For better or worse Americans continue to not trust politicians and the government very much.
Perhaps because some of the sleeping have awoken and started to pay a thimble’s worth of attention.
Perhaps because a poor economy naturally leads to distrust.
Perhaps because we’re on the verge of some sort of political revolution (unlikely, but think more third party than Tahir Square style).
Perhaps because a perpetually overreaching government is just inherently not trustable.
As Glenn Harlan Reynolds puts it in USA Today (italics mine), ‘a government limited to few things can probably do those things well, and thus it’s likely to be trusted. A government that tries to do many things, might do them badly, and be less highly regarded.’
On the other hand, distrusting the government isn’t unique to this era or a remotely new thing.
Either way, it’s instructive, every once in a while, to ponder why the powers that be engender such deep seated disdain and how, over time, it serves to erode the tenets of the Democratic Republic.
–
In addition to the aforementioned, and rather obviously, people don’t trust their government at large because of the politicians themselves, like, for example; Jesse Jackson Jr., Ray Nagin, Kwame Kilpatrick and Rod Blagojevich amongst many, many others.
Jesse Jackson Jr. – former Illinois Congressman – charged with one count of conspiracy to commit false statements, mail fraud and wire fraud in the misuse of ~$750,000 in campaign funds.
Among his purchases; over $20,000 in Michael Jackson memorabilia, a cashmere cape and a $43,350 Rolex. Eclectic.
Ray Nagin – former New Orleans Mayor – indicted by a Grand Jury on 21 federal corruption charges. He received $200,000 in kickbacks from city contracts, accepted $70,000 in bribes amongst other things.
All this while he led a pitiful Katrina recovery.
Kwame Kilpatrick – former Detroit Mayor – charged with 30 counts including; extortion, racketeering, bribery, mail and wire fraud and tax evasion. He owes the city over $850,000. Despite having over 300,000 texts and a mountain of evidence that seem to implicate Kilpatrick in all the crimes, he’s denied any wrongdoing because his arrogance knows no bounds apparently.
Kilpatrick was named one of the worst Mayors in the country in 2005.
Rod Blagojevich – former Governor of Illinois – serving a 14 year jail term for 17 corruption charges relating to trying to sell Barack Obama’s vacated Senate seat. He was the 4th Illinois Governor since 1973 to be convicted of criminal charges according to Reuters.
The Reuters article goes on, ”The harm is the erosion of public trust in government,’ U.S. District Judge James Zagel said, adding that when the governor’s office is tainted, the fabric of all government ‘is torn and disfigured and not easily repaired. You did that damage.”
Humble public servants indeed.
–
A poll last year showed that only 22% of people believe government actually has the consent of the governed. That’s a central tenet to a healthy democracy, ya know, the whole ‘doing the will of the people’ thing.
However, regardless of how much disdain and disapproval the citizenry has for congress, for example, the people are more or less powerless to change anything.
Look at this way, while congress continues to flirt with its lowest approval rates in history, incumbents still won 90% of congressional races in 2012 (and 91% of senate races).
The reasons are legion but a few stand out;
1) Money. As of 2010 the average cost of winning a House race was $1.4 million and 7 times more than that for a Senate win.
Money flows to those in power making it difficult for any challenger no matter their degree of benevolence (which usually hovers around nil since politics isn’t for the kind hearted).
As for donations, to go past the already absurd threshold of trusting any politician and actually donating money to their campaign is to wave the white flag and loudly declare, ‘I’m a moron’.
Unless your intent is to buy Jesse Jackson Jr. a cashmere scarf and a football signed by some ex-presidents. If that’s the case, bravo, you nailed it.
Of course the majority of donations, the ones that mean something, aren’t from plebeians like you and I. The big money, PACs and special interests are what generally fund the wins over time.
Your money, assuming you’re not a millionaire/billionaire, amounts to nothing (see The Men Who Built America. May as well take it straight out of your wallet and put it directly in the toilet.
Or, keep it. Get a haircut. Buy yourself something nice. Invest it. Donate to a charity. Put it anywhere but the coffers of a candidate.
2) Redistricting (read: gerrymandering). In the majority of States, politicians are tasked with redrawing their own district lines (read: picking their own voters) after each census.
That means your senate/congressional vote likely means precious little because your district has been drawn in such a way that the winner is largely a foregone conclusion before the actual election, that goes double for the the presidential race which has a built in buffer against direct democracy as per the design of the Founders (see: Electoral College creation, 1787).
If the allotment of electoral votes by congressional district ever occurs, without redistricting reform, your presidential vote will mean markedly less than it already does.
3) Republican/Democratic machines make politicians more beholden to their party than their constituents and thus does away with the ‘consent of the governed’ precept altogether.
George Washington, in his farewell address, explains the danger of parties and gives a stunningly prescient prediction of what they’d eventually lead to (put in bold by me);
…I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.
Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume…
These sort of things collude to create what Jon Huntsman calls a trust deficit between people and the government.
Shocking.
Ultimately, it seems we’re living in some odd simulacrum of a Democratic Republic where the voice of the people is just soft static.
More at USA Today, US News, Open Secrets, Gallup, NPR and CBS News