Independents constitute a
plurality in the United States [1],
and the dysfunctional electoral college system and the language of the
Constitution provide abundant evidence that the intent of the constitutional
Framers was that this country would operate on a non-partisan basis. [2]
But a partisan representative democracy we are, and this alone has rendered
calls for a return to the vision of the Founders ridiculous.
Certainly, we wouldn’t
really want a return to that vision with its toleration of slavery and a restricted
franchise. But even without such obnoxious features, the ascendancy of
political parties has made the endeavor quixotic. Still, while the Constitution
has had to be amended to accommodate the party regime, it retains much of its
non-partisan language. It cannot be said that it is unfriendly to throwing off
the yoke of party control, even though it hasn’t protected us from it.
Let us, then, adopt the
intent of the Framers qualified by subsequent constitutional amendments as our
goal. In doing so, we find a system that is still designed for a non-partisan
regime. If the system is to work as intended, we must reduce the power of
political parties.
But how?
Since the parties aren’t
going to support restricting their own power, we must begin in those eighteen
states that permit amendment of their constitutions by the initiative process.
They are Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio,
Oklahoma, Oregon, and South Dakota. [3]
In those states,
initiatives should be put forward that eliminate party control over the
election and legislative processes. All elections should be made non-partisan,
with no party designations on the ballot. Party nominations should be made to
have no effect on ballot access; petition signatures alone should be the means
of qualifying.
Nebraska has a
non-partisan legislature. “There are no formal party alignments or groups
within the Nebraska State Senate. Coalitions tend to form issue-by-issue based
on a member’s philosophy of government, geographic background and constituency.
However, almost all the members of the legislature are affiliated with the
state affiliate of either the Democratic or the Republican Party and both
parties explicitly endorse candidates for legislative seats. Senators and
candidates are listed as officially nonpartisan, but in most cases the
individual has a direct party affiliation. As an example, in most cases if a
sitting senator runs for Congress, the individual runs on either the Democratic
or Republican line on the ballot.” [4]
That there be no formal
party alignments within the legislature is critical. It is, therefore,
essential that any constitutional provision along these lines include such a
requirement. There is probably nothing to be done about party endorsements. But
their impact within the legislature can be minimized with constitutional rules
on how proposed legislation comes before the state legislature.
Specifically, any
legislation put forward by two members of the legislature should come before
the entire body for a vote. No officer of the body, including the presiding
offer, should have the authority to stop this from happening. Proposed
legislation can be referred to a committee, but the committee should be
required to report back within a certain period, and both legislators who
proposed the legislation should agree to any amendments added by the committee.
Another possibility is
the appointment of non-partisan parliamentarians to preside over legislative
bodies. Being mindful that political parties will attempt to regain dominance
surreptitiously, there would likely be an antidotal effect in bringing in a
non-voting officer selected for his or her parliamentarian knowledge and skill who
would have a certain professional pride in not manifesting bias.
Most importantly,
primaries should be fashioned in the direction of the non-partisan blanket
model, with these characteristics: The political parties should have nothing to
do with them, and, again, no party designations should be on the ballot; a
candidate winning a majority of the votes should be declared the winner of the
election, with no general election necessary; otherwise the two candidates
receiving the most votes in the primary should afterward compete in the general
election.
Presidential elections
won’t be immediately affected, because candidates who don’t win their party
primaries will have withdrawn from the race by the time of the general election.
A state’s citizens will want their votes in a presidential election to be
meaningful, so presidential elections will have to be conceded to the parties
until non-partisan efforts have achieved results sufficient to impact the
federal system. In the meantime, a proportional award of presidential electors,
in the manner previously suggested in these pages [5],
might be the best method to make individual votes relevant.
As things stand now,
politicians represent their political parties rather than their constituents.
It is difficult to overstate how inimical that is to republican government. That
is likely why the Constitution wasn’t designed for political parties. The more
quickly we can move them to the margins of political relevance, the sooner we
will have the sort of system envisioned by our nation’s Founders.
