Vote? No! Two agonizing years in the making, a multi-million dollar process, climaxing today -- Tuesday, November 6, 2012 -- in Election Day. It’s the day that most Americans believe must be participated in; a citizen’s duty to assure that the “greatest government process ever devised” will survive and prosper. Well, I did not participate and what follows is my rationale for refusing to vote. Simply stated, I cannot, with a clear conscience, support a plutocracy that purchases power, lies with impunity, prospers from illegal financial transactions and, when all is said and done, never has to worry about accountability. Once in office, our politicians are no longer mere citizens; success in the election process is their initiation into the plutocracy. They are in the envious position of being able to make laws and decisions that impact the governed masses while assuring that they remain exempt – immune. Their healthcare and retirement programs are separate and superior to what most of the middle class can get, and those benefits come at no cost to them. Their constitutional responsibilities – legislating, leading and representing constituents – are blatantly neglected in lieu of catering to their wealthy benefactors and raising funds to position themselves for reelection. We are taught and have come to accept the premise that ours is a government of the people, by the people and for the people. This in spite of overwhelming evidence that the power lies in money, not in people. The recent economic crisis should make that quite clear. Not only were financial sector plutocrats able to create complex and often illegal insider investment packages that bloated their wealth while devastating the economy, they were able to maintain their lofty and powerful positions and never looked back with the slightest sense of guilt. Part of that system led to the housing bubble debacle that financially ruined tens of thousands of citizens while lining the pockets of those responsible. To my way of thinking, that cannot happen in a nation governed by a constitution of, by and for the people. It can only happen in that nation when constitutional powers are usurped by money. How much money was spent on campaigns over the past two years? According to the November 19 issue of Time Magazine, the presidential candidates spent more than $1.9 billion and the U.S. congressional races accounted for another $4.1 billion. And add to that all of the state-run races. Most of this money came from wealthy donors who can contribute enormous amounts of money and remain anonymous since the Supreme Court’s ruling that paved the way for PACs and other organizations to contribute unlimited amounts. These are the same folks who strongly object to even a slight increase in their personal income tax. One of their arguments against raising taxes is legitimate – wasteful spending by congress. And so, they are willing to give millions to get candidates elected, anticipating paybacks in legislation and spending decisions that are overwhelmingly advantageous to their financial status. They also claim that taxing wealth adversely impacts job creation. What a hollow argument that is! If the top 10% of wealthy Americans want to engage in job-creating endeavors, they can comfortably do so under the current or any proposed tax levels. But why expose themselves to the work and the risks of job-creating enterprises when far more favorable gains can be realized through relatively safe global investments? In addition to being relatively safe they are heavily tilted to favor the wealthy investor. That’s because they possess the tremendous advantages of volume and knowledge. Volume provides the leverage to realize substantial gains even from relatively slight increases in an investment’s value. As for knowledge, the insider information, both the legal and illegal to which they are privy, cannot be overstated. In today’s political environment, the primary concern of our elected officials is getting reelected. One of the favored avenues toward that end is to castigate and spurn the opposition. It is more important to assure that the opposition will not succeed or be given credit for a bill or a proposal than it is to pass legislation that would be good for the country. In this negatively tainted environment democracy suffers, the wealthy thrive and the masses are duped. We should be governed by congressional representatives who temporarily leave their civilian occupations to serve their constituents within the constraints of what is best for the nation overall. Instead we have career politicians who, when no longer in office, remain in the game as overpaid influence peddlers, either lobbying their former colleagues or fundraising to perpetuate their favored-status positions. Does that not speak volumes for term limits, not to mention serious and sincere campaign finance reform? In parliamentary systems an election can be called and completed in six weeks and within reasonable costs. Why is our election process on-going and astronomically expensive? Were it not for history books and biographies, dictionaries would have to classify the word “statesman” as an obsolete term. There are none. Instead we have career politicians whose celebrity and uber-citizen status link them solidly with the ruling oligarchy of wealth. In our two-party system, that ruling class carries on an endless competition, not unlike professional athletics, where we the spectators take sides, cheer them on, provide support and remain loyal even when their concern for us is evidently a very low priority. If I were to vote, knowing that my vote doesn’t count and that the system will not change regardless of who is elected, I would be acknowledging and supporting a system that I consider flawed, unfair, and detrimental to the future well-being of this great nation. A.N. Pavia November, 2012