2002 My Political Rant

Steven B. Zwickel

November 18, 2002

What should we do when public servants put their own self-interests before those of the public? It seems that our elected representatives are caught in an endless cycle of fund-raising and campaigning that has plunged our whole system into a pit of corruption. They need help to escape this trap and to restore confidence in government.

Our representatives run for reelection for a variety of reasons. Some want to continue in office to press legislation on certain issues. They feel that public service is a noble calling that enables them to act as advocates for the issues that are important to them. Many of them see themselves as professional politicians and the process of getting reelected is a way of continuing their careers. All of those who run for reelection do so because they can, because there is no limit to the number of times a person can run for an office in this state.

The more times a politician gets reelected, the more seniority he or she acquires. In the legislature, seniority leads to an increase in power. The lure of power is a strong incentive to run for reelection.

This desire to get reelected is the root cause of all the problems our legislature has had in the past few years. When legislators have to worry about getting reelected, they can’t act on their principles—instead of doing what they think is right, they do what is popular. They try not to take positions on controversial issues, because these votes may be used against them in an election campaign. Even if a legislator has a strong opinion, he or she dare not express it, lest they give ammunition to their political opponents when they come up for reelection. This is why our legislators actually prefer inaction to action. No wonder so little gets done! And no wonder there is so much hoopla when a bill is enacted.

It also explains why all the candidates sound alike. They conduct polls to find out what the majority of voters think and then they try to please everyone. They all sound alike because they all base their campaigns on telling us what they think we want to hear. This is called “pandering” and it is a good indication of how rotten our political system has become. Our representatives no longer stand for anything.

The current system encourages politicians to avoid trying anything new. New ideas may be controversial and they can fail, so politicians have learned to avoid them. They have discovered that it is much safer to run on a platform that opposes new ideas. It is harder to defend an idea and to campaign in favor of doing something. It is the height of absurdity when campaigns become contests to see which candidate can come out against more things.

Perhaps the worst example of how our system has become dysfunctional is the political gridlock surrounding the issue of taxation. The candidates—every single one of them—promise to curb spending and cut taxes. If they are so absolutely determined to cut taxes, why haven’t they done so? The reason they have not cut taxes is because they can’t. They know it would be impossible to maintain the level of services we get from government if taxes were cut. We expect roads to be fixed, snow to be plowed, crooks to be caught and sent to jail, schools and libraries to be open and working, and cutting any of these would make the voters very angry.

The same legislators who can’t cut taxes can’t raise taxes either. All of them have pledged to never, ever raise taxes. This foolish oath, if taken seriously, means that, when the unknowable, unforeseeable, and uncontrollable come to pass (as they surely will) we can expect no help from the state. They are powerless to raise taxes, even in an emergency! In the recent budget crisis, any sane person would have (reluctantly, I think) concluded that a small tax increase would save the ship of state from deficits. Not one voice was heard in the legislature proposing this solution. The legislators know that a vote in favor of any tax hike is “political suicide”—something career politicians must avoid at all costs. Instead, they used the tobacco settlement windfall, which temporarily (at least until after the next election) solved the problem without raising taxes.

Are the voters opposed to tax increases? Of course we are. We don’t want to pay more taxes, but we aren’t stupid, either. Had the legislators raised taxes to balance the budget, we would have griped and complained, but I think we would also have recognized the importance of paying for all the things we want, and have come to expect, from the state. When taxes need to be raised, we need legislators who are not afraid to do the right thing.

Our politicians are constantly raising money to pay for the TV, radio, and newspaper ads for the next election. This need for money caused the scandals we have seen splashed all over the news. The need to raise money for campaigning has led some good people astray. Too many elected officials have given in to temptation and become deeply beholden to big campaign contributors and a lot less sensitive to the needs of their other constituents.

Who wins when a large donor’s interests conflict with those of the community? Can a politician afford to say “no” to a wealthy contributor? By saying “yes” and taking the money, he or she can more easily ignore the will of the public, because a big campaign warchest can be used to buy lots of ads that will put a positive “spin” on things. In other words, if you raise enough money, you can screw the public and later on persuade them that you actually did the right thing.

We have an elected body whose members are more concerned with getting reelected than with doing what is necessary to keep our state going. On some issues, like taxes, they seem to be completely immobilized. Their self-interest requires them to chase money in underhanded and illegal ways and to accept contributions knowing that they may have to vote against their consciences and against the best interests of their constituents. How can we get them out of this mire? Can anyone reform our state government?

The argument may be made that the legislators can reform themselves—that they can pass legislation that will solve these problems and end the abuses. If they could have, they would have. They can’t do it. They can’t reform themselves: they have too much at stake, they are too partisan, and they are much too much attached to power.

We, the people, will have to reform our own political system. We need an end to partisan gridlock. We need to stop the endless fund-raising and campaigning. We need to hold a convention, as described in Article XII, §2 of the State Constitution to put things right. And it needs to be a convention of the people, not of the politicians.

Let’s start by putting a clause in the Constitution limiting how much money anyone can contribute to a candidate. Make it a percentage of the salary for the office—say 1%—or use any formula, as long as it is applied fairly to all office seekers. This amendment needs to be airtight; there mustn’t be any loopholes. Let’s get rid of “deniability” as a defense. We can permit a candidate to make one “mistake”, but two violations of the law and you go directly to jail. Let’s treat candidates the way we are (finally) treating CEOs. They must be held personally accountable for what their campaigns do and they should be required to sign off on an outside audit.

It is also time to get rid of the career politicians whose pettiness, sneakiness, and partisanship got us into this mess. We need term limits. Other states have them and we would not be the first to try them out. Opponents of term limits argue that it means “throwing the good out with the bad” and that the end result is a terrible “loss of experience” when senior legislators are forced out. Needless to say, all the opponents of term limits are career politicians (and their backers) who have a lot to lose. Service in the legislature was never intended to be a full-time job, much less a career. Reelecting a batch of “experienced” politicians means bringing back all the old animosity, greed, and personality clashes that led to gridlock in the first place.

Term limits would free our elected representatives to devote their time in office to doing the job at hand instead of spending it fund-raising and campaigning. They could increase or decrease taxes as needed, regardless of how popular such a move might be. They could do the “right” thing and tell the special interests and big donors to take a hike.

We, the people, have to do a better job, too. More of us have to vote and all of us need to know more about the issues. But, we can solve the problems we face—in fact, we are the only ones who can do so.

More than 225 years ago, Tom Paine insisted that there comes a time when reform can’t be left to the politicians; when the people themselves must act. That’s why the authors of the Wisconsin State Constitution put in Article XII—so that we can do what needs to be done ourselves. Now, we must do it.