Here is a letter I have written to two of the participants in the January 7, 2008 meeting at Oklahoma University to discuss (in the words of the OU Press Release), “ways in which our nation can end divisive partisan polarization, create bipartisanship, and bring the country together after the conclusion of the 2008 election”.

January 4, 2008

Senator Chuck Hagel
Senator Gary Hart

Subject: Meeting at Oklahoma University January 7, 2008

Gentlemen,

My congratulations on being invited to attend this meeting about overcoming polarization in American politics. I think your invitation speaks to your intelligence, open-mindedness and genuine concern for the welfare of this country.

Given that I have written a book about your topic and am unable to be in the closed door session with you, I would like to offer some thoughts for you to carry inside.

Overcoming polarized politics means identifying and eliminating the causes. I believe the causes fall into two major categories.

a. An electorate which has become confused about the purpose, rules and definitions of the political process. The resulting focus on issues and personalities rather than principles and outcomes allows polarization to fester.
b. Special Interest groups are exploiting the confusion of the electorate to pursue getting their business done through the government when that business has no place in the government. Although there are several examples of this, the most predominant one lies with religious organizations.

Education of the electorate is a prime means of eliminating these causes. Education is the reason you, I and people like Senator Danforth have written the books we have.

Further, polarization has been able to flourish because of the political system we have. Our two party system has been forced out of alignment by the manipulation of the exploiting groups. As a result, the strongest reaction I get when I give talks is when I ask the audience whether voting makes people feel they must choose between the lesser of two evils. The answer is a resounding yes.

Just putting forth third party candidates is not a solution with our current winner take all ballot system. My research so far indicates to me that third parties with our current system will likely fall victim to two arguments. (1) You’re wasting your vote. (2) You’re splitting the vote of our party and now the other candidate will win.

Without the competitive threat of a third party the existing parties have little incentive to change.  Overcoming polarization will, therefore, require initiatives at the state level to change voting procedures for national candidates. The two changes I recommend are:

 Institute automatic run-off voting. Instead of being forced to choose a single candidate, allow voters to rank order their choices. If no single candidate achieves a clear majority initially, then those who did not vote for the top two vote getters have their ballots examined for their alternate choices until a clear winner emerges. This is voting with a safety net. The concern over wasting or splitting of votes is eliminated. The threat of competition makes all parties more responsive. More voters are likely to vote.

 All states should pass laws allowing proportional allocation of representatives to the Electoral College based on popular vote within the state. Retaining the Electoral College is essential to the viability of the less populated states in the election of our President. Proportional distribution would encourage participation and lessen the impact of polarization. No longer would a red voter in a blue state (or vice versa) feel that voting was a futile exercise. Increased participation should also increase competition among parties and lessen the impact of polarization.

Thank you in advance for consideration of my suggestions. I make them in keeping with one of my favorite sayings from Brian Tracy about being open to change, “I may be wrong. I often am.”

I hope your meeting will be productive. I’m planning to be in the audience for the press conference afterwards.

Very Respectfully,

Larry R. Bradley
Author, Neither Liberal Nor Conservative Be