November 8, 2000

Just how independent are American Independents?

Elections always bring more questions than answers. If only! If only my candidate had alloted his time differently. If only she hadn't misspelled her endorser's names! If only he hadn't given a flip answer to that question. If Mickey, Minnie and Goofy were counted each time they're written in, would they ever wind up serving in some office? Who of those three and Pat Buchanan were written in the most times in the Spring primary? That one's easy. Pat came in fourth out of the four.

There's a minor California political entity known as the American Independent Party. County headquarters for many years, perhaps even state hq at times, was right here in Pacifica, at the home of the late Nick Kudrovzeff. Nick was one of those contradictions. His politics were to the right of the well-known Attila the Hun. On the other hand, I enjoyed thoroughly knowing him as a person. I even voted for him once or twice, when it couldn't do any harm. He always had a smile. He was dedicated, worked hard to advance his political goals, never gave up. Over and over he ran for Congress or some state office. He'd get a few votes, and bounce back for the next try with that same smile.

The American Independent party came out of the 1968 George Wallace campaign. It made even the most right wing Republican look liberal. Yet in this generally liberal city, quite a few are American Independent. Why then, do some of them vote straight Democratic, or even Green? I think it's because they thought when they registered AI they were registering as independent, what most people put down as "decline to state." Many Pacificans who used to take pride in being Democratic, and a number who took pride in being Republican, no longer wish to be associated with the major parties.

More would vote for folks like Ralph Nader if they could find some way to make their votes count. I understand their frustrations. For myself, I prefer to stick with the Democratic Party, while acknowledging its shortcomings. It is, after all, the party of Franklin Roosevelt, whose death at the early age of 63 hit me like a punch in the gut. It's the party of Adlai Stevenson, John Kennedy, and even Lyndon Johnson, a man so full of shortcomings and shenanigans it's easy to overlook his manifold accomplishments. Much as I admire Nader, should he have been elected he'd have been a worse President than Millard Fillmore or Franklin Pierce.

I'd like to see California's electoral votes allotted by congressional district. For example, if the 12th district voted for Gore, one electoral vote would go to Gore. If a deep-dyed Republican district in Orange County voted Bush, he'd get that electoral vote. It would be winner take all by district, rather than by state. Two California electoral votes would remain at large. Instead of the present setup, such a plan would give candidates reason to campaign vigorously in California, because each congressional district would be the scene of its own mini-campaign.

Some recent Reactor columns may be found at Paul Azevedo's website, http://www.thereactor.net/ Reach him by e-mail at Paul@thereactor.net