How do we fix our current political system? American politics should become more British | Opinion
Today, we celebrate our independence from the British and the establishment of our own political institutions. It just so happens that there is also an important election taking place today: British voters will elect their government and select their prime minister on July 4.
While Americans take pride in our freedoms and democracy, there are characteristics of the British system we should take a closer look at.
Six weeks ago, current Conservative Party Prime Minister Rishi Sunak dissolved Parliament and called for the election to take place today. While the election has been raucous — with daily pledges and accusations going back and forth between the main parties — the election season is remarkably short.
Opinion
By comparison, our presidential primaries officially began in January and we won’t know who wins the presidency until weeks after the Nov. 3 election — an insufferably long time. How much polarizing politics can our democracy stand?
Money and politics
In Britain, there are significant limits on how much money political parties and candidates running to become a member of Parliament can spend on campaigning. While spending limits for political campaigns in Britain have increased recently, TV advertising by political parties is sharply limited and regulated.
Our system, on the other hand, is flooded with cash. According to the campaign spending site Open Secrets, President Joe Biden has raised $231 million while former President Donald Trump has raised $388 million — some of it for their campaign committees and some of it consisting of outside “Super PACs (political action committees).” That kind of money buys a lot of unwarranted influence.
Members of Parliament — equivalent to our members of Congress — run every five years. Here, as soon as an American congressperson is elected, fundraising begins for their next election in two years.
In Britain, candidates who want to be prime minister have to run throughout the country supporting their party. During the week that I have been in London, both Sunak and the Labour Party leader, Keir Starmer, have visited Scotland and Wales and campaigned across England — north, south, east and west.
Government structure
In the U.S., due to the exotic functioning of the Electoral College, six or seven states will have a great deal of face-time with the candidates and be inundated with TV ads, while most of the country will be ignored. California, for instance, functions as one, gigantic political ATM machine.
This dramatically distorts our politics, giving certain states and areas an over-sized role in shaping issues that become important for our country.
Additionally, because the House of Lords (the upper political chamber in Britain) only has an advisory role on legislation, they can delay but not obstruct important legislation that is passed by the House of Commons (the lower chamber).
If the Labour Party wins a majority of parliamentary seats today, which most of the polls indicate they will, they will have the ability to implement the manifesto which they ran on. That means they will be able to keep the promises they made to voters.
Very often in the U.S., a threatened filibuster in the Senate stops important legislation from being enacted. Our judicial system is another significant check on popular democracy. In many respects, we are politically paralyzed — locked into a situation where we are constantly at each other’s throats.
Top candidates are up to the job
For whatever reason, despite its own deep-seated problems as a country, the two major parties in Britain have top leaders who are relatively young, energetic and able to clearly articulate where they want to take the country. Sunak, the Conservative leader, is 41 years old and Labour Party leader Starmer is 61. Voters may disagree with their policies, but they know that the candidates are physically and mentally up to the rigors of the job.
The most frequent question I heard here from campaigners and people on the street was why a country as great as the U.S. could not find better options to lead us and the world than Donald Trump (78) and Joe Biden (81). I couldn’t come up with a great answer.
The biggest difference
Gary Gerstle, an American history professor who has been teaching at Cambridge University (an hour north of London) for 10 years, is retiring soon and returning to the U.S. We spoke this week about history and politics, and about the most important political difference between our two countries.
“No loser in British politics, to my knowledge, has challenged the vote counts or the legitimacy of the election itself or has said that they cannot lose except through fraudulent means,” Gerstle said. “I have no doubt that whoever is elected today in the United Kingdom, that result will be accepted by the British people.”
It would be wonderful if we could say the same thing about our election on November 3.
Kelly Candaele has worked on both American presidential campaigns and British parliamentary elections. He was an elected official in Los Angeles for 16 years.
