DEMOCRACY: AN ENDANGERED SPECIES?
November 5, 2006The Reverend Anne Felton Hines
One of my favorite cartoon strips is called “Non-Sequitur,” by Wiley. A few years ago the cartoon featured an Adams-family look-alike called “The Graevsytes” (spell). In it, Mr. & Mrs. Graevsyte have decided it’s time to confront their pre-teen son with what they call, “The Talk.” They go to his bedroom and Mrs. Graevsyte says, “Boyle…Your father and I have something to tell you.” Mr. Graevsyte then says to his son, “This may be a little scary, but it’s part of growing up and we don’t trust the schools to deal with it properly…So, here it is: Politicians don’t really care about you.”
The son gasps. “But their smiles,” he says; “…the ring of sincerity in their voices…You mean it’s all been just a fairy tale? What next? Are you going to tell me there’s no difference between Democrats and Repub…?”
The look on his parents’ faces gives him the answer, and he cries out in agony, “Noooooo!”
“Darn!” one parent says to the other. “I was hoping he had already learned that part on the street!”
My parents never had that “talk” with me. I grew up thinking that politicians – with a few exceptions who I won’t mention here – really did care about me, and about the country. Politics was a common theme at our dinner table, and each of us participated in the democratic process in some way – in many cases even before we were old enough to vote.
My sister Mary wore a “Stevenson for President” button to school when she was only 12 years old, which unfortunately resulted in a classmate slapping her across her face; I guess politics was an integral part of that child’s family as well!
My brother Rick met his wife, Judy, while working on Robert Kennedy’s presidential campaign; she was still in high school, and he had just begun college. Both were present at the Ambassador Hotel the night Kennedy was assassinated.
Many years earlier my mother told her obstetrician that I couldn’t be born before she knew for sure that FDR had been re-elected.
My uncle, Lionel VanDeerlin, served in the United States Congress for 20 years, representing San Diego until the year Ronald Reagan was voted into the White House. At the age of 92, he still writes a weekly column in the San Diego Union, commenting on the quirks of both local and national politics.
And I am much more “star-struck” by politicians -– at least, those I support! – than by athletes or movie stars. At a staff meeting for the kids’ camp at deBenneville Pines this past summer, where I was serving as Chaplain, we were asked to share what famous person we’d like to go out on a date with. (I’m sure you’re relieved to know the depth of the staff conversations at our youth camps!) Each staff member mentioned some well-known athlete or entertainer; but I said Senator Barak Obama, with Steven Colbert a close second!
Yet even I must admit that these days it is difficult to keep faith in those who say they want to represent me in some political office. Indeed, these days I’m having a difficult time even trusting in the Democracy that I have cherished for so many years.
This Tuesday is election day, and the cynicism about politics and those who give their lives to that service is at probably the highest it’s ever been. It will be interesting to see just how many citizens turn out at the voting booths. According to a report on NPR yesterday, in the 2002 midterm election, two-thirds of eligible voters chose not to vote. It was especially true among young adults, who apparently don’t think their vote will make any difference. Part of that might be because they see themselves as only one person among millions eligible to vote, so of course their vote seems insignificant. But part of their attitude comes because they don’t believe in the system itself; they no longer feel that those running for office really care about them or their communities. It’s as if their parents had finally had “the Talk” with them!
But I will vote, no matter what; and I assume that all of you will as well. Because you and I know that not only does our vote count – look at how close the last two presidential elections have been! – but that voting is a precious right not granted to people everywhere in the world. We believe that even though we may not always be happy with the results of an election, the ballot box is a far better way to make our wishes known than anything else that’s been tried. We will vote on Tuesday because we believe it’s our responsibility as citizens of this country, and we are so very grateful to carry such a responsibility and when we vote, I hope our choices will be informed by our Unitarian Universalist values.
In his recent book, The Audacity of Hope, my heartthrob Barak Obama suggests that our Democracy is an invitation to a “conversation;” that “all its elaborate machinery” – the separation of powers, checks and balances, Bill of Rights, etc. – “are designed to force us into conversation.” He calls it a “deliberative democracy,” in which all citizens are required to engage in the process of testing our ideas against external reality, trying to persuade others of our conclusions, and building shifting alliances of consent.
Yet I am concerned – as is the young Senator from Illinois – that that “deliberative democracy” of which he speaks has come under attack in the last few years. The “conversation” that is our right and responsibility to have with one another and with our elected officials has become stunted, as more and more voices of dissent get accused of disloyalty, or ridiculed as cowards.
I am concerned that our Democracy is threatened by a Congress that has given away much of its authority to provide a “checks and balance” to the Executive Branch – a congress that has given powers to the president that undermine international laws of human decency, and threaten our freedoms here at home.
And I am concerned that our Democracy is possibly threatened by the very act of voting itself, as we become more and more reliant on a technology that is already proving to be unreliable, and possibly even corrupt. And yet there is apparently no federal regulation or oversight of this technology.
Yet despite all of this – indeed, perhaps because of all this – you and I will vote on Tuesday – if we haven’t already – because we insist on being part of that “conversation” into which the founding fathers and mothers – many of whom were Unitarians – invited us. And because we believe that our vote is anything but insignificant. Some of us will even be spending our time in the next 48 hours helping to convince others to vote as well.
I will, like you, be voting on the many Propositions on the California ballot once again – though I strongly disapprove of the misuse of this process. But several of the measures are just too important to ignore. And so as of today, with my Unitarian Universalist Principles as my guide,
I will vote NO on Prop. 84, called the “Sex Offenders & Sexually Violent Predators Punishment, Residence Restrictions and Monitoring Initiative,” in part because I believe it gives a false sense of safety, and distracts us from addressing the very real threat of child sexual abuse in families which makes up 90% of all sexual abuse.
I will vote NO on Prop. 85, which would force parent notification and impose a 48-hour waiting period on minors
seeking an abortion, because I believe it will only hurt young women who live in abusive homes, and because I suspect that the real purpose of this measure is to move us closer to outlawing abortions once again.
I will vote YES on Prop. 87, the “Alternative Energy” measure, because I feel it’s so very important, for the sake of our beloved earth, that we do more to reduce our reliance on oil.
I will vote YES on Prop. 89, the so-called “Clean Money” initiative, because I believe that it is imperative for the integrity of our Democracy that campaigns be funded by everyone, not just the wealthiest who stand to benefit from their large contributions.
And what about all those propositions I didn’t mention? I haven’t made up my mind on those; but I will – or I just won’t vote on them. (If you haven’t made up your mind on the ballot initiatives, I urge you to go to the website of our UU Legislative Ministry, where they offer a variety of analysis and opinions from fellow UUs.)
Getting involved in the “conversation” of Democracy is crucial if it is to remain healthy and alive. We can say all we want about how politicians are corrupt – how the current Administration is undermining our Constitutional freedoms, or how Congress and the media are “aiding and abetting.” But if you and I, and the rest of the citizenry, don’t hold up our end of the bargain, we must accept some of the responsibility for the erosion of the ideals on which this country was founded. We must become full participants, and we must encourage everyone we know to become full participants as well.
Which brings me to our church, and to our Unitarian Universalist faith. One of the most fundamental values of this religious tradition of ours is that of the democratic process; it’s our 5th Principle, and one that sets us apart from many other traditions.
The four people who were welcomed into membership this morning are now eligible to participate in the decisions guiding this congregation. Just like all the rest of you who are members, they will now be eligible to vote on how their financial contributions are spent; on who will represent them as the lay leadership of the church; on a variety of issues that might be brought before the membership; and most important and unique of all, who will serve as the ordained minister of the church (though not until I leave, which I don’t expect to be anytime soon!).
In addition, they are now eligible to step into the leadership of Emerson, and participate even more fully in the decision-making of the church. Not every religion allows such participation by the laity; but for Unitarians and Universalists, it has always been fundamental.
So I don’t understand why so few members of UU congregations take advantage of this great privilege. I think that most church Bylaws require that only 20% of the membership constitutes a quorum at a congregational meeting; and that tends to be just about how many members attend such meetings. Here at Emerson, 20% would be only about 30 members; yet I remember one meeting where we had to go rounding up folks who were about to leave or were deep in conversations, and ask them to come to the meeting because we didn’t have that needed 20%! Even last June, when we were voting on a congregational resolution to call for a deadline to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq, we barely had a quorum. Yet most of us would never dream of sitting out public elections.
This congregation is no less a “deliberative democracy” than is our nation. Its democratic process is “an invitation to a conversation,” and it depends on that conversation if it is to do the good and necessary work it’s called to do. It needs all of us – those who agree with the majority and those most especially who disagree, to be in full participation of our 5th UU Principle.
In addition to members who don’t show up to vote, every UU congregation has its share of people who attend for many years, participate in various programs of the church, even contribute financially, but never become members. Which means, of course, that they can’t vote on the budget, or who will serve as their minister, even if they want to; nor can they participate in the leadership of the church, or in any of the real decision-making.
And I know that there are a variety of reasons people choose not to join, and those reasons often run very deep. But just as I wish that every immigrant to this country who chooses to stay and make a life here would take the necessary steps to citizenship, so that they can be full participants in its democracy…so, too, do I wish that every person who makes this church their religious home would take the simple steps to membership, so that they can become full participants in our democratic process.
The UUA’s Commission on Appraisal report a few years ago stated that “the purpose of the democratic process is to enhance community.” That, too, is Senator Obama’s contention. And the more people who are full participants in that process, whether as a nation or as a Unitarian Universalist congregation, the more alive we are as a community. And the more alive we are as a community, the more brightly will we shine as a beacon of hope and courage to those beyond our walls.
© 2006 Anne Felton Hines. All rights reserved.
