Political Participation in National Elections

f?

1964* 1966 1968* Percent who reported that they registered to vote

1970 1972* 1974 1976* 1978 1980*
„_ .j. Percent who reported

that they VOted •Presidential Election Year

THE POLITICAL SYSTEM 151

Voter turnout in other democratic nations is much higher:

_L Percent of Voting Age Population

90 -

80

З у

и з 5

T

8°

Several factors may contribute to these differences in voter participation: —Unlike most of the nations shown on the graph, the United States requires early voter registration.

—Election campaigns tend to be much longer in the United States than in many other nations. After following campaigns that sometimes begin a year or more before the election, many Americans lose interest and do not vote. —American elections are always held on Tuesdays, a normal working day, whereas elections in many other nations are held on weekends. —The American two-party system may contribute to low voter turnout because voters' choice is limited.

—The other democratic nations shown on the graph have parliamentary systems, in which the outcome of the election determines both the executive and legislative branches of government. Voters in these countries may feel that their vote carries more weight.

The United States Constitution established a system in which the people have the right, whether they exercise it or not, to influence the direction of government.

part в Texts

Perspective of a Public Man

An Interview with Hubert Humphrey

The late Senator Hubert Humphrey was a leading figure in American government for more than 30 years. He served as mayor of Minneapolis, United States senator, vice president and was the Democratic party's candidate for president in 1968. He was an outspoken champion of civil rights, a strong advocate of nuclear disarmament and the author of much legislation on both domestic and foreign policy issues.

In this interview with CLOSE UP, conducted in 1977, Senator Humphrey discusses his long experience in public life and the importance of inspiration and motivation in effecting change.

QUESTION All of the problems and policies that you have been discussing emphasize the need for leader­ship of the highest caliber in the halls of government. What are the qualities which make someone an effec­tive leader of the people?

Senator Humphrey: Motivation. The difference bet­ween a great president and just a president is whether or not he can motivate people to greater achievements. As Teddy Roosevelt said, "You have to make the White House a bully pulpit." You have to be a com­bination of educator and evangelist. You have to move people. What we need in our society today is a kind of clarion call. People also need to learn to have pri­orities, because you can't do everything. That's where leadership comes in.

As a senator, I've always felt that my job is more than passing legislation. I see my role in politics as be­ing the cutting edge of progress. I've spent most of my time out with the people, planting ideas by talking with hundreds of audiences. I've taken a lot of razzing for it, but I have my own methodology. I've tried to be a teacher as well as a senator. To do this you have to take your message out to the people. To be a teacher, you have to have more than a classroom, you've got to have students. You've got to have more than a rostrum, you've got to have people who will listen and you have to make your message sufficiently simple and yet profound. The good teacher is the one who knows how to simplify great, difficult problems and, at the same time, make them interesting so that he holds his audience. You have to recognize that it requires repeti­tion. You must keep in mind that people can only ab­sorb so much at any one session. You repeat, repeat, repeat with adaptation so that you make it interesting. It's like a song: Even the most beautiful classical music maybe has just two or three themes in it, repeated time after time in different variations. That is what a leader, what a teacher, has to do.

Hubert Humphrey

Another part of being a leader is being willing to run the risk of unpopularity. I don't like people in public life, particularly as presidents, mayors and governors, who can't make decisions. You have to make decisions.

Sometimes people come to me and say, "Well, the reason I have to vote like this is that the Gallup poll showed this or that." The Gallup poll is a momentary, current, unscientific survey of what is called public opi­nion. The important question is, "What do you think is right?" Now you don't ignore public opinion, but if you have a strong conviction, you do it. I, for ex­ample, had a strong conviction about civil rights legisla­tion. There wasn't much public opinion on my side— I'll guarantee you that—and surely not among the political powerhouses. I ran right smack bang into all of them. But I felt I was right. And, if you feel you're right, you stay with it. Yet you also recognize that you can't get everything you want on day one. It may be a long, arduous process.

THE POLITICAL SYSTEM 153

1. continued

QUESTION: What advice would you give to young people who mught be contemplating careers in politics, about the pitfalls and the rewards of public service?

Senator Humphrey: When you are involved in anything, you have to expect criticism. You have to constantly ask yourself, am I prepared to do that? You can always run away from problems and hide out; many people do. If you are going to be involved, you must be willing to be criticized for your inadequacies and your limitations. This is especially true in public life, where you are constantly under examination.

Some young people today feel that it isn't worth it. Why go through all the sweat? Why put up with it? Let somebody else do it. But they forget that politics is another word for people. Politics is the people's business, particularly in a democracy. If the people

don't take care of their business by participating, by getting involved, then they will "get the business." While you may not think that your individual effort amounts to much, remember that every person sitting on the sidelines gives those that are involved that much more power.

I always try to point out that while great decisions may carry the name tag of one or two leaders, in fact many more people are involved. Great decisions are the products of a kind of digestive process that takes place in the whole society, in which all individuals can express their feelings on new ideas and plans.

In this process, we look to the younger generation, to those who are filled with the love of life and with bright ideals. They've got to contribute. If they are in­volved, then politics will really be the people's business.

Gallup poll: a special count of opinions done by questioning a representative section of the population. George Horace Gallup, born 1901, statistician, founded the American Institute of Public Opinion.

Teddy Roosevelt: Theodore Roosevelt (1858-1919) U.S. President 1901-1909.

Q A President's Mission

George Bush's Nomination Acceptance Speech (excerpt)

is to me the presidency provides an incomparable opportunity for "gentle persuasion."

I hope to stand for a new harmony, a greater tolerance. We've come far, but I think we need a new harmony among the races in our country. We're on a journey to a new century, and we've got to leave the tired old baggage of bigotry behind.

Some people who are enjoying our prosperity have forgotten what it's for. But they diminish our triumph when they act as if wealth is an end in itself.

There are those who have dropped their stand­ards along the way, as if ethics were too heavy and slowed their rise to the top. There's graft in city hall, the greed on Wall Street; there's influence peddling in Washington, and the small corruptions of everyday ambition.

But you see, I believe public service is honorable. And every time I hear that someone has breached the public trust it breaks my heart.

I wonder sometimes if we have forgotten who we

are. But we're the people who sundered a nation rather than allow a sin called slavery - we're the people who rose from the ghettoes and the deserts.

We weren't saints - but we lived by standards. We celebrated the individual - but we weren't self-centered. We were practical - but we didn't live only for material things. We believed in getting ahead - but blind ambition wasn't our way.

The fact is, prosperity has a purpose. It is to allow us to pursue "the better angels" to give us time to think and grow. Prosperity with a purpose means taking your idealism and making it concrete by certain acts of goodness. It means helping a child from an unhappy home learn how to read -and I thank my wife Barbara for all her work in literacy. It means teaching troubled children through your presence that there's such a thing as reliable love. Some would say it's soft and insuffi­ciently tough to care about these things. But where is it written that we must act as if we do not care, as if we are not moved?

Well I am moved. I want a kinder, gentler nation.

Two men this year ask for your support. And

154 AMERICA IN CLOSE-UP

2. continued

you must know us.

As for me, I have held high office and done the work of democracy day by day. My parents were prosperous; their children were lucky. But there were lessons we had to learn about life. John Kennedy discovered poverty when he campaigned in West Virginia; there were children there who had no milk. Young Teddy Roosevelt met the new America when he roamed the immigrant streets of New York. And I learned a few things about life in a place called Texas.

We moved to west Texas 40 years ago. The war was over, and we wanted to get out and make it on our own. Those were exciting days, lived in a little shotgun house, one room for the three of us. Worked in the oil business, started my own.

In time we had six children. Moved from the shotgun to a duplex apartment to a house. Lived the dream - high school football on Friday night, Little League, neighborhood barbecue.

People don't see their experience as symbolic of an era — but of course we were. So was everyone else who was taking a chance and pushing into unknown territory with kids and a dog and a car. But the big thing I learned is the satisfaction of creating jobs, which meant creating opportunity, which meant happy families, who in turn could do more to help others and enhance their own lives. I learned that the good done by a single good job can be felt in ways you can't imagine.

I may not be the most eloquent, but I learned early that eloquence won't draw oil from the ground. I may sometimes be a little awkward, but there's nothing self-conscious in my love of country. I am a quiet man - but I hear the quiet people others don't. The ones who raise the family, pay the taxes, meet the mortgage. I hear them and I am moved, and their concerns are mine.

George Bush

A president must be many things.

He must be a shrewd protector of America's interests; and he must be an idealist who leads those who move for a freer and more democratic planet.

He must see to it that government intrudes as little as possible in the lives of the people; and yet remember that it is right and proper that a nation's leader takes an interest in the nation's character.

And he must be able to define - and' lead — a mission.

New Orleans, August 18, 1988

The Human Side of Congress

Representative Jim Wright

Representative Jim Wright (D-Tex.), a member of the House of Representatives since 1954, describes the "nuts and bolts" of congressional decision making — people and personalities. As majority leader, a post he has held since 1977, he works with the speaker and with committee chairmen to oversee party strategy and control the flow of legislation.

After thirty years as a member of Congress, I am not an objective observer. I believe Congress is the most fascinating human institution in the world. It is bevond

question the most criticized legislative assembly on earth, and yet it is the most honored. It can rise to heights of sparkling statesmanship, and it can sink to

THE POLITICAL SYSTEM 155

3. continued

levels of crass mediocrity. In both postures, it is su­premely interesting—because it is human. The story of Congress is the story of people.

Congress is a microcosm of the nation. It is a distil­late of our strengths and weaknesses, our virtues and our faults. It is a heterogeneous collection of opinion­ated human beings. On the whole, members are slightly better educated and considerably more ambitious than the average American citizen. But members of Con­gress reflect the same human frailties and possess the same range of human emotions as their constituents.

Senators and representatives are individualists, not easily stereotyped or categorized. If there is a single thread of similarity that unites most, it is that they are driven in their work. The average member of Congress works longer and harder than do members of any other professional or business group I have ever observed. The average one of my colleagues probably spends from twelve to fourteen hours on work in an average day. If a member of Congress were to expend the same amount of energy and time in furthering any soundly conceived business venture, I have no doubt that he or she would become rich.

A member of Congress is not some inanimate cog in a self-propelling legislative wheel. He or she is a turn­er of the wheel, a decider—along with others—of the direction the vehicle will take. True, there is a mechan­ical process that makes the car function. It needs gas­oline. It needs a battery, a working engine, tires, and a universal joint. But knowing the mechanics of a mo­tor—important as that knowledge is—does not tell us where the car is going. Its direction and ultimate des­tination depend upon who is behind the wheel.

That is why careful students of Congress will do well to pay attention to the personalities of decision makers. They will reflect on backgrounds, personal philoso­phies, religious persuasions, and economic and edu­cational experiences of members of Congress.

These elements determine how well legislators inter­act with their colleagues and how much they compre­hend and even care about different issues. Constituency pressures and interests, political party affiliation, and results of public opinion polls are important factors, but not infallible prognosticators when it comes to un­derstanding how the Congress operates.

It is instructive to ponder how the typical member of Congress sees the job. It includes more than just passing laws. I would suggest that a U.S. representative is a tripartite personality.

In the first place, members of Congress are required to be ombudsmen for their constituents. A less digni­fied term might be errand boy. A widow does not re­ceive her survivor benefit check in the mail. A college

wants to apply for a federal grant. A student cannot find a bank for a student loan. One person wants out of the military service; another wants an emergency leave.

The average representative may receive two hundred letters a day. Forty percent of them will deal with the individual problems of citizens enmeshed in the coils of government and looking to their representative as their intercessor.

The ombudsman role should not be despised. If it takes a disproportionate share of representatives' time, it keeps them close to real people with real needs. If citizens are entitled to go through doors that they sim­ply cannot find in the bureaucratic maze, by leading citizens to those doors, representatives perform nec­essary functions. Were government ever to become so remote and aloof that the average citizen had no in­tercessor it would be a sad thing indeed.

In a second role, members of Congress serve as trav­eling salesmen for their districts. Each tries to see that his or her slice of America gets its share of the action. Members try to direct federal projects into their cities, contracts to their factories, and grants to their local institutions of learning. Anything that promotes busi­ness or employment opportunities in a member's dis­trict is fair game to be pursued with vigor.

Jim Wright

156 AMERICA IN CLOSE-UP

3. continued

The late Senator Robert Kerr (D-Okla.), ranking Democrat on both Public Works and Finance Com­mittees, once was being chided by Senator Albert Gore (D-Tenn.). Gore gently upbraided Kerr for using his powerful posts to promote dams, highways, and public buildings for Oklahoma, while writing tax laws with "unintended benefits" for Oklahomans.

Kerr replied that he wanted to offer only "one slight correction in the otherwise excellent recitation" of his colleague. "That is the point," said Kerr, "at which my friend refers to these as "unintended benefits." I want him to know that they are fully intended benefits. While I am a senator of the United States, I am a sen­ator from and for the state of Oklahoma. I am not ashamed of that; I am proud of that."

Scorn the "pork barrel" function as they may, pur­ists in political science cannot wish it away. It is in­herent in human nature. From the clash of conflicting parochial and economic interests, the Congress syn­thesizes an amalgam that serves the nation as a whole.

In the third role, representatives are often statesmen. There is conviction among members, and courage. If the law makers, on the average, did not usually vote as most of their constituents found acceptable, they probably would not be very good representatives for their districts. They might not be representatives at all for very long.

But occasions arise in the life of each when by reason of conviction deeply held or information not widely known, a law maker is impelled to vote in ways that are at least temporarily unpopular. This is when the mettle of the person is tested. A southerner voting for civil rights two decades ago, a midwesterner support­ing the Panama Canal Treaty, someone from the Bi-

ble Belt resisting constituent pressures to breach the wall between church and state—these are examples of personal principle under pressure.

In 1956, then Senate Majority Leader Lyndon John­son was in a fight for his political life on the Texas home front. Antagonists portrayed him as a turncoat, a traitor to the southern cause, a tool of the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People). Powerful epithets two years after Brown v. Board of Education!

Johnson never waivered. "I am not going to dema­gogue on that issue," he once said to me. "If I have to try to prove that I hate Negroes in order to win, then I will just not win." It was a matter of conscience.

All of the above—a mixture of servitude and con­viction, servility and courage—combine to make up the human mosaic of the congressional decision-making process. Lyndon Johnson was a master of that pro­cess not because he knew the procedures better than others, but because he had an instinctive "feel" for people. He was persuasive with his colleagues because he understood them. He knew what made them tick, collectively and individually.

As House Majority Leader, I am constantly trying to meld together a majority out of an assortment of minorities. It is often frustrating but always fascinating. Building coalitions in Congress is like being a peace­maker within a family. One must know the concerns and needs of the members and must be sensitive to their opinions and the uniqueness of their individual per­sonalities. Sometimes I see my role as a combination parish priest, evangelist, and part-time prophet. Har­mony among this mixture of strong-willed individualists is an elusive grail. Sometimes you cannot find it at all, but it is fun trying.

(From 1987 to 1989, Jim Wright was Speaker of the House of Representatives. This interview was given when he was House Majority Leader. He has since resigned in disgrace.)

(D-Tex.): Democrat/Texas.

majority leader: party member directing the activities of the majority party on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives.

speaker, the presiding officer of the U.S. House of Representatives.

pork barrel: refers to the practice of using political office to further the interests of one's supporters.

Panama Canal Treaty: in the Panama Canal Treaties, ratified under President Carter, the United States agreed to hand over the canal to the Republic of Panama on December 31, 1999, and to make the canal a neutral waterway open to all shipping after 1999.

Bible Belt: those sections of the U.S., chiefly in the South and the Midwest, noted for religious fundamentalism.

NAACP: civil rights organization, founded in 1909. Brown v. Board of Education: see pages 109 and 113.

THE POLITICAL SYSTEM 157

Дата добавления: 2015-10-26