National politics happens to get the major headlines, from the president to Congress to the Supreme Court. Should they?
Who gets elected president is a big deal. The presidential race, including primaries, debates, and a lengthy campaign season, is covered extensively by national and local media. And yet, individual voters have almost no influence on the president.
The situation is similar in Congress. A resident of a state can call their senator or congressperson, but even if that call is successful, the politician is just one of a large group.
It would seem that a person would be much more likely to make a difference at the state or local level than they would at the national one. In a town environment, one resident is a much larger percentage of the constituency. As a result, they wield much more influence. In addition, the issues at the local level often have a more direct impact on someone’s day-to-day life.
And yet, it is at the national level that most of the attention is directed. Many major media outlets have someone – or even a team – dedicated to covering the president. You may well know members of Congress, even those that don’t represent your district or state.
Overall, how much should we pay attention to events and people that are beyond our control? How important is it to follow what transpires over which you have little input? Is that being an “informed citizen” or are you spending your attention on something that doesn’t deserve it?
What is the proper level of engagement in national politics?
Related questions: Politics: local or national? What deserves your attention? Are you politically active? What is important?
“UNLESS someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It’s not.”
― Dr. Seuss, The Lorax
“Everyone can make a huge difference. We should not underestimate ourselves, because if lots of individuals go together then we can accomplish almost anything.”
― Greta Thunberg (young Swedish environmental activist)
The context for this question makes me sad. The assumption is that you should only take action to impact policy only when you can directly see the difference. By all means, take action at your local or state level. It’s incredibly powerful to witness how your action, amassed with others, has an impact. But the thing is, the same thing happens at the national level; it’s just harder to see. It could be the failure of national advocacy organizations to report back to those who took action that they did, in fact, move the dial.
Want to know why Social Security continues as a government program? It’s because seniors vote in high numbers, and any hint of trying to mess with the program generates an immense number of angry calls and letters to Congress and the President. Then, advocacy groups report back to their members how their collective ruckus made a difference, incentivizing their future actions.
Imagine if other groups voted in high enough numbers and acted like seniors regarding Social Security. No, really. Stop here for a moment. Imagine the impact.
Now, why should you act? Congress and Trump are looking to give substantial tax cuts to the very wealthy while slashing programs for those in need. Do you want to see increased homelessness? Do you want to avert your eyes from more hungry children? Do you not care if pre-existing conditions return to health insurance determinations? If not, you need to act and do so often. (I’d suggest weekly.) My advice is to, first, join an advocacy group that informs you about when to take action on the issues you care about, and then second, put your Congressperson, U. S. Senators, and the White House switchboard on speed dial on your phone. Do you feel intimidated at the thought of making such calls? Call during the late evening and leave a voice message.
Like raindrops that eventually fill a bucket with water ― well, you get the picture.
Michael, (and Lee) great question and answer. Very timely from my perspective. At my wife’s complaint/suggestion, I just sent a handwritten letter to Pres. Biden asking him to get to the root cause of the kind of hate that caused the New Orleans tragedy on New Year’s day. Repeat, root cause, not a band aid. We asked him to convene a panel of the best minds in the world to study hate groups like Isis, White Supremacists, etc.
Jesus, in his Sermon on the Mount, (Matthew Ch 5-7) said to love your enemies. He didn’t say kill them.
You may think this is Quixotic and I won’t get action on this letter. So far, I’ve been successful in getting a response from my elected officials. Somewhere I have a hand-signed letter from Jimmy Carter.
When my daughter Julie worked for Senator Paul Wellstone, she told me that if the Senator got 7 or 10 calls or letters on an issue, it got their attention.
This is American and we have free speech. Let’s not hesitate to use it for the good of our nation.
What national institutions even come close to the power and influence of government? And should they?
Hi Ruby. I don’t understand your question. Please say more. Thank you.
Personally, I believe there is too much reliance on the federal government. There is so much money in their hands of the members of Congress that it is more than the members are able to deal with or even comprehend, thus the lack of a proper budget and the growing unsustainable debt. If other institutions too responsibility, I think it would be better. But it seems that even NGOs as well as state and city governments depend on the government grants for too many things. What do you think?