Pick 24 - Political Parties

Today I am wondering if there is any hidden value in our current two-party political system. Most of my friends contend that neither party represents their interests anymore.  Even worse, the differences between the platforms of the two parties is determined by the special interests of the large corporations who fund political campaigns. They say: follow the money trail--if you can find it--and it is easy to understand why Party A supports a national health insurance plan while Party B totally opposes it. Or understand why Party B opposes any environmental regulations on gas, oil, and coal extraction under the guise of cheap energy and more jobs.

But this blog is not a forum for political discussion. I want to point out the value of limiting our selection to two major camps even tough third-party candidates are free to enter the race and get on the ballot if they qualify. One hidden value of TWO is that it is natural. Think of all the expressions that support this:

"It takes two to Tango."
"Two is company--three is a crowd."
 "Three strikes and you're out! (never two strikes )"
Even the US Treasury prints $2 bills but not $3 bills.
Every SW developer knows there are only two expressions that count "0" and "1"
Then there is the old "one, two, punch" If you got to "three" it was the other guy's punch knocking you out.
In the British Parliamentary system, elected Representatives sit on one side of the chamber if their party has the majority and on the other side if not. While relegated to the minority side, one is expected to oppose everything the ruling side does or wants to do. I think the objective is to proclaim "I told you so!" every time the majority makes a blunder that could have been averted if they had listened to "the loyal opposition" After enough "I told you so's" the opposition can call for a vote of "no confidence" in the ruling party. If enough voters agree, then a general election is held. If the string of blunders was so bad, the voters might elevate the loyal opposition into the ruling majority and they would switch sides with the losers. It is all fun to watch and costs the public little or nothing because it is part of the established political process and is telecast without charge to the political candidates. This does not preclude special interest groups or influence peddlers from large corporations. Unlike America, the British had the foresight to give these high-rollers a place of their own in Government. Its is no secret that the House of Lords represents big money, large corporations, and even the will of the Monarchy. That is what the Lords have been appointed to do.  And that leaves the elected Representatives free to exercise their primary responsibility to the Crown: looking after the needs of the common people. After all, if there are no common people, then there is no need for a Monarch.
So the hidden value of our two-party system might be it's throwback to our British roots. Perhaps if the Democratic Party was to declare openly that it represents only those people who depend on a paycheck for their livelihood. And if the Republican Party declared openly that it represents only corporate, big money constituents--like those named in the Citizens United decision of the Supreme Court--then the hidden value of our two-party system could be reasserted and we the people could fill the Senate with Republicans and the House with Democrats. It would not be long before a "loyal opposition" evolved in both chambers and that would make C-span the most watched cable network. Moreover, the politicians would not need to raise millions of dollars for re-election campaigns. They would just have to accumulate enough "I told you so's" to win control of their chamber.   

$tokens to Tip the Pickers

1 $token - 1.00 USD3 $tokens - 3.00 USD5 $tokens - 5 USD 12345