And buried deep within them, a few bucks worth of candid, forthright and honest information for voters with the interest and inclination to sift them out.
The Journal Editors argue, link,
"Voters would be right to demand a serious debate on real issues among those who seek to represent the state in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives."The Journal Editors stopped short of suggesting how voters might do that. Where exactly, would that demand be delivered, who would carry it, and who would care upon the delivery?
It is abundantly clear that voters don't want the ads, and do want "debates". It is at least as clear that the Democratic and Republican Parties could not care less about what voters want. Never mind the PACs and SuperPACs and their seemingly unlimited funding and equally abundant disregard for even the rudiments of honesty.
The Editors continue;
And this debate should be complete with verifiable facts and thoughtful, realistic plans.Let's see political discussions, not "debates". Let's take an issue at a time and have candidates carry on facilitated public discussions, the objectives of which are to educate voters; on the issues and about the candidates. No more "debates" where candidates use any question as a segue into an opportunity to regurgitate carefully scripted soundbites, soundbites engineered to manipulate rather than illuminate.
In their editorial; editors identified nine issues. (Curiously, the nine issues appeared in my home edition, but not in the online version of the editorial, which listed only one; the first.)
- Health costs and coverage
- Social Security
- Medicare
- Energy
- Infrastructure
- Education
- Defense
- Immigration and
- Government
reason they should not take place.
Unfortunately, it is up to the people to "demand" that they
take place, and they haven't the wherewithal. Even if the
government were as advertised; of, by and for the people,
it doesn't make a whit of difference if the elections that
create governments, are none of them.
No comments:
Post a Comment