Within the last couple of weeks, two prominent Democratic politicians have come out in favor of less democracy. First, Peter Orzag, President Obama's first director of the OMB, called explicitly for less democracy in an article at The New Republic. Called Too much of a good thing, the article basically called for Congress to delegate much if not most of its traditional function to various panels, committees, and other appointed bodies.
Second, yesterday, Democrat Governor Bev Perdue of North Carolina suggested that we cancel Congressional elections next year to "focus on the economy." Her exact words, as reported by the News Observer, were these:
"You have to have more ability from Congress, I think, to work together and to get over the partisan bickering and focus on fixing things. I think we ought to suspend, perhaps, elections for Congress for two years and just tell them we won't hold it against them, whatever decisions they make, to just let them help this country recover. I really hope that someone can agree with me on that. The one good thing about Raleigh is that for so many years we worked across party lines. It's a little bit more contentious now but it's not impossible to try to do what's right in this state. You want people who don't worry about the next election."
Later that day, her spokesman tried to claim she was using hyperbole, but it seems no one is buying it. Hyperbolic statements don't include wishes that people agree with them.
I don't think that it is necessarily the wisest thing for a politician up for reelection to suggest (even in hyperbole, under the most charitable interpretation) that said election just shouldn't happen.
Because not holding congressional elections would be pointless unless we just didn't hold any elections at all, for President, or for state elections.
Needless to say, the Republicans are all over this story. Words like "fascist" and "dictator" are flowing around. And I suppose that canceling elections would be a rather fascist thing to do. Governor Perdue is trying to claim it was in jest or hyperbole, but there is audio of her statement and, well, it doesn't support those claims. It sounds like a completely serious proposal.
Everyone thought Bush would be the one to cancel elections, but he never hinted or suggested it. Now we have prominent politicians and voices on the left (like Tom Friedman and Peter Orzag, as above) either openly calling for less democracy or suggesting (even in jest) to cancel elections.
Canceling elections would be stupid. Republicans accuse Obama and the Democrats of wishing the USA was Venezuela, or Cuba, and it would be hard to think of anything that would prove them right more than trying to cancel elections. I think this idea had better die a fast, quick death.
Because this has probably cost Perdue her re-election, at the very least. And if she is serious about trying to cancel elections, then good riddance. North Carolina can survive a Republican Governor for a few years, but if elections are canceled, would they ever come back? Without violence, at least?