THE VIEW FROM HERE-In the two-party process that we Americans have established (though that was not the original intent when our nation was created), one parochial-thinking party can prevent passage of legislation—even if the majority of the voting populace supports the issue behind the bill.
It seems that exercising power simply because they can, simply because they can score points with a vociferous, strident constituency (many Congressional Representatives pander to the vocal few to ensure an “easy” re-election opportunity) are the goals of the minority party—hence stagnation, acrimony, obstructionism are the inevitable result.
I must admit that I prefer a parliamentary system to our own—for a number of reasons. Without going into great detail, where such a political process exists, the government seems more responsive to its people. When there is not a clear majority, minority parties can form a coalition government for the purpose of advancing legislation that is popularly supported by and beneficial to the electorate.
Legislators worry less about who gets credit for what, as much as they care about getting their programs through. And if there is a lack of trust in, support for, and loyalty to the leadership, a vote of confidence can be taken (before the next regularly scheduled election), often resulting in a shift in power and direction of the governing body.
In America, our minority parties seem to disregard totally what the majority of people support or oppose—instead, introducing or obstructing legislation that satisfies the big-moneyed conglomerates and the self-serving groups whose interests preclude the needs of the majority.
We, here is America, have suffered in recent years under a dysfunctional, two-party system. We are all too aware of how the deliberate and selfish obstructionist moves in Washington have made our last Congressional year the worst-performing in our history.
On the other hand, for a great example of how legislatures can work, just look at what California has accomplished in 2013 because of the Democratic super-majority it holds in both houses in Sacramento. This legislature garnered even more strength from an all-Democratic slate of officials (popularly elected by great majorities) in every Constitutional State office, from the Governor on down.
These realities do not mean I actually support a one-party system. What I really want (short of a parliamentary system which will never be accepted in our nation) is a two-party system whose goal is to work toward the same ends—that which is best for the majority of the population. Ideally, two parties should create a type of checks-and-balances on each other so that what emerges from legislation is what was intended--correcting and improving problems for the many. We simply cannot be controlled by an intimidating, bullying, provocative minority which seeks only to advance narrow, self-serving goals for the few.
Washington could not come up with reasonable gun-control laws, but we Californians did. Ammunition magazines can no longer be altered to hold more than ten rounds; privately held guns must be locked up inside homes; rifle owners must receive required safety training. (I remember a number of years ago when a well-intentioned fellow teacher … with permission from the mothers … took fatherless boys on a hunting trip. Without sufficient safety instruction, one young man accidentally killed another—three lives and their families forever impacted.)
Where Washington cannot agree on a farm bill which affects the nutrition supplement program (SNAP) for the poor, we approved eligibility expansion so that a quarter million more people will benefit from our successful Cal-Fresh Program.
After attempting at least 44 times to overturn, limit, obstruct the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, our state’s Covered California has been so successful that it is considered a role model (along with a few other states) for the rest of the country.
While many conservative state legislatures are still trying to limit women’s access to birth control and legal abortions, California supports a woman’s right to access both.
All student athletes in California schools (public, charter, and private) must now be immediately removed from practices and games if concussion or other head injuries are suspected. Appropriate follow-up medical attention must also be delivered.
You have read about my concern that the formerly incarcerated are not given a genuine opportunity to apply for jobs for which they are qualified (hence, my support for the Ban-the-Box Program). Now, based on a law passed in 2013, “some non-violent felons sentenced to county jail instead of state prison are given the right to have their crimes expunged from their records by a judge.” This action, of course, will assist such people in obtaining jobs which can support them and their families.
Furthermore, jail overcrowding in county facilities can be eased by reducing sentences for non-violent criminals (such as those who have been convicted of possessing small amounts of marijuana for personal use). These individuals, however, must first prove they have successfully completed rehabilitation classes.
Children who have run away from home will be provided with licensed shelters to protect them after they have escaped their abusers. Such plans can curb the propensity for many of these young people from turning to crime to survive.
Washington can’t seem to agree on laws to protect our environment (consider the Keystone XL issue), but California has once again taken the lead by placing limits on fracking procedures (we need to ban it altogether but at least this law is a step in the right direction)
It is now mandated that water quality must be improved dramatically [certainly fracking has an adverse effect on our water supply—especially when water running from a home faucet can catch fire (see the Gasland films) as a direct result of that counterproductive and detrimental practice].
In addition, all new houses and single-family homes (built more than 20 years ago) that are being remodeled, must be fitted with water-saving devices. These include all faucets, shower heads, and toilets. If any of this applies to you, please contact your gas and/or electric company for free products and installation which will satisfy the California standards.
These are only some of the hundreds of laws passed in 2013 by our State legislature. Our Congress, on the other hand, passed about 60 laws all year, most of which were for naming post offices and other buildings. Cooperative party actions would have substantially changed what is really an embarrassing outcome. The difference could have resulted in immigration reform, a farm bill, a jobs program (repairing our infrastructure among other projects), extension of unemployment benefits, raising the minimum wage—to name just some of the important issues that Washington has yet to resolve.
Incidentally, California introduced a bill last year that would have banned the use state-wide of single-use plastic bags. It fell three votes short, but Sacramento will introduce it again this year. In the meantime, Los Angeles (in addition to the many other cities which have already passed this measure or are in the process of doing so) has enacted such a ban, starting January 1, 2014, that will affect every super-market and other major stores (like Target, Rite-Aid. and K-Mart) which sell food products. Smaller establishments, such as mom-and-pop stores, will have a few months longer to comply with the law’s mandates.
So, bring those re-usable bags with you when you shop, or pay ten cents per paper bag until that option is also eliminated. Don’t think of this requirement as an imposition. Think of it, instead, as a simple way you can help save the environment by creating a healthy symbiotic relationship that will benefit plants, animals, and humans. Such actions will redound to future generations who will be grateful for our foresight and magnanimity.
The California system, though not perfect, is well-worth our praise and imitation. Too bad that it took electing a super-majority to achieve these results.
Let’s keep in mind, though, that before we elect our future representatives (at any level), we should demand of those seeking potential leadership roles to listen to their better angels as well as to their constituents before they consider a political career.
They must realize, however, that sometimes voting their conscience may be against what many of their constituents are asking for, but that such votes are the moral, ethical way to proceed (consider the acrimony over civil rights which eventually led to the principled Civil Rights set of laws). The real purpose for having been elected in the first place is to make government work for all the people.
Electeds must be courageous. They must always be willing to vote for what is right rather than mindlessly casting votes that adhere to a strict party line—a dogma whose outcome inevitably creates rulings that are not truly in the best interests of the community.
They must understand that “compromise” is not a dirty word, that working in concert with those on the other side of the aisle to achieve the most good, as expeditiously as possible, is something for which we can all cheer in this new year.
(Rosemary Jenkins is a Democratic activist and chair of the Northeast Valley Green Coalition. Jenkins has written Leticia in Her Wedding Dress and Other Poems, A Quick-and-Easy Reference to Correct Grammar and Composition and Vignettes for Understanding Literary and Related Concepts. She also writes for CityWatch.)
-cw
CityWatch
Vol 12 Issue 2
Pub: Jan 7, 2014