|
Debates: In or out for Ralph Nader? Stiffing Nader isn't democratic
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Trancer-X |
Debates: In or out for Ralph Nader?
Stiffing Nader isn't democratic
By JACQUELINE SALIT
The Neo Independent
The American electorate has been changing in dramatic ways as more and more voters look beyond two-party politics. The inclusion of independent candidate Ralph Nader in the televised presidential debates should be judged in this context.
The trend toward political independence is not altogether new, but it is reaching a critical mass.
According to a report by the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate, the number of Americans registering as independents has increased 800 percent in the last three decades.
Polls show youth leading the trend with 41 percent of those ages 18-29 identifying as independents. Among blacks 25 percent consider themselves independent. Among 18- to 29-year-olds in the black community, the number climbs to 35 percent. A recent poll conducted by the American Association of Retired Persons and Roper ASW showed that 56 percent of U.S. "baby boomers" would like to see a strong third party in the political mix.
Though the two parties frame virtually every aspect of our elections, more people of voting age consider themselves political independents (35 percent) than either Republicans (32 percent) or Democrats (31 percent), according to a CNN poll.
Clearly, there is a strong attraction to political independence. Yet the Commission on Presidential Debates - assembled and run by the Democratic and Republican parties to manage the televised candidate encounters - have precluded independent presidential contenders since 1992.
This is part of a generalized pattern of election regulation that depresses public interest in alternatives to the main parties and impedes the development of a third party and a national independent political movement.
After years of litigation against the CPD, by independent presidential candidates such as Lenora Fulani, Ross Perot, Patrick Buchanan and John Hagelin, a federal court judge recently ordered the Federal Election Commission to investigate the CPD's apparent failure to act in a nonpartisan manner. This intervention is long overdue.
Much is made about the need to nurture and cultivate democracy in Iraq and elsewhere. But American democracy is treated differently.
The exclusion of Ralph Nader from the debates is more than a bureaucratic manipulation to limit participation to George Bush and John Kerry. It is designed to delegitimize the public thirst for new political players.
If our democracy institutions are not proactively responsive to new developments in the body politic, our democracy will itself degenerate. Indeed, it already has. Fully 50 percent of eligible Americans do not vote in national elections.
The historical record makes clear that when independent candidates are included in national presidential debates, viewership and voter turnout go up. Moreover, polling in 2000 and 2004 show that a significant majority of Americans - as high as 75 percent in some cases - support the inclusion of Nader regardless of whom they plan to vote for.
Ralph Nader has been a hugely significant figure in American political life for a generation. He has now become a political independent, providing a visible presence for the undeniable movement toward a new paradigm that is more varied and more representative of America than the two-party system.
The hysterical reaction to Nader's candidacy by some - which has gone a step beyond wanting him excluded from the debates to wanting him removed from the ballot altogether - is as much an anti-democratic reaction to the movement as it is to the man.
A vibrant, forward-looking and responsive society must always choose the path of democratic development. The conduct of the 2004 presidential debates is a defining choice in this regard. Ralph Nader must be included in the presidential debates.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jacqueline Salit is Executive Editor of The Neo Independent, a quarterly publication dedicated to the development of democracy (www.neoindependent.com). Letters should be sent to Postmodern Press, 302A West 12th Street, #140, New York, NY 10014 or you may contact by email at [email protected].
http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/demo...ion/9632676.htm |
|
|
| Q5echo |
Nader is an ok guy from what i know of him. and that is his problem.
i, like most people am completely clueless as to who he is and what he stands for. why? because the people of this country are only exposed to him and his agenda for about eight months every four years. those eight months happen to be the worst possible time to get your message out above the din.
it may be too little to late now for his curiously short half-life, but he has gone about campaigning for the presidency all wrong.
he should campaign between cycles.
but then he'd have to quit his day job. |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
| 1 of the 3 debates should be all-party. |
|
|
| plumeria |
| not only are they keeping nader out of the debates but the democrats are trying to keep him off the ballot or have already succeeded in a few states. not that i will or would vote for him, depending on what happens. i just don't remember his presence being such a big deal last election. but now the democrats are so desperate for a win they're trying to find every inconsistency in order to keep him out. suddenly i kinda do feel like voting for him, just to give a big F.U. to my own party. |
|
|
|
|
