October 18, 2007 12:10 PM

Could Electoral Politics Lead to Better Governing

We generally assume that election season political maneuvering leads to bad policy in government. Let's remember, it was the fear-mongering of the '02 and '06 midterms that terrorized cowardly candidates into authorizing the use of force, and four years later trashing our Constitutional rights. Too often, candidates race to the mythical "middle" of the political spectrum, as though being part of a herd will get them elected.

What if it were different? If you could differentiate yourself by taking strong stands -- and by using your role in government to push those proposals -- wouldn't you?

Chris Dodd just did. He's put a "hold" on the FISA bill:

As I've said before, the FIRST thing I will do after being sworn into office is restore the Constitution. But we shouldn't have to wait until then to prevent the further erosion of our country's most treasured document. That's why I am stopping this bill today.

I like that a candidate says we don't have to wait until the election to act. We have the power now to do something. As do the candidates, especially those in the Senate. They should give us a taste of how they'd use Presidential power by showing us they are willing to stand up in the Senate.

Not sure what this will mean and whether the Senate will come to its senses to end domestic spying and hold phone companies accountable for their illegal actions...but at least we can still tell the Senate to do the right thing.