Efficient election could minimize voter burnout

A little more than a year ago, I wrote a column titled “We’re voting next year, so come back then.”

My point was, and still is, simple: There is no justification for candidates spending massive amounts of money over a year before the election is to take place.

On that day over a year ago, Barack Obama visited two cities, Hillary Clinton held a talk, Mitt Romney flew from Orange County to Nevada and John Edwards traversed six cities.

Of course, the latter three have little, except frequent flyer miles, to show for their efforts.

Instead of a nearly two-year election cycle (after all, it was Edwards that spoke at Kerckhoff Patio in early March of 2007) that results in dismal voter turnout, the United States should transition to a more efficient system.

America should reform its election cycle with firm caps on spending. In other words, no 30-minute Obama ads.

I have neither a bachelor’s degree nor a credible career in American politics, yet it is not difficult to dream up notions of a better election.

Candidacy should be announced on a set date, no earlier than one year before the election. This gives the variety of candidates plenty of time to make their case before the American people ““ on TV, online or in person.

The primary season must run rapidly, perhaps even concurrently in all 50 states. A few debates should then precede the general election, which would undoubtedly see much higher voter participation as voter burnout decreases dramatically.

John McCain and Obama both declared their campaigns in 2007. Since then, a barrage of viral personal attacks and meaningless distractions have left many voters wondering if there is really any difference between the two candidates.

There are other options. Take France’s 2007 election, which garnered an 85 percent voter turnout ““ unheard of in America. The list of candidates was released on March 19, the first debate on May 2 and the election on May 6.

Less than two months was all it took for 85 percent of a nation to make up their minds.

Granted, America is no France. We have a much larger population and greater geographic spread. Some may claim that this should translate into an election which allows candidates to travel the nation and become familiarized with the nuances that make America all that it is.

But if anything, this election has proven to be the political equivalent of a television show stretching 20 minutes of material into a two hour, ad-filled travesty.

So while America is bigger, we still do not deserve a mind-numbingly repetitive race.

How many times have you heard that McCain voted with Bush 90 percent of the time? The Obama campaign has been relentless in this attack, to the tired ears of conservatives and liberals alike.

Consider the following as well: “I told Congress, “˜Thanks, but no thanks’ for that bridge to nowhere.”

If it sounds familiar, it’s because Sarah Palin has said those words at least 11 times.

According to the Web site ThinkProgress.org, the number of times that the McCain camp (McCain, Palin, surrogates) used this phrase ““ since proven false ““ reached at least 23.

Wolf Blitzer’s “The Situation Room” ran a segment juxtaposing six of her events. As Blitzer said, “Sarah Palin is giving essentially the same stump speech over and over.”

There is frankly no justification for candidates burning through millions of dollars to stump. Let’s celebrate when it all ends.

Sick of politics? Email Makarechi at kmakarechi@media.ucla.edu. Send general comments to viewpoint@media.ucla.edu.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *