Campaign reformers should look north to Canada
I have a strong suspicion that politics has begun to enter a new
and exalted realm of stupidity. And although it’s not unexpected,
it is disconcerting.
The thought that the election is just around the corner
– this coming Tuesday –fills me with extreme happiness, because
then there will finally be an end to all the campaign
advertising.
Campaign reformers should look north to Canada
I have a strong suspicion that politics has begun to enter a new and exalted realm of stupidity. And although it’s not unexpected, it is disconcerting.
The thought that the election is just around the corner – this coming Tuesday –fills me with extreme happiness, because then there will finally be an end to all the campaign advertising.
Let’s see, how long has it been going on now? Like a year?
I think the time has come for some changes to campaigning. Not so much how it’s paid for, or who can pay for it. No, it needs to only be allowed for the month before the election.
I didn’t realize this until recently, but in Canada, campaigning is only allowed during the five weeks prior to Election Day. When I heard this, a light bulb went off in my head.
“Jeepers,” I thought. “That’s exactly what California should do, if not the entire United States. Why hasn’t anyone ever brought this up before? It’s genius!”
Now admit the truth: Couldn’t you have lived without the months and months of advertising for this office and that office? Couldn’t you have done without the negative ads that accuse opponents of being cheats, crooks, liars and just plain simple-minded? Wouldn’t it have been nice to just hear the facts and not the fabrications?
Specifically, I’m sick of the California governor’s race. Whitman attacks Brown, lays blame and shreds his character; Brown then goes and does likewise to Whitman.
It seems to be a given that there are dirty tricks on both sides. Back and forth it goes like watching a tennis match, only with one important difference: I can’t help but think less of both players now.
Maybe if there was less campaign time allotted, there would be less opportunity to air opponents’ dirty laundry, fewer attack ads and less bickering. Oh, we could only hope.
And then there are the propositions, just about every one of them as confusing as can be, seemingly with good arguments on each side. But again, accusations are leveled against whoever’s supporting one side or the other (Texas oil! Teachers! Firefighters! Potheads!) and it becomes increasingly dicey to sort out what’s really the best decision.
It’s enough to make someone stop voting altogether.
(And if you think it’s bad in California, you should check out some of the television ads run by candidates in other states. There’s no doubt in my mind that some definitely violate truth-in-advertising laws. If you get a chance, check some of these out at the website Foolocracy.com.)
At any rate, I have a modest proposal for cleaning up dirty campaigning. First of all, go with the five-week limit, like Canada. No talking about campaigns before that, no debates, no ads, no nothing. We’ll have to put up with it for a month, but that’s do-able.
Secondly, candidates will no longer be able to say nasty things about their opponents, unless they can also say something nice. I think that’s only right. If you don’t want to say anything nice, then don’t say anything. Run on your own merits.
Thirdly, chocolate should be distributed to everyone who comes out to vote. Really. Don’t you think that would get a lot of people out to the polling places who are otherwise unmotivated? Everyone likes chocolate, and besides, it won’t cost election departments too much. They can just buy up all that Halloween candy that’s going to be 50 percent off on Nov. 1.
So, in a nutshell: Limits on campaigns. Niceness. And chocolate.
All of these things would make politics much easier to be around.
