Jay Evensen
  • Front Page
  • Opinions
  • Second Thoughts
  • Portfolio
  • Awards
  • About

Do we suffer from too much democracy?

11/20/2019

0 Comments

 
Does the nation suffer from too much democracy? 

If that sounds like an odd question, consider the 2020 race for the Democratic presidential nominee. Seventeen people still are in the running, and one, former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, may yet jump in.

Much the same happened in the Republican Party four years ago, when Donald Trump emerged despite never getting 50% support within the party.​
A candidate today can win with help from a small share of voters in a handful of states. Or perhaps several candidates might lay claim to the same market share of party support, with similar platforms or. They could split the vote and all lose, when one such candidate might have carried the day.
The obvious followup question to this observation is, was the nation better served in the days when party bosses picked someone they felt was a winnable candidate in a metaphorical smoke-filled back room?
And if you say yes to that, does that mean you support the way Utah has traditionally chosen candidates through a caucus system involving only party delegates? 
Conversely, if you think the primary system is better, do also support the recent move in Utah toward more democracy — allowing candidates to get on the ballot through a petition process if they don’t pass muster with party delegates?
These are not inconsequential questions. They also aren’t easy.
In the December issue of The Atlantic, Brookings Institution fellow Jonathan Rauch and University of Massachusetts political science professor Ray La Raja examine how the relatively recent power shift from political insiders to primary elections has affected the types of candidates we get and the way they govern. The simple takeaway is that a system relying only on primaries leads to trouble.
“In a large field, enduring the early battles requires mobilizing a loyal faction rather than pulling together a coalition,” they wrote. But governing always requires the ability to build coalitions. That can be difficult to do if you get into office without having to develop that skill.
Rauch and La Raja quote another professor, Henry Jones Ford, who wrote about the danger of direct primaries way back in 1909. Ford acknowledged problems with back-room coronations, but said that system tended to produce candidates who knew how to govern, whereas a primary system would elevate people who mostly knew how to promote themselves. Those with the most money would tend to win “when power is conditioned upon ability to finance costly electioneering campaigns.”
But the answer isn’t as simple as to turn the nomination process back to party bosses. Rauch and La Raja  also acknowledge problems with empowering those people totally.
What is needed, they argue, is a mixed system, ensuring “the full spectrum of democratic values gets attention.”
Utah may be a unique case because of the near total control of the Republican Party. Studies here have shown that the caucus system tends to under-represent women. Delegates tend to skew to the party’s extremes, which is not representative of the party’s overall membership. Some high-profile incumbents, such as the late Sen. Bob Bennett, were defeated in the convention process when polls showed they had strong public support.
And yet conventions can be springboards for strong candidates who may lack the funding to succeed in a primary-only system.
That may make the current compromise system in Utah, in which candidates may qualify for the ballot either through the convention or through a petition process, the ideal blend.
Time will tell, although so far candidates who go the petition route seem to fair better than those chosen by party insiders.
Rauch and La Raja argue that today’s political reformers spend too much energy on reforming how we vote (ranked choice vs. traditional ballots, for example), how easily we vote (mail-in balloting and same-day registrations, for example), and the fairness of voting (how districts are drawn or how donations are reported, for example). Real change would come through re-empowering, at least to an extent, the vetting of political professionals.
That’s an interesting and compelling thesis, but I can’t help thinking the real solution is at the same time both easier, and harder, than that.
Simply put, if more people would become well-informed participants in the political process, the process itself would become more representative, and the leaders more qualified. Party bosses may need to winnow a long list of candidates, but the bigger problem is that voter apathy empowers extremists. 
Arousing the great, sleeping, middle of the road — not just on Election Day but in the process leading up to that — would solve so many problems.
Making that happen, particularly in a time of ease and excess, is the great challenge for democracy in our day.

​
0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    RSS Feed

    Search this site


    Like what you read here?

      Please subscribe below, and we'll let you know when there is a new opinion.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    Picture

    The author

    Jay Evensen is the Senior Editorial Columnist of the Deseret News. He has nearly 40 years experience as a reporter, editor and editorial writer in Oklahoma, New York City, Las Vegas and Salt Lake City. He also has been an adjunct journalism professor at Brigham Young and Weber State universities.

    Archives

    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012

    Categories

    All
    Campaign 2012
    Congress
    Crime
    Culture
    Iran
    Oil And Gas
    Poverty
    Steroids
    Taxes
    Utah
    Washington
    World Events
    World Events

    Links

    Deseret News
    Newslink
    Marianne Evensen's blog

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.