Benjamin T. Awesome — Thank you for your comment. Let me say I’m afraid you take my story for a defense of the Democratic Party, which it is not.
Not at all. Just expanding on the points you made. I assume you meant exactly what you said, nothing more.
A technical point: the DNC is a non-profit corporation. It cannot accumulate wealth — although it can, as you point out, enrich its stakeholders. I’ll note that the links you provide might only show that rich people get elected and then vote like rich people. In any case, it is hard to see those rich people regulating themselves; it’s not even clear what regulations would be effective.
I find this to be an uninteresting distinction in this context. As you point out, non-profit corporations can enrich their stakeholders, and there are plenty of non-profits with multimillionaire CEOs and officers. The DNC and GOP can not only enrich their stakeholders, but can also serve as a means of funneling money to other interests. In effect, they are a mechanism for income redistribution from the lower and middle classes to the upper class.
More to the point, it’s hard to see how regulation solves the problems I raise in my story. We need parties, and especially parties that are good at being parties. The best fix for the parties we have is competition — more parties. If you think the DNC and RNC are hopelessly corrupt, you should have a reasonable alternative. That requires restructuring how elections are run.
I agree more parties is good. Whether it is the best fix is anyone’s guess. Given the deplorable actions of the GOP and DNC in the last several decades, though, I would say it is an immoral act to vote for any of their candidates anymore, so having candidates to choose from in other parties can only be an improvement.
If you follow the links in my story — especially the first one, and the one behind ‘excluding third parties’ — you will find more ideas for how we can fix our election machinery. Some of these are much more likely — easier, even — than regulation.
It’s a very difficult challenge. The major parties are like religions when it comes to how much influence they exert over members, and it is hard to get people to change their opinion of parties to which they have been loyal for years, decades, or even generations. In this regard, it is like challenging the faith of a zealot with facts and figures — a tall order.
Despite this challenge, I still believe breaking that domination has to start with the people, the average voters, not the party leadership, staff, or politicians. The corruption of the empowered transcends the brainwashing of the voters. If more people come to see the major parties for what they are, their unchecked pillaging of the voting public will come to a close, either by way of their agreement to undergo regulation and election reform, or by way of third parties being seen as morally superior, functional, viable alternatives.
I think any form of progress has to involve Democrat and Republican voters no longer just surrendering their vote to the “lesser of two evils;” this just perpetuates the corruption.