McDermott’s Safe Seat Is A Danger To Democracy
| July 29, 2011 | Posted by wa state pol under Congressional Districts, Election 2012, Elections, U.S. House of Representatives |
Jim McDermott once again seems ready to run for election in Washington’s 7th Congressional District. This is hardly news, since he has been running, and winning in “his” district since 1988. That is 23 years since the liberal Seattle district has had a different representative in Congress. Obviously, his constituents like him; McDermott typically polls in the 70th percentile when election day rolls around. The positive for the district, and for the state as a whole, is that McDermott has racked up a lot of seniority and power in Congress.
On the negative side (and you just KNEW I would mention a negative, eh?), is that once again, other Democrats in the 7th District, liberal or otherwise, have no chance to try for that seat, as to challenge a party stalwart like McDermott is heresy. The Republicans, and I am sure there are a few who live in that district, have almost zero chance of overthrowing the Congressman-for-life. So why is his longevity a negative? Simple: with a true-blue, uber-liberal district with virtually no ideological diversity, there is no incentive for McDermott to do anything beyond what he had done for 23 years. He is impervious to compromise with his congressional colleagues, and he can afford to ignore his party’s leaders, (including President Obama), if he so chooses. This is precisely the problem Speaker of the House Boehner has with his more conservative Republicans and the current debt ceiling debate. Many of these Republicans are in secure districts where they face little or no realistic challenges to re-election. Thus, they are free to ignore the party leader (which, I admit, is not always a bad thing), and, more importantly, they are free to ignore what is truly best for the nation. These secure members of Congress only have to justify their actions to their district constituents. Again, you say, this is a bad thing? A representative, by definition, is supposed to listen to the folks back home. True, but when the folks back home have no ideological diversity, this is a problem. Groupthink in action!
The solution to this of course, is in the once-a-decade process of re-districting. If each district were actually constructed and populated with a more-or-less equal number of Democrats and Republicans, then a true debate, and a true choice of candidates would flourish in each and every congressional district in the land. And THAT is good for American Democracy and for every district and every state in the nation.
Nothing against Jim McDermott; he is just a creature of his neighborhood. No different than oh, John Dingell and his safe seat from Detroit. He has been in Congress since 1955! Even Fidel Castro has not been in power that long (yeah, I know he supposedly gave up power to his brother, but you know he still rules the roost). Democracy should be about legitimate debate and competitive campaigns and elections. Long-term office-holders like McDermott and Dingell have nothing to fear at home, so they can literally do as they please in Washington City. Is that what the Founders of this nation truly had in mind? I sincerely doubt it.
Check out these links if you don’t believe me:
http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/wb/294183
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/79033/security-bad-democracy-congressional-seats
This is the default footer layout. You can easily add or remove columns in the footer.
Recent Comments