Walter Cronkite thinks that the Democrats should have a midterm convention to draw up a platform. I started thinking about that a lot because, as an Illinois delegate to the 2004 convention, I am one of the people he proposes should be there.
Cronkite's reasoning for a midterm convention is that the Democrats should use it as a window to the differences between Democrats and Republicans and a showcase for Democratic vision. Cronkite goes on:
"In sharp contrast to the secrecy of the Bush administration, it would let the public, if only remotely, share in the construction of the Democratic platform."
In thinking about Cronkite's proposal, I reflected back on the 2004 Convention. While it was a great experience for me, I was disappointed on the meaninglessness of the votes for President and Vice President and the lack of participation most delegates had in creation of the platform. It simply appeared on the internet weeks before the convention and we never even got to vote on it. It was done by insiders and was a fait accomplis before we even landed in Boston. I wrote this back on July 31, 2004:
"Maybe we need to be creative and come up with something for the future that will get out the message to more voters and in a way that will be more meaningful and helpful to them."
At the time, I was not so sure how we could create a convention and platform with more grassroots participation. Now, I have an idea or really a twist on someone else's idea. Last year I participated in an internet writing contest on the issue of the Iraq War. (I cannot remember the name of the group that sponsored this internet event. Please let me know if you know about it.) The goal was to come up with a policy statement about the war. It went something like this:
People were divided up into groups and were given questions to answer in essay form. At the end of a specified time, each person was asked to rank the answers of group members. The top 2 or 3 answers were chosen and all group members were asked to edit them. Then, the group ranked the edited versions and the top 2 or 3 were chosen and the writers of those went on to the next round. My essay was chosen to move to the next round, but unfortunately, the sponsor of the event had server problems on subsequent scheduled day and I was unable to participate in the rescheduled event. However, I was impressed with the way it allowed participation of a large number of people in policymaking.
So, we could start the midterm convention in a manner similar to what I described above with delegates initially choosing a platform issue from a list or be assigned and placed into district, state, region and then national groups competing and helping to edit each others work. The essay winners of competing versions would be the chosen spokespeople to present the draft grassroots platform with some competing versions of key provisions argued in speeches or debate style and voted upon. Now that would be some interesting television, not just rah rah Edwards! rah rah Kerry! and a lot of balloons.
Then delegates would vote on the final platform, a real, meaningful vote. The last day could be the party leaders making speeches on their thoughts about the platform.
Americans would see some real democracy in action accomplished by some real Democrats and I cannot think of anything more positive than that.