century, and with amendments to the Constitution which elect the president and senators by popular vote (despite the enduring Electoral College), America has grown toward democracy over the 19th and 20th centuries. Wall Street champions the Republic and abhors the idea of democracy. Wall Street's influence upon government would be seriously diminished if the American people, as a majority, had the power to veto Wall Street's agenda.

This is the underlying domestic war taking place in America today, between the wealthy few percent and the rest of the American people who have lost faith and confidence in Wall Street, the government, and the political system to promote the general welfare for all Americans. On one side there are the Wall Streeters who believe democracy is an evil thing - mob rule. On the other side are those who believe democracy has a place in our Republic as an enduring American strength to force change when change is most needed. Ours is, after all, a democratic republic; which is to say that it is a republic in which its leaders are democratically elected.

This tension between these factions is as old as our founding fathers, but, it is a rarer occurrence in American history that this tension flows into the streets of America in the form of protests and demonstrations. In our system, to effect legislative or constitutional change, these protesters must translate their actions into voting behavior on Election Day. In other words, they must elect persons who will represent their desire for a Constitutional Amendment to remove the influence of private money from our governing processes. That will amount to an enormous anti-incumbent process, since few current politicians have supported the idea of such an amendment.

Ultimately, who wins will depend upon the enduring nature of the American people to sustain their activism. If they can sustain it, they will prevail, as the people did in India in removing British rule and as the South African people did in ending Apartheid and Afrikaner Rule. Ironically, the worst thing that could happen to the Occupy Wall Street movement is for the economy to recover. This creates a self-fulfilling prophecy of growth for the Occupy Wall Street movement, as long as the GOP continues its campaign against economic recovery solutions in their attempt to foil their arch enemy, the Democrats.

As long as the media focuses on the war between the political parties, the American people will lose at the hands of the inaction and gridlock by those political parties. If however, the media can be forced to address the war between wealthy corporate influence and the future of the average American family, the American people will continue to gain strength and power in this war for their future.

Occupy Wall Street

2011-10-07T13:00:05Z

The Occupy Wall Street movement has gone viral. The core of the movement is centered on the singular perception that it is not healthy for the nation, or majority of Americans, if 1% of the population controls the economy for their own benefit, while the other 99% experience declines in their financial and employment status. It is a perception that is nearly impossible to argue against with a straight face. Where is this movement going, however?

]]> OWS could potentially fizzle with the onset of Winter, making hours outdoors in protest insufferable, if not downright unhealthy. Or, the movement could decline over Winter, only to resurge next Spring with warmer weather. Lastly, the movement could continue with legs as a unifying theme that binds the American public together despite all efforts by the political leaders to divide them for their own purposes.

To express one's disappointment with the condition of America, however, does nothing to correct that condition. Only if two conditions are met, can the Occupy Wall Street movement effect positive change for America's tentative economic condition. First, the movement must adopt an action that effects the outcome of elections. And second, that effect must leave politicians in government no political choice but to pass into law, solutions that will appease the activist OWS voters.

In other words, the Occupy Wall Street movement must translate into sufficient anti-incumbent voting in November, 2012, as to leave politicians thinking they have no future in politics unless they address the concern of the OWS voters. Put another way, the OWS movement must embrace the Vote Out Incumbents Democracy strategy, if they are to have any lasting positive effect on the future of our country.

VOID will have more to say on what reforms will be required in order to set our nation back on sound footing for economic prosperity and opportunity going forward. We would very much appreciate your feedback on this topic.

Obviously, however, the first and foremost prerequisite to effecting positive change for America has to be getting the money influence out of politics. As long as our elected leaders and political parties can be bought and sold by the highest commercial bidders on Wall Street, there can be no positive future for the American people at large. But, that is only the first of many reforms that must be adopted as a demand by voters. Tell us what you think should follow.

Anti-incumbent Intentions Are Real

2010-03-19T02:38:25Z

The PEW research group provided an excellent history of anti-incumbent sentiment polls, demonstrating that 2010 is shaping up to be a big anti-incumbent election year.

]]> A February CNN poll article affirms the PEW poll:

The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll, released Tuesday, indicates that only 34 percent feel that current federal lawmakers deserve re-election, with 63 percent saying no.

According to the survey, 51 percent feel their own member of Congress should be re-elected -- also an all-time low in CNN polling -- while 44 percent say their representative doesn't deserve to be returned to office in November.

The problem with sentiment however, is that it can change on a dime. A strategy with a clear goal, however is something one can commit to, unwaveringly, until that goal is reached. That is core of what Vote Out Incumbents Democracy is about. Organizing voters to turn their anti-incumbent sentiment into strategic voting, election after election, until the goal of improved government and political process in America is achieved in a permanent way.

As the table shows, independent voters are carrying the commitment further than either Democrats or Republicans. But, the percentage of Democrats and Republicans today, who do not want to see their own representatives reelected is remarkable. VOID's objective is to reach these voters with the message that they are not alone, they can become organized, and together, we can and will change the future of governance in America for the better.

Your support is important and necessary. Whether your support comes in the form of just letting others know about VOID, volunteering your skills and talents to VOID, or making as generous a donation as possible, it is appreciated, it is monumentally important, and it speaks highly of your intelligence, love of our country, care for our nation's future, and respect for your fellow Americans.

Anti-Incumbent Voters, Alive, Well, and Growing.

2008-11-06T11:55:45Z

From Michigan's Supreme Court race to the many incumbent losses in the House of Representatives, to the incumbent losses in the Senate (Oregon's Smith, N. Carolina's Dole, New Hampshire's Sununu), the anti-incumbent vote made its presence very visible in this election. It was decidedly an anti-incumbent vote against the GOP. However, both major parties can no longer ignore the power of the independent voters (6% of whom decided the Democratic direction of this race), nor the power of voters exercising their right and obligation to vote out incumbents when government disappoints the voters.

]]> Adding to the momentum of the anti-incumbent vote of the 2006 races, this election marks, what has all the appearances of becoming, a national anti-incumbent trend in American elections. This trend is underwritten by several factors.

First, is the dramatic growth in registered Independent voters. They now out number either Democrat or Republican registered voters.
Second, is the growth in interest, memberships, and signs of Vote Out Incumbents sentiment.
Third is the dramatic growth in 3rd Party candidates on ballots all across the nation.
And lastly, the growth of state based 3rd and independent parties, not yet well organized or competitive, most conservative oriented, but growing.

Anti-incumbent leaning voters go to the ballot and find two parties they recognize and reject, the Democratic and Republican, and some third parties they don't recognize and do not trust for a variety of reasons. However, like all growing factions of discontent, one day these splinter groups are likely to find or create a national 3rd party to challenge the duopoly party, with name recognition, extensive media coverage, a growing grass roots revenue stream, and a party platform that is lean and focused on key challenges facing the nation.

Until then, however, the anti-incumbent sentiment is going to mostly be presented with the choice of a democrat or republican incumbent and the other party's challenger. Which inevitably leads to Republicans and Democrats alternating roles as the majority and minority party in federal and state government. These swings do give the major parties cause to reevaluate their agendas, their ideology, and their policy plans. To the extent those changes reflect demands of the voters for more responsible, more accountable, and more transparent government, this very good.

The problem however, is that such changes are marginal, fleeting, and typically get reversed each time the majority and minority parties switch, giving no continuity and sustainability to reform measures over time. That is why, at some point, there must be a third party choice on the ballots across the nation that reflect the demands and wishes of the broad center of the political spectrum and which moderate working class and college educated voters can get behind.

This party must be based on reforms primarily, as opposed to temporary short term issues, though they must be capable of dealing with short term issues as well. But, their focus will likely have to include campaign finance reform, lobbyist reform, fiscal responsibility and plan to lower the national debt and end deficit spending save for national emergencies, voting reform to include moving election day to a weekend and providing accountable mail in voting, verifiable but easy voter registration, as well as extending early voting to permit everyone to vote without wasting precious time and money, or having to overcome other obstacles to voting. Lastly, this party will have to present credible foreign policy credentials along the lines of maintaining a highly effective but vastly lower cost military structure with the ability to defend our nation, while supporting international organizations designed to effectively deal with nations which threaten the peace of other nations.

This new centrist, moderate, pragmatic, independent party will have to avoid adopting divisive cultural and religious values issues, leaving those to be championed by the duopoly party. Unity, common sense, pragmatism, and a laser focus on solving the international, domestic economic, and infrastructure challenges will have to be the cornerstones of a new broad based third party to give the anti-incumbent voter not only someone to vote against on election day, but, challengers to vote for on election day as well.

The anti-incumbent movement is alive, well, and growing. If this does not seem immediately obvious from the election results, it is because the challenging party to the Republican incumbent Party was the Democratic Party. And where there were 3rd party choices, the moderate, centrist, pragmatic voters had little trust or confidence in those 3rd party candidates. As long as government continues to disappoint voters on how government is run however, there will be an anti-incumbent sentiment awaiting leadership to chart another course on election day.

To all of you who voted against an incumbent this election, you fulfilled your obligation in attempting to change the future course of this government which has failed 10's of millions of Americans and hundreds of ways, and failed the American ideals our nation was founded upon. You will strengthen your cause by finding opportunities to share your hopes and vision for a better future with the others in your life. This is a growing movement. The more we communicate our common purpose, the faster this movement will grow and become an effective counter to the destructive, short sighted policies of the Democratic and Republican Parties, based more on securing power than saving and elevating our nation's future.

In 2012, Democrats will have had sufficient time to prove whether they are making solid progress on solving the international and economic challenges of our day. It is up to each of us to fairly and objectively evaluate whether or not that progress exists. If it doesn't, we must be prepared to seek and solidify unity amongst ourselves to create an alternative choice on the ballot to the Democratic and Republican musical chair parties.