The status quo

It seems to me that everyone is obsessed with identifying the problems that have misshaped our society. While this is certainly a commendable practice, it doesn't do any good unless we discuss solutions to those problems. It is always good to question our current state; I gain a little more faith in my generation every time I hear a group of students discussing our current social and political issues. However, I hear few solutions being offered. Not only have I witnessed this at a local level, but this seems to be apparent on a national level as well. The occupy movement seems to be the prime example. Thousands of people have rallied under the common notion of general disappointment with the way things are going, yet have not proclaimed any universal demand or solution. The problems are easy to identify; political futility, federal corruption, party warfare, corporate greed and a prolonged culture war have set the status quo down a path of impending turmoil. We seem to be entering a time in which common citizens are realizing that things need to change. People are questioning the way things are, and the events that have culminated our current state of disorder. Congratulations, this is the first step: accepting that there are problems with the way things are. However, we can only hope to bring about real change if we explore and invent solutions to these problems.

I have faith in my generation simply because so many of us have addressed these problems at such young ages. Although this is a great thing, it is unfortunately not enough. What we need to realize is that we cannot pretend that the problems will go away once we identify them. What we should realize is that no matter what, change is coming. Whether we like it or not, things cannot continue in the ways that they have. It is clear that as of now, the times are taking a turn for the worse. However, how things are in ten or twenty years is up to us. I am not attempting to criticize others for not acting; I am unsatisfied with how little I myself have done to bring about awareness and positive change. I simply wish that others see how important that the decisions that the young people make are. The lifestyles we choose to lead and the habits that we foster will determine what sort of world we live in when we are in charge. Although it may seem that there is little that young people can do in a scene controlled by a few wealthy, powerful, and established individuals, it is sort of the little things that count. Open conversations, along with social networking can be great ways to generate discussion. Making efforts to combat over-consumption can be rewarding and beneficial, for it is obvious that grotesque consumption has certainly contributed to the mess that America is in. We can stop supporting the corporations that control us. In going to school and crafting a career, study something you love so much that you want to share your talents and use them to benefit others. Or don't take any of this advice at all. But don't let the world forget that young people have minds of their own. Young people are the future of the status quo.

Presidential appointments

One thing for which President Obama has been sharply criticized was giving out appointments to people who raised or gave a lot of money for his 2008 electoral campaign. This is the sort of political strategy that has a lot of Americans upset right now. Many people feel that one easy solution to the corruption of our current government is to simply get money out of politics. This will ensure that our leaders attain their power by merit, rather than by monetary prowess. This would mean that our leaders are in politics to serve the common good, rather than to serve themselves. Although it is easy in words, simply "getting money out of politics" would most likely spark a prolonged political battle concerning how to go about this. Though there are most likely many interpretations of "out of politics", here are some solutions as to ensure that our politicians are truly servers of the people.

* set a limit on the amount of money any one candidate can spend on a campaign

* renounce the rights of corporations to be considered citizens

* Presidential appointees should be publicly interviewed and announced

* (as discussed in my previous blog) Do away with the "winner takes all" approach to elections; this would give third parties much greater opportunities, and diversify the voter's options.

Although cleaning up our government will be a long and difficult process, discussion of solutions and the encouragement of open minded conversations are the best ways to get change started.

Winner take all

One of the most important debates in American politics today concerns the adaption of the constitution to make sense of modern issues. Because the constitution was composed in such a different social atmosphere, it has become necessary to interpret its meaning in new and appropriate ways. Let us not forget that the original constitution equated slaves as 3/5ths of a person... It is apparent that we must adjust the purposes behind the constitution to meet our modern needs and standards. Although there is much debate over how this is to be done, there is little disagreement when it comes to the Electoral College. By far, the majority of citizens who are aware of its true implications agree that it is outdated and unnecessary.

The Electoral College was originally designed to avoid tension between the northern and southern states concerning the rights of African Americans. In the words of James Madison:

"There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to the fewest objections."

Today, the Electoral College serves as an unnecessary step in the election process. Most states have adopted a "winner take all" approach to the electorate system. This process is largely undemocratic, because it completely disregards the votes of hundreds of thousands of individuals simply because they were the local minority. However, those votes add up, and therefore many elections may have had very different outcomes. This winner take all approach has been extremely negative in our election process, and has had lasting negative effects. These include:

*In 2000, George W Bush became president although opponent Al Gore received more of the popular vote. Bush won because he was the majority in a few large states with many electoral votes, rather that Gore, who had more individual votes.

*The winner take all approach gives candidates incentive to focus solely on states where there is rarely a clear majority. Minority voters in "decided states" have little incentive to come out and vote, because their vote will almost always be transferred to the opposing candidate. This is extremely undemocratic and disadvantages many thousands of voters, while privileging a select few (those in swing states).

*This system disadvantages third party voters as well, as their votes will almost always never count. This distorts the whole purpose of third parties because third party votes usually end up benefitting the candidate that they least favor (spoiler effect). If electoral votes were actually given to the candidate they were intended for, many voters would be empowered, and third parties would stand a much greater chance.


It is obvious that many Americans are unhappy with our political system. The "winner take all" approach to politics has accomplished little but to perpetuate a 2 party system and disadvantage thousands of voters. The founding fathers warned of this problem, especially James Madison, who argued against "an interested and overbearing majority" and the "mischiefs of faction" in an electoral system. The current system has twisted the original intent of the democratic electoral process.

Many Americans today are discussing potential solutions to our current political disappointments (disappointments being an understatement). In my opinion, doing away with the "winner take all" approach should be seriously considered.