November 4 is the “off-year election.” We all know what that means but I would hesitate to call any election the “on-year election.” That would indicate that everyone would give full attention and intelligent thought to the major offices up for grabs. We would all be “on target” to choose the candidate that would do the best for the country. Oh, wouldn’t that be grand.
Unfortunately, such is not the case. The candidates, even in this “off” year, have spent millions making promises that they cannot keep but somehow believe that the electorate will overlook the impossibility of fulfillment and will vote for them anyway.
If one has even a rudimentary understanding of the political process it is obvious that the individual office holder is powerless unless allied with the seniority of their party. Even then, gaining a voice in the assembly, be it local, state, or national, is dependent on loyalty to the party and one doesn’t get that until years of Pavlovian response to the demands of the leadership.
The process of winning an election is predicated on how much money one has to spend. Numerous are the number of billionaires who have dipped into their mammoth fortunes to purchase an election. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission opened the flood gates of finance to for-profit corporations, unions, and countless others proving that money talks and is therefore covered by the first amendment
One could consider the defeat of Eric Cantor, the second most powerful member of the House of Representatives, as proof that money doesn’t buy victory. He spent two million dollars compared to Dave Brat’s (a totally unknown college professor) two-hundred thousand and lost the primary election; it wasn’t even close.
Say what you will, Cantor was judged by all to be a very effective legislator, surely headed to be Speaker and who knows what lay beyond that. He, of course, stepped into a multimillion dollar job as a lobbyist (call it what you will, that’s what it is) somehow avoiding the prohibition that forbids such things for a year after leaving Congress. By becoming the vice chairman of an investment firm, Moelis & Co, he will have access to Congress unparalleled in the past. The Washington Post reports that his total compensation will be 26 times the average household income of the district he formerly represented.
Cantor’s “defeat” has been termed one of the greatest upsets in American political history. Don’t count on him disappearing; this was an aberration and the key to victory in the political arena still rests on two things: money and promises, both of which he will have in abundant supply. Never mind where the money comes from and that the promises are pointless.
Is there anyone, other than the incumbents, who is not cynical about Congress? The one thing at which they excel it is partisan bickering. Virtually nothing has been accomplished in the last two sessions. Oh, I should mention that the great majority of bills had to do with the naming of post office buildings; we shouldn’t overlook that!
Our representative, Mr. Goodlatte, did have his name affixed to one of the two bills passed by a Virginian; it had to do with immigration reform, which is desperately needed. Mr. Goodlatte, despite his promise nearly a quarter century ago to serve only five terms, now is chairman of the powerful judiciary committee, so perhaps we can expect to see him doing more. Taking off his hyper-partisan hat would be a good start.
If this sounds like the usual anti-congress rant and it will be as ineffective as usual; nothing will change after the election. But the one thing we all must do is vote. I will even tell you who to vote for: The candidate who doesn’t promise things that cannot be delivered, but does promise to weigh each issue on its merits, has unquestioned personal integrity and will ignore the pressure from the party leadership (thereby assuring a backseat bench as long as the terms last), and vote for the interest of the district and the country, not for the perpetuation of incumbency.
Please let me know if you ever hear of such a candidate.
– Hayden Hollingsworth
