Jim Davis, a former candidate for Florida governor, pledged to raises taxes to almost a billion dollars, which some economists believe would force the average Florida taxpayer to pay almost 55%percent of their income in taxes. The second major candidate was Charlie Crist, a man that accepted millions of dollars in campaign donations from insurance companies, which could possibly lead to a slight bias. It seems our political system has boiled down to choosing the lesser of two evils.
We have the freedom to vote in this country, but we have no way to express disdain for the candidates. There is the option of not voting, however that is abandoning the democratic process completely. The solution is simple: Pass an amendment requiring that for each election on any and all levels there must be an option on the ballot stating “No Acceptable Candidate.”
Having that option on a ballot would allow voters to express their dissatisfaction for the political parties in power or possible candidates if they wished to do so. In an interview with Time magazine Timothy McVeigh said, “It’s all inter-related…the growing resentment of taxation in America, obtrusive government. There is a larger problem.” That problem is that our population cannot express that resentment, or disdain, in a democratic manner. The Constitution allows me to burn an American flag, yet it limits me from expressing the same dissent in our democratic process.
Some people may ask, “Why does one need to express dissatisfaction through the ‘No Acceptable Candidate’ concept instead of other forms of protest?” Simply stated, our government doesn’t listen to other forms of protest. Our nation was created on the philosophy that the government would figuratively listen to the voter, yet we then limit the voice of the voter. We are granted with certain unalienable rights, one of those being to express ourselves through the democratic process. I believe it is time that this right is recognized.
The American government operates on the concept that power is derived from the consent of the governed. But if our government only recognizes the election results, and we cannot express discourse through those elections, can we do anything but consent?