Florida Recount Was a Crisis in Basic Citizenship

By: Bruce S. Ticker

Slightly two centuries after George Washington became our first president, a man can move into the White House with insufficient experience and qualifications.

A candidate can come before the public and talk in platitudes yet avoid explaining in detail what he will do. And even when he does, many voters don't pay attention.

He can offend any number of ethnic, religious and other interest groups.

He can withhold details of his personal life involving drugs and abortion.

He can present himself with only six years of elective experience in a job that lacks power and a relative degree of hard work.

He doesn't even need to win the majority of votes of the people.

And when he takes office, he can conduct his job by employing a handbook which might as well be called Governing by Intimidation.

This is not just about George W. Bush, though I clearly distrust him more than any president in my lifetime.

When major newspapers related their independent findings of the Florida recount last week, references were made to the partisan nature of the struggle. The Washington Post prodded some resentment in me when an analysis written by John F. Harris in parts stressed Democratic anger over the election's outcome.

This is more than a partisan issue. And more than a racial or ideological issue.

What has happened to this country over the last year is a crisis of basic citizenship.

The Florida election and subsequent recount exposed many gaping holes in our system of representative government. Our votes may count for nothing in a presidential race in our own states and nationwide because of the anachronistic electoral college. An idealist who votes for the presumably best candidate for president may end up with the worst.

A majority of the Supreme Court can do whatever it pleases in a court ruling and not be held accountable for its actions. And for that matter, individuals who cannot be depended upon to judge cases on merit can advance to the Supreme Court and other federal judgeships.

And in daily governance, the president and a minority of congressmen can dominate the legislative agenda. They can ram through reckless legislation and in the process bully more reasonable members of Congress into going along with them.

The president and his associates can impose administration policies which may jeopardize civil liberties without congressional approval.

While American democracy has always fallen far short of perfection, the representative democracy which has been so special about this country has been severely disrupted by right-wing Republicans in the administration and Congress.

Most disturbing of all is voter apathy. People elsewhere are so grateful to vote that they will line up to vote for a few days. They are deeply concerned about issues and don't allow a television commercial to be the sole determinant of their votes.

The public lets Bush, congressmen like Tom DeLay and Dick Armey and such Supreme Court justices as Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas get away with actions which insult the intelligence of anyone who keeps tabs on Washington politics.

Many Americans were jolted when the court rendered its decision which ended the presidential contest nearly a year ago. But signs have emerged for two decades that such a shocker was possible. People were not paying sufficient attention to what politicians were doing.

Some folks might contend that anyone who is surprised by the Supreme Court's decision and Bush's style of governing by intimidation deserves the government which has been foisted on us.