Unrigging the Race: Bringing Democracy Back to the American Election

 "Congradulations, you have survived this year's Election. Please, feel free to select one of the following options: 1) Thank God It's Over! 2) I don't hate that guy as much... 3) Just shoot me. I don't care to vote after that crap. ...Thank You for your time."

 Sound familiar? This is a representation of what a lot of people, including myself, have heard run through thier heads as they prepare to cast thier almighty ballot. The problem is that for all the hyped sanctity of our democratic way, most people from both major parties can't help but feel like they just licked the inside of a garbage can. Democracy, our gut tells us, should feel beautiful, not horrible. It even leads us to nearly the only concensus we can reach anymore: our democracy is broken in subtle ways that are hard to describe, but easy to feel. On so many levels, from a lack of real discourse with our neighbors, to the profusion of talking heads on television, to the double standard of the electoral college, we need to discuss the possible ways that we might reclaim our once-true democracy.

   The issue I'd like to start with is the media. The media was recognized by our founding fathers as absolutely necessary to effectively and unbiasedly inform the voting public. This was the prime responsibility of the newsroom journalist, that guy with thick-rim glasses sitting over a notepad and dragging one hand through his thin hair while holding on to a rumpled cigarette with the other. These men obsessively dived into the events of their day, wrangling with uncooperative politicians until the facts came out. These  journalists held news not just as a way to make a living, but as a way to find the truth in a world so intent on hiding it.

  It was thanks to these efforts that the monopolies were tackled, the tenements removed, and children sent to school instead of the mines. They provided a valuable resource that allowed the democracy to think and change. We owe so much to the bracery of Murrow, Sinclair, and Cronkite. They gave us the news by exploring the depths when they could have skated the surface. What happened?

   Twenty-four hour news happened; the inernet happened; Brittney Spears and Paris Hilton happened. That is not to say that any of these is bad. What was bad was the reaction of the news business to these changes. Now instead of having everyone's undivided attention when they said 'Breaking News', every single face on television is trying to hook with flashy, fiery, jarring information hoping to stick out. Journalists were no longer able to distinguish themselves by integrity and objectivity and investigative skills. Instead, they are now known for how shocking they can be. Nod in approval, Bill O'Reilly.

   So there is about where we stand. Now how do we fix it? This is where discussion comes in: tell me what you think. What if the Federal Elections Commission selected twelve of the best reporters and writers still around. Add to this economists and scientists and doctors who write, and hire them all for the election cycle. A bipartisan review board would oversee the group and ensure that no overt bias comes in. After that let the reporters and writer dig into the candidates and report the facts. To distribute, the board could easily use public television and radio as well as the associated press.

   I think we'd all be amazed how quickly this would catch on. The best writers and some of the best minds, all talking the public forum about what is actually happening; it would be amazing. The substance of these articles could feed the minds of the entire electorate. That would once again bring reason and dicourse, at least in part, and democracy back to our elections.