Except for the counting – and, perhaps, the lawsuits – it’s finally over. Our roadways (soon, we hope) will be free of political signs, our airwaves liberated from the now-grating phrase “… and I approved this message.”
Before the election cycle fades completely, we offer a few observations:
* Passions ran high this year, surely a good thing for democracy. A divided electorate creates a challenge for the winners, however, who must govern in a way that takes such divisions into account and leads us toward reconciliation. Moving forward, an ability to reach across party lines and find compromise will be the surest sign of effective leadership.
* Big-money politics is alive and well. Federal efforts to stem the influence of cash only shifted its flow to “527” groups, which were responsible for some of the nastiest TV and radio ads. The more we try to regulate political speech, the more creative it gets in finding outlets.
* One thing citizens should demand in terms of money is disclosure – knowing who is doing the spending. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s shameful effort to hide its funding of hit ads against state attorney general candidate Deborah Senn is something that should never be tolerated.
* Fear of negative ads is having a real effect on candidates. Not a single congressional candidate interviewed by this editorial board would offer a concrete proposal for dealing with the pending Social Security crisis, and some admitted it was because they’d get hammered by an opponent for suggesting any cut in benefits or change in the retirement age. Democrats and Republicans need to call a truce on this issue and deal with it before it’s too late.
* State lawmakers should rethink the extended filing period, intended to give political parties a chance to recruit candidates in races where no one from a major party has filed. This year, that extra week gave us a candidate for state auditor with a long record of arrests – a candidate whose own party tried unsuccessfully to have his name pulled from the ballot. In other races, it got us candidates whose commitment was questionable. If they were serious, why didn’t they file before the initial deadline?
That said, those who do expose themselves to the scrutiny of the election process are to be commended. Without people willing to take the hits our messy process delivers, democracy wouldn’t work. We applaud their contribution.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
