The Des Moines Register has been running a series giving readers and voters information on upcoming candidates running for office. Although special interest groups help fund campaigns, it is hard-earned taxpayer money that pays the salaries and generous health and retirement benefits of those elected to serve the good people of Iowa. That’s why it’s important to weigh the words of campaigns carefully when determining who to vote for to represent your needs.
Non-incumbent candidates for public office often claim they will “work across the aisle” after they are elected, giving the false impression that things will change for the better if elected. The truth is bipartisan support happens in every general assembly. The majority of bills pass the Iowa Senate and the Iowa House without opposition. It just doesn’t get reported because the controversial bills are deemed more newsworthy.
It’s the controversial bills that send legislators scurrying to hideout in the highly restricted caucus rooms. The desires of political party and special interests blind those elected to office as they fully focus on the funding for future elections instead of fulfilling their pledge to listen and support the people who elected them to serve. Newly elected candidates will break the promise of working across the aisle as partisan politics pressures them to vote with the party or suffer the consequences of withholding campaign funds or in a few circumstances — threaten to “primary them.”
The majority party leadership sets the schedule, the tone, and the rules of the legislature. A legislator belonging to the minority party is not going to have any influence in an act of compromise with the majority party. It’s that simple. And when a candidate becomes part of the majority, that candidate will soon find out that there is no room for compromising with any legislator belonging to the minority party.
There are certain issues in which one party will never compromise with the other. Think of abortion, education, taxes, and a few matters of appropriating funds for certain agencies, departments, and pet projects. When the majority party decides what measures will be brought up for consideration, the minority party candidate can only vote against it.
Campaign promises have been in existence for centuries. “Read my lips: no new taxes.” “I will order Guantanamo closed.” “A chicken in every pot.”
“Called the ‘Pledge Paradox’, the difference between voter expectations and reality seems partially determined by the difficulty in how voters define kept promises and skepticism over whether elected officials can actually successfully achieve outcomes rather than actions[1]” Once elected, will general voters recall the vague promise of “working across the aisle?” We sort of doubt it.
***
Please help Fawkes-Lee & Ryan maintain this website by donating $10, $20, $30, $50, $100, or more.
Your support is appreciated.
Subscribe (It’s FREE): Email mrtyryn@gmail.com with “Subscribe” in the Subject Line.
Fawkes-Lee & Ryan
2516 Lynner Dr.
Des Moines, IA 50310
Copyright (c) 2024. Fawkes-Lee & Ryan. All rights reserved.
[1] Naurin, E. 2011. Election Promises, Party Behaviour and Voter Perceptions. Palgrave Macmillan. Quoted from Bonilla, Tabitha. Promises Kept, Promises Broken, and Those Caught in the Middle. Northwestern University and IPR. 2022.