Bring Back Democracy to America

Steve Forbes looks at how little competition exists in our political elections. Are the people really in control?

Of America's 435 congressional districts, only about 35 had real contests this past November--about a third of what we had in 1992. After the 1990 census, districts in New Jersey were constructed so that every incumbent member of Congress was guaranteed reelection. The same thing happened in California: In the last election not one California house seat changed party hands. In 2002 the only switch came when Representative Gary Condit was undone by the scandal surrounding the murder of one of his interns, with whom he subsequently admitted having had an affair.

Today in the U.S. only Iowa, Arizona and, to a lesser extent, the state of Washington make honest efforts to draw honest nonpartisan districts. What politicos have wrought is also an argument for term limits. In this modern day, incumbents have huge advantages--ready access to the media, taxpayer-financed political mailings sent out under the guise of constituent-information newsletters, taxpayer-financed "constituent offices" that are really disguised political headquarters and contributions from special interests. Forcing politicos to repot themselves every few years would be a good thing. Critics claim that we would be deprived of experienced legislators. Not really. For much of this republic's existence, most of those who served in Congress sat there for only a handful of years. California already has term limits. Now it needs Arnold's reform to have honest, competitive legislative districts.

Monopoly is bad for business, and competition is good. The same holds true for politics.