-Caveat Lector- THURSDAY JUNE 10 1999 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- We don't know if voting works ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- © 1999 WorldNetDaily.com I've had a great many people contact me in the past few days complaining that I'm not being very realistic when I admonish this nation to "throw out the professional politicians" during the November 2000 election. Having said that, I will admit -- based on results over the past few decades -- the prospect of seriously changing the electorate through the ballot box seems dim indeed. But there is another aspect to these results. Could today's ballot results be having a less-than-desirable effect on the political process because most of us aren't bothering to go to the polls? I wonder if most people even realize that this kind of pitiful voter turnout is exactly what our career politicians hope for every year. It's true. Incumbents count on poor voter turnouts because statistically speaking, incumbents benefit when voter turnout is low. Historically, when more of us turn out to vote, we routinely change the players in Washington. You may remember the most recent example of this: The so-called Republican Revolution in 1994. It happened because after only two years of Bill Clinton, Americans en masse were already prepared to make drastic changes and showed up in record numbers at polling stations all across the country. The result was a GOP-controlled Congress for the first time in over 40 years that was reelected, for the most part, in 1996 and 1998. Were these examples just flukes? In reality we really don't know because the last few generations of Americans haven't consistently shown up at the polls in large numbers. Consequently, there has been no way to gauge the very real power "ordinary" Americans possess in regard to selecting those we want to represent us in government. I personally know -- as do you -- many people who either never bother to vote at all in any election, or vote very infrequently, perhaps only when there is a "pet" issue to consider in a local ballot. What a shame that is. It's a sad testament to the United States that these days, in national elections, we consider it a good turnout if just 35 percent of eligible voters bother to utilize our God-given right and privilege to choose whom we want to lead us. If only a fraction of us who can ever bother to vote, how in the world can we then say that "we the people" have selected the leaders we send to higher office? "We the people" aren't doing anything except letting a minority of us choose an even smaller number of select people who are supposed to represent all of us. It doesn't make sense. For years Americans have complained that the federal government doesn't legislate on behalf of the majority anymore. Maybe that's because only portions of eligible Americans are even willing to help select those people we routinely criticize. If we value the kind of representation we are supposed to get, then we ought to value the process in which we select these people. If we want to reserve the right to criticize (or suggest better ways of doing things) then we ought to participate in the selection process. If we don't, then in essence we are not criticizing the lawmaker, per se; we are criticizing the selection of that lawmaker by a minority of voting Americans. That isn't the same thing because the lawmaker knows he or she can still count on the same few people voting for them the next time around if this trend doesn't reverse itself. I know there are many obstacles to making responsible choices for leaders to lead us. I realize the dominance of the two-party system, the bias of the mainstream media and their selective reporting, the occasional instances of voter fraud, America's addiction to the five-second sound bite, and so on. But we have to remember that we're citizens of this country, and this country belongs to us. With that also comes the responsibility of doing whatever it takes to find out how your representatives feel on the issues that are important to you. That isn't easy. But it is doable. We just have to commit ourselves to a few things, like our forefathers did. For one thing -- and this is especially true of any incumbent -- don't be satisfied with sound bite explanations for complex problems and issues. If your representative says, for instance, "We need more gun control," you need to find out why that lawmaker or candidate feels that way. While you'll probably never get to talk to the candidate yourself, sometimes just calling his or her campaign headquarters (where the call takers have been given "position statements" to read from) will be sufficient. Dig; don't just settle for some stock answer. Find out the details of their positions and what led them to formulate their positions. Secondly, turn the heat up on your current representatives and senators. Call their offices, write them letters, and be vocal -- you have that right. After all, regardless of what they think, they are ultimately there for you and your community. Realize that they have many people in the same district (and hence, many viewpoints) to represent. But you have every right to make your point of view known and you should do so often. It matters, contrary to what you may think. Third, learn as much as you can about all of the different issues and problems your representative or candidate is likely to face. You have an obligation to stay informed, and with the plethora of news and information services out there these days, there is virtually no excuse for not taking the time to find out all you can about all you can. Think of yourself as a boss who has the responsibility of knowing all there is to know about the company you're running. We, the people, are the bosses; the representatives and senators are the employees. If we expect them to know what we want and how we want things done, we have to tell them instead of having them tell us what to do all the time. Fourth, make sure you show up and vote. That vote is so much more powerful when lots and lots of people cast it; it is less powerful and, therefore, less influential, when only a few of us vote. Last, it's probably a good idea for you to get into the mindset that this strategy will take some time. Our country did not slip into the current moral abyss after one or two elections; it has taken years for this slip to take place. It's likely to take years to reverse it. But always keep in mind -- for every election we participate in, the slippery slope into chaos is slowed. Eventually, this process will stop that slide completely, then reverse it altogether. History is replete with examples of societies that have completely changed their culture -- and those changes were not always for the worse. I really believe through a combination of spirituality and diligence, Americans can and will change the face of our society if we resolve to stay in the game, make the commitment to stay informed, and refuse to let career politicians who espouse ideals anathema to our beliefs and our Constitution get away with it. We have to remember that people like Bill Clinton may only be anomalies instead of "the kind of person we deserve" to lead us. We have to stop believing the lie that there is nothing we can do for ourselves, and we have to stop letting our citizenship in the greatest country on earth be taken for granted. We owe ourselves, our Founders, and our children more than that. The fact is no society in any nation on earth deserves somebody like Bill Clinton. As far as we've come since 1776, that is especially true for Americans. So let's get busy throwing the bums out in November 2000 and stop taking "no" for an answer. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Jon E. Dougherty is a senior writer and columnist for WorldNetDaily, as well as a morning co-host of Daybreak America. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_dougherty_com/19990610_xcjod_we_dont_kn .shtml Bard Visit me at: The Center for Exposing Corruption in the Federal Government http://www.xld.com/public/center/center.htm Federal Government defined: ....a benefit/subsidy protection racket! DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
