A Call For Quality in Democracy

September 25, 2003.


A Call for Quality in Democracy

Under the current political practices, we elect the best politicians money can buy and ignore the true leaders that money cannot buy. Technologically, we have been advancing rapidly: politically, we have been decaying steadily. Consequently, from a technological perspective, we have a solution to almost every problem but from a political perspective, we have a problem to almost every solution. The Soviet Union has proved that communism does not work. The current affairs in California tend to prove that democracy is also not able to deliver the results. Direct democracy gives an illusion of wide choice of candidates but not the right candidate for governor.

This is because non-partisan rationality to protect the common good is missing in our democratic operations. Each political party engages in a blame game. The parties keep escalating polarization to the point fanaticism. Full effort is devoted to gain power: No effort is made to evolve substantive solution to the problems. Then, in frustration, we take steps that do not even address the very issues that trigger those steps. For instance, recall of the Governor to eliminate the budget deficit. In frustration, we hope that any change will be a change for the better. We do not evaluate merits and demerits of the change.

Let’s take a quick look. First, the Governor is not entirely responsible the budget deficit: many assembly members and senators are equally responsible. Second, power base of the new governor will impose the same constraints, e.g., voters’ wishes and restrictive legislative assembly. Third, State budget is generated by a compromise of many conflicting forces: recall effort does nothing to eliminate them or even minimize them. Fourth, no contesting candidate is presenting a clear-cut plan to abolish the deficit. Any such plan would be detrimental to the candidate’s chances in election.

Last night, the gubernatorial debate was of extremely low quality. The debate was very poorly conducted. It was more of a shouting competition without substance. How can voters be expected to judge the job fitness of the candidates from such a debate?

Usually, the solution is sought when the problem is felt most. I take this opportunity to suggest interjection of some quality in our democratic operations in order to evolve abiding solution for the common good.

As a first step, I would like to suggest that certain prerequisites be adopted and enforced for each elected position in the state. Such a measure should assure the necessary background and the minimum knowledge and the quality of candidates for the job performance. Much as immigrants are welcome, I believe the candidates competing for the state elections must be born in the state.