Legacy of the 2000 U.S. Election
 |
 |
|
 Seed Newsvine |
|
Most political "scandals" are the result of imperfect men performing in a system that allows such behavior to flourish under the surface. Politics rewards unscrupulous behavior as long as it never reaches daylight. When it does, the politicians face a fight for their political life but the system is not challenged. The election debacle of 2000 proved different. The principal actor was not a man but the system itself. A two hundred year old myth had been debunked. The concept that people exercising their right to vote determines who wins an election was demolished in a month of chaos. Three times in history a president had been elected without the popular vote. Each time the Electoral College system that allowed this was questioned and each time preservation of a Constitutional bedrock was given precedent over political awkwardness. The 2000 election was different. The Electoral College issue was just one component, and not the most significant. The very concept that the voting public determines the presidency was proven a myth. Little children are taught in school that their vote counts as much as anyone else's and that is the true beauty of American Democracy. Not any more.
The 2000 election was not determined at the ballot box. It was determined by the political alignment of the Supreme Court. Had Bill Clinton appointed one more Supreme Court judge who knows what the result would have been? Whether an actual recount would have changed the election is irrelevant. The legacy is that there is now a perception that the entire election process could become immaterial if the race is close. No government department escaped the debacle. Politicians in every branch demonstrated they placed more importance on a satisfactory political outcome than on the efficacy of the system. Among students of the American political system this outcome was secretly predicted. Among the grade school and high school teachers that preach the majesty of the electoral process this outcome was unimaginable.
Since 2000 t here have been changes in the physical process of voting and calls for additional change. In general; though, the system remains in place until the next debacle. The change is more subtle. The ruse has been exposed. The myth of a noble system practiced by imperfect individuals is now dead.
In 1960 this scenario could have been played out in a very similar manner. Richard Nixon lost an extremely close election and many political historians believe that election fraud in Illinois could have resulted in Kennedy's election. Had Nixon challenged the results, as Gore did, the debacle of 2000 may have occurred 40 years prior. Nixon chose to place preservation of the system over his own personal future. Al Gore came to the opposite conclusion. He chose to expose the flaws in the system rather than hiding them away to haunt a future election. Of course, his job was on the line. Apologists for the U.S. system praise Richard Nixon for his sacrifice and decry Gore for his naked ambition. It is clear now that their fear was well placed. The myth cherished so highly and preached so consistently was proven a fraud. Little children may be taught the same lessons but no longer will they believe them to be true.
Recent PB Submissions:
