Personally, I have mixed feelings regarding the permanent campaign. On the negative side, the permanent campaign prevents elected officials from revealing their true opinions and standing up for their personal beliefs for fear that they will lose public support from certain groups. For instance, many legislators today who want to maintain reputations as moderates are hesitant to propose legislation that would in any way align them with either the far left or right agenda. This ongoing campaign process also makes it necessary for a candidate to raise (or have plenty of their own) funds in order to counter an incumbent, or to maintain a viable candidacy. On the positive side, the permanent campaign forces elected officials to be responsive to public needs. In the United States today, it seems unrealistic to think that the permanent campaign will ever lose its permanency. What do you think? Do you support or oppose the permanent campaign? Are there other pros and cons that I overlooked? I'm interested in hearing your opinions so please feel free to comment and have a wonderful day!
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
American Politics and the Permanent Campaign
Our topic of class discussion/study this week regards the permanent campaign, which plays a large role in American politics today. One of the articles we read in order to introduce the subject was an article by Michael Kazin in The Washington Post. It is common to hear people complain that campaigns start earlier these days than they ever did before, however, in reality, the permanent campaign began with Martin Van Buren prior to the 1828 election. One major difference between now and then is today's 24-hour news cycle, which subjects politicians to constant public scrutiny. This factor greatly contributes to the permanent campaign by requiring politicians to act in ways that will gain public favor.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I have major issues with the money that is spent on permanent campaigning. Also, I wonder how effective the candidates, who are also supposed to be representing their constituents in the Senate, can be in having time to study bills coming before the Congress that they need to vote for. Did I dream at one time they had to resign their seat to campaign for office if it was going to take them away from their ELECTED office?
I agree with you about having mixed feelings about the permanent campaign. It is a waste of money and does take politicians away from their current elected positions, but at the same time it's a political reality.
What I think I have more of a problem is what Joe Klein and others referenced in the recent articles we had to read. Presidents using their office to visit swing states and campaign while holding office.
Post a Comment