'Advanced citizenship', at last

Americans bristled in 2000 when a collection of forces - the electoral college, a conniving governor and an intellectually dishonest Supreme Court - combined to expose many of the defects in our political system. Nothing happened.

We griped throughout the past year as a Senate minority repeatedly filibustered legislation that might benefit everyone. Again, nothing happened.

Same electoral college, same exploitation of the system, same Supreme Court and arrangement for choosing justices, same filibuster - among many chinks in the system that threatens to revert our political operation to tyranny.

Something happened in St. Petersburg, Fla., Trenton, N.J., and London that restores one’s faith and hope in how a democracy can be shaped. A fictitious president - Michael Douglas in “The American President” - declared that “America is advanced citizenship.” He is right.

Living with a democracy is like nurturing a child. One must take full advantage of its gifts to make it work. Voting is not sufficient. A citizen needs to become involved in the governing process in ways that fit one’s concerns - as examples, writing their representatives, submitting letters on issues to newspapers, attending demonstrations, campaigning for candidates.

In Florida, New Jersey and Britain, some citizens are acting to force democracy to better serve the public. Florida’s governor is running for the Senate as an independent, a move that can loosen the grip of the two major parties. In New Jersey, Democratic senators and many others are standing up to what they call the draconian policies of their new governor.

Britain’s new coalition government follows the Liberal Democratic Party’s demand for a preferential voting system, as has been proposed in the United States. The winning candidate in a three-way race can receive less than a majority of the total vote. In fact, the majority’s least preferred candidate can win.

In 2000, Al Gore and Ralph Nader won a combined majority of the electoral votes, but on their own they each fell short of George W. Bush’s percentage. Nader’s votes are believed to have eroded Gore’s voting total.

The Liberal Democrats are seeking a form of proportional representation based on a single transferable transferable vote. Voters under this system would rank candidates in order of preference, according to The New York Times. Votes for the lowest-ranking candidates are redistributed to the voter’s second choice.

That plan is targeted at increasing the number of parliamentary seats for a minority party, but it could result in allowing a voter’s second preference to win an election.

Across the pond, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist is running for the senate as an independent after recognizing that he will likely lose the Republican primary to the more conservative Marco Rubio. After the party primaries are held, Crist is expected to run against Rubio and Democratic Rep. Kendrick Meek.

What’s key is the concept of another independent senator, not necessarily this candidate; if Crist is the best candidate, let’s hope he can convince the voters of it. The addition of more independents in Congress and other offices will limit the power of both the Democratic and Republican parties. Both parties have been positive forces in some ways, but more independents in office will inject more citizen participation into politics.

A successful independent presidential campaign is hard to envision because it is too mammoth to fund and organize. However, independent campaigns have already succeeded in two Senate and two gubernatorial elections.

Many New Jerseyans are livid about Gov. Christopher J. Christie’s policies which include sharp increases in transit fares, tax breaks for the wealthy, cuts in school programs and his refusal to reappoint liberal-leaning Justice John Wallace to the state Supreme Court.

Senate Democrats resent Christie’s attempt to conservatize the court and his sacking, in effect, of its only African-American justice. They responded by refusing to consider Christie’s nominee, white attorney Anne Patterson, to replace Wallace, the Associated Press reported.

There are conflicting arguments over Christie’s action, and he claims that the Senate is obligated to consider his nominee for appointment to the court. What really rankles is that Christie’s decision is a slap in the face to the black community, especially since Wallace must retire in two years when he reaches the mandatory age. If Democrats in the state legislature ignore the prescribed process, what can Christie do about it?

Maybe Christie can appeal to the court, but wouldn’t that court be the state Supreme Court?

New Jersey appears headed for a governing deadlock. Maybe Christie had not counted on his subjects to behave as if they live in a democracy.