Fixing American politics

American federal governance has long been warped by a range of tensions that predate this particular administration.

The separation-of-powers designed by the founding fathers to prevent monarchical tyranny through checks and balances between states, federal government, congress, Supreme Court and President, created a sense of permanent gridlock rather than due deliberation, for example.

This focus on process rather than outcomes created a public disenchantment with not just politics and politicians but democracy itself, allowing a ‘strong man’ like President Trump to justify ignoring them all together in the name of ‘getting things done’.

Divided government and the Senate filibuster meant major legislation often required supermajorities that are difficult to assemble in a polarized electorate, further pushing Presidential policymaking toward executive orders, agency rulemaking, and judicial interpretation rather than statute.

Trump was able to exploit fears about the “administrative state” and criticisms that unelected agencies had accrued power that Congress was meant to wield to justify defunding or abolishing them altogether, concentrating power in the hands of himself and his business cronies.  The argument that the technical complexity of the modern world requires expert agencies to handle matters Congress had abdicated responsibility for has largely fallen on deaf ears.

Meanwhile, historical quirks like the Electoral College, equal Senate representation for each state regardless of population, and ridiculously gerrymandered House districts mean electoral outcomes increasingly diverge from national vote totals. While some see these as protecting federalism and minority interests, others see as a democratic deficit that entrenches minority rule and the President exploits these doubts by dismissing any vote against him as fraud or treason.

Incentives and Capacity

A second cluster of problems concerns incentives and capacity. Two-year House terms keep members in near-permanent campaign mode, favoring short-term positioning over long-term policy development.

The reliance on private campaign finance creates a corrupting dependence on donors and organized interests and an aging, seniority-based congressional leadership structure can slow adaptation to new problems.  America once prided itself on its youth and vigour, but its political class – led by its octogenarian President – is one of the oldest in the world.

Layered on top is a judiciary increasingly asked to resolve disputes that a functioning legislature might otherwise settle, which politicizes judicial appointments when the whole point of the courts is to be independent. This in turn raises questions about the Supreme Court’s own democratic legitimacy, as politically motivated appointees simply rubber stamp the President’s decrees rather than interrogate their dubious constitutional legitimacy.

In less polarized times, reasonable people could disagree about whether these are “flaws” which need radical reform or intentional trade-offs which were designed or evolved to diffuse abuses of power. Whatever one’s personal view, public trust in federal institutions has fallen for fifty years and the failure of reform proposals such as filibuster elimination to term limits to Electoral College changes fed a groundswell of opinion for more radical change.

Trump’s self-serving exploitation of public discontent built on the arguments made by the Republican Tea Party movement before him and succeeded to such an extent that he could win a second term after attempting a coup against his own government. The system appeared so broken the electorate turned to Trump again as he was the only man claiming he could easily and quickly fix it.

This fix turned out to be replacing democratic bureaucracy with blustering diktat and, with politicians of both sides either unwilling or unable to oppose his bulldozing of 250 years of American constitutional norms, it is left, once again, to the American people to save their nation from the abyss.

Freedom, Intelligence and Energy

Dwight Eisenhower once said “There is nothing wrong with America that the faith, love of freedom, intelligence, and energy of her citizens cannot cure” and Ike was right. Americans were given the power to rule by the nation’s founders, but we have to turn out to vote as if we care about proper representation, hold Congress and the President accountable and shift their focus from their own wealth to our welfare.

The men and women in Congress have to understand that lobbyists and corporations didn’t elect them and if they’re not representing the people, they’re not doing their jobs. While people typically vote according to party philosophies, both left and right should realise their representatives in  Congress have abandoned their traditional platforms to focus on personal job security.

We must renew the system of checks and balances which has, up to now at least, ensured the survival of our democracy. This will not happen if half the population don’t bother to vote and the rest just vote a straight party line without looking at the quality of their candidate.

If the current situation continues to deteriorate, there may be no way to repair the damage, and our children and grandchildren will not thank us for the mess we left them. While there are many things that need fixing, two of them must be priorities to make the rest possible – a stronger role for the American people to encourage greater public engagement and a reduction of the pernicious but currently all pervading influence of money in politics.

When citizens in every community participate more actively through voting, public forums, community engagement, and by communicating regularly with representatives, government becomes more responsive and accountable. Greater civic involvement helps ensure that public policy  at the local, state and Federal level reflects the broad public interest rather than special interests.

Equally important is the elimination of the current method of campaign financing, which gives disproportionate influence to wealthy donors and special interests. Replacing private funding with a transparent public financing system, as successfully employed in several European countries, would allow candidates to compete based on ideas and qualifications, rather fundraising and secret influence deals. This would encourage a wider range of candidates to run for office and help restore confidence that elected officials serve the public rather than financial backers.

The synergy of greater citizen participation and public campaign financing would strengthen democratic legitimacy, improve accountability, and help the federal government function effectively. A healthier democracy depends on a system where voices matter more than dollars and where public service is guided by the needs of the people.

Mr Geuli’s latest book, “Fixing Federal Dysfunction”, is available at Amazon.