The Election Fun Begins

The 2008 election is in full swing. Evidently a great number of select and politically experienced Americans are not happy that all of the important issues are being addressed or even debated by the candidates. As a result they are meeting in early January to try to affect the election dialogue. Will this work and exactly what is their strategy? Read the following article for Richard Freer's take on the situation, their strategy, and their chances of success in steering the conversation of not only the upcoming but also of future election agendas.

By Robert E. Freer, Jr., President of The Free Enterprise Foundation

"Thank you for agreeing to join us to exchange ideas about constructive ways in which we might stimulate a meaningful debate during the current presidential campaign on the important challenges facing our nation. Our political system is, at least badly bent and many are concluding that it is broken…….."

So begins a letter to a select group of Americans from Governor David Boren and former Senator Sam Nunn. The vast majority of those invited have previously had distinguished careers in Congress. The exceptions are David Abshire, President of the Center for the Study of the Presidency, Susan Eisenhower, Christine Todd Whitman, Edward Perkins (former ambassador to the U.N.) and Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Somehow my invitation must have been delayed in the mail; nevertheless, I will watch the gathering of this flock with keen interest. The vast majority of the issues set for discussion could have been taken directly from my columns of the past year or so and are the first public sign that someone out there wants to speak for the majority of our citizens who do not wish to be associated with either pole of our party extremes and are very worried by what they see as a nation that has slipped its anchor. I wrote about them following the ‘06 election, more than a year ago in “The Bell Curve Election.”

Perhaps, more important than the meeting are the credentials of the invitees. Former Senator, now president of the University of Oklahoma, David Boren and former Senator Sam Nunn have arranged for a constellation of heavyweights to gather in Norman, Oklahoma for a short meeting to discuss these major issues. The shortness of the meeting, the release in advance of the attendees and the setting of a press conference to follow immediately suggest that little of substance will occur during the short discussion that is possible in the few hours available for the meeting scheduled for January 7. Only time will tell, but the Norman Conclave obviously follows much discussion that has already occurred and is being held for its hoped for public impact.

In addition to those I have set out above, the group includes Gary Hart, former Senator Bob Graham, Chuck Hagel, former Senator Chuck Robb, former RNC Chairman and Senator Bill Brock. Mayor Bloomberg’s presence, if he can be believed, is not the lead up to his announcement that he will mount an independent run for president, but clearly adds almost unlimited financial clout to the groups’ pronouncements.

The group’s press event is a chip on the green baize of the election table that is a threat to the huge financial stakes embodied in each campaign. It says that sufficient brain power and dollars are available to make any campaign consider carefully its policy pronouncements. The group is betting that the threat of unlimited financial resources posed against them in the general election is enough to assure the campaigns are focused on those issues for which we need solutions not rhetoric. Their wish is to encourage positive proposals not negative ads. Only time will reveal whether their vision will be realized, but that they are making the effort is a mark of the seriousness of the peril into which they see our country drifting. Whether successful or not, it bodes for a very interesting campaign season.

While independent and third party attempts have been made a number of times in our history, their major impact has been to throw the election to one of the two major parties by denying “bell curve” votes from the great mass of the 40 percent of uncommitted voters not aligned with either party to the candidate that stays closest to the middle of the political road. For it to work this time, recent election trends would have to be reversed.

First, the electorate has to be engaged in a major way. Having barely a majority of voters make it to the polls is a vote for lack of accountability by our representatives. It is a vote for caucus control of party policy by a few and thus inhibits the value of the governing outcome. It is the embodiment of status quo! Second, the dissatisfaction with both major parties has to coincide with a similar determination of the vast majority of those voters I describe as being part of the bell curve. Third, the new Congress must reflect the same national agenda not just parochial district perspective. Both branches have to be in agreement or the natural competiveness built into our form of government will stymie substantial progress.

While I can write all day about the importance for our country’s future for this alignment to work, our experience isn’t promising. Negative politics is so prevalent because it works. Our digital tools enable us to slice and dice the population into micro strata. Political pros know how to craft a message to appeal to each stratum with a compelling message. More often than not the message is negative.

Experience has proven that voters go to the polls to vote against someone or something not for a desired positive outcome. Often it is a peripheral issue having little to do with the major responsibilities of the position. Historically these “chicken little” voters don’t have a comprehensive concept of what electing a president means; they haven’t a clue what the limitations on the office mean regarding the president’s ability to truly change outcomes for many of the conundrums that face the country nor the reality that, particularly in foreign affairs, we are faced with a series of unpalatable alternatives from which we need work toward the least unpalatable.

The President’s greatest attribute must be to be an effective, well grounded manager of countless constituencies. Beyond that, we are truly fortunate if we get one who is self aware and comes full formed to inspire the nation with our better future rather than simply cap a successful career. In today’s world, the portion of a president’s time spent on the peripheral issues that seem so important to the outcome in November are relegated to the bottom of the pile that greets the new president and the new Congress when they arrive in Washington in January.

While I respect the men and women assembling in Norman, Oklahoma, and wish the best for the efforts of Governor Boren’s Conclave, only an educated and aroused electorate can truly demand the change in course our country needs to surmount the structural challenges we now face. We are beyond the normal appeals of money and rhetoric. An aroused public demanding that we work towards solutions rather than against them needs to find its own way to make its will clear. Toward that effort I hope these essays will help educate the public to the importance of its well informed participation at the polls and in the civic debate.

Copyright © 2007 by Robert E. Freer, Jr. All rights reserved

About the author: Robert E. Freer, Jr. is President of The Free Enterprise Foundation. He is a Visiting Professor, at The Citadel and elected in 2005 to be their first John S. Grinalds Leader in Residence. A regular contributor to the Mercury, He can be reached by E-mail at The Citadel . Copies of his earlier columns can be found The Free Enterprise Foundation.

If you’d like to contribute an article to this collection please e-mail it for review .