The jarring disconnect in the process is that in the aftermath of any particular election people are normally dissatisfied with the outcomes in many cases, and as time goes by and those elected representatives take action and debate issues and disburse monies and pass legislation the outcry normally grows louder and louder, because the electorate feels ignored and marginalized and excluded from the processes that are supposedly being undertaken on their behalf, and with their consent.
Part of the problem is that people are simply too busy and too distracted by work and family and recreation and financial worries and health issues and a host of other concerns to pay close attention to on-going Governmental affairs, and my suspicion is that Government in many cases likes it that way, which is why elected representatives become indignant or defensive or hostile at times when they are confronted by someone whose interests they supposedly represent who requests information or documentation or access to Governmental processes that those elected officials have somehow come to believe are "theirs" and not "ours."
And even more curiously, elected officials who have ignored the wishes and voices of their constituents and voted in opposition to the expressed opinions of the people who elected them and withheld information that properly ought to be public and sought to limit public participation in local Government in a variety of ways somehow, be it through "name recognition" or targeted advertising or Democratic or Republican Party infrastructure or simple apathy on the part of the voters end up RE-ELECTED to the position that they occupied the last time around, even though there was wide-spread dissatisfaction with their performance.
A friend of mine and I were discussing this whole campaign yesterday, and he told me that he was surprised and impressed at how seriously I'd approached it, and how hard I'd worked, even though the prospects of success were uncertain, and he worried aloud that I might take it hard in the event that I ended up short of winning the election, which was quite likely.
I laughed at him when he said that, and I told him that it was only my passionate belief in participatory democracy that had goaded me into entering the race in the first place, and that my fundamental conviction is that all any candidate should do, and properly ought to do, is offer themselves to the public as servants in any given race, and let the people determine by the votes that they cast whether or not they want that person to serve their interests for whatever term the office holds, and more to the point whether or not that person is sincere about serving the public as opposed to a more selfish or private agenda.
John Fitzgerald Kennedy's famous exhortation to,
"Ask not what your Country can do for you, but rather what you can do for your Country,"
ought to be taken to heart by more politicians; in essence my entire campaign has been a variation on that question, and all that I've really done is to ask the voters of District 2 whether or not I can serve them as their Supervisor; at the end of the day it's not much different from the waiter who asks if he may take your order, and whether or not you'd like to see the wine list.
And if the electorate determines that they'd rather be waited on by someone else I wish them only the best service; ultimately the people get the elected representation that they request at the ballot box, and that's as it properly ought to be.
John-Henry
0 comments:
Post a Comment