Pennsylvania TownHall -- Where the Voice of Pennsylvania is Heard!

From the Kitchen Table

Madison Avenue Politics

by Peg Luksik

The Presidential primary season is now in full swing and we are being inundated with information from and about the candidates. Unfortunately, most of that information consists of photo ops, slogans, 30-second sound bytes, and pre-scripted answers to carefully pre-screened questions.

When one candidate does attempt to press another on contradictions and evasions in voting records or official actions, the candidate confronted complains that their opponent is engaging in "negative campaigning" or showing prejudice against them. And they sidestep the question about the contradiction or evasion completely.

In this new incarnation of electoral politics, style has taken the place of substance, and emotion has replaced thought.

Political debate in America has always been loud, but under the ever-present bluster of campaigns, it used to be thoughtful.

Consider the debate over the ratification of our Constitution. The tome we now call The Federalist Papers is actually a compilation of the 85 editorials printed in local newspapers in New York in which Mr. Madison, Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Jay presented each of the tenets of the U.S. Constitution, explained the varying points of view that led to the adopted language, analyzed the structure of the new government, and argued for its passage. The editorials ran from 1787 to 1788. They were read by the citizens of New York, who themselves hotly debated every provision before voting to ratify.

Let us look at just one part of one paragraph from editorial #79, written by Mr. Hamilton: "NEXT to permanency in office, nothing can contribute more to the independence of the judges than a fixed provision for their support. The remark made in relation to the President is equally applicable here. In the general course of human nature, A POWER OVER A MAN'S SUBSISTENCE AMOUNTS TO A POWER OVER HIS WILL. And we can never hope to see realized in practice, the complete separation of the judicial from the legislative power, in any system which leaves the former dependent for pecuniary resources on the occasional grants of the latter."

Can you imagine any candidate presenting such a series of editorials on anything in today's electoral climate? Especially using the detailed vocabulary and grammatical structure contained above.

Almost no newspaper would print it because it would be above the reading ability of most of their readers. Almost no voter would read it because it would be too long and too detailed. One can almost hear people say, "Can't you just give me the highlights?"

It would be easy to blame the candidates for the lack of substance in the current Presidential elections. But political campaigns are only mirrors of the society in which they are conducted. If the voters demanded substance, the candidates would have to provide it to get elected. But when the voters are more interested in who won the football games or the Golden Globes than in the views and character of the person who is seeking to lead our nation, the candidates are forced to use glitz to attract attention.

In a republic, the citizens get to choose their government. Too many of today's citizens are making that choice based on Madison Avenue marketing. If that doesn't change, we will wind up with the candidate who "sells" best, instead of the candidate who "is" best.

And we will have only ourselves to blame.