USD Magazine, Spring 1995

with politicians to some extent, but that's not what the election was about. They have a fundamental understanding of what the parties stand for, and they chose the Republicans."

"Some of the signs of dealignment are there, such as an increase in the number of independent voters, a rise in split– ticket voting and a divided government," says Norton. "But it's still too soon to tell." "This election may have appeared to be a dealignment, because people seemed turned off to politics in general," Pfau says. "But in fact the election was very partisan. People may think this strong ideology is negative, but ideological debate is the basis of politics. When the ideological debate turns to issues, people will get involved."

'"ra.::1Ei:111g; a. :.Ki'*- :£:re>m '"re:ch:111e>:l.e>g;:v

'

Some new additions to the political scene are helping people discover exactly why it is they don't like a certain candidate - or even a certain party. Increasingly adversarial and sensational media put candidates under a microscope. Television ads allow campaign managers to exploit every possible chink in the oppo– nent's armor. And talk radio shows let people know just what they shouldn't like about candidates. As Molly Lamb found, the resulting response from the public can be frustrating. "The media have ways of pigeonholing people and issues," says Lamb, who recalls a direct correlation between talk radio time slots and the volume of calls from voters at such times. "We spent a lot of time responding to people who were sound– biting us to death. It was more sensation than substance." But Pfau sees the negativism permeating the airwaves more philosophically. "Hardly anybody ever changes their mind in politics," he says. "The media tend to reinforce people's exist– ing attitudes." Pfau notes that the target of negative campaigns is not the hard-and-fast Democrats or Republicans but a marginal group of voters that may or may not be motivated to vote. The suc– cessful party is the one that can capture those swing votes. And he argues that the adversarial relationship created by television ads and the like may be a boon, giving marginal voters more information with which to make up their minds. "Negative campaigning is nothing new, and it works," Pfau says. "But negative ads should bring in more issues for discus– sion, not resort to attacks on personal integrity and character." As the media have grown, so has the number of special inter– est groups lobbying politicians to promote their own agendas. Experts explain that more special interest groups with opposing ideas often means more dissatisfaction with candidates. No mat– ter what decision a politician makes, it's bound to go against the interests of one group or another. "We're inundated with mail from every special interest group you can imagine," says Schilling. Smith adds, "It's harder for politicians to show the public any dramatic reforms today, because special interest groups pick them apart."

'Wb.a..,t;, ,t;,b,~ --~e>p1~ 'Wa..:ai,t;,

While there are many opinions about whether voter anger is truly at unprecedented levels or simply reflecting political cycles, all sides agree that there is one cure for voter disgruntle– ment: taking a stand and delivering results. "People always want to know what you stand for, and it makes them mad when you say one thing and vote another," Schilling says. "Voters are looking for politicians who will stand up for what they believe in." While she may not agree with her Republican counterpart's ideology, Molly Lamb agrees with Schilling's assessment of what is needed to curb voter frustration and anger. "People appreciate leaders who have a vision, and they don't even have to agree with that vision," she says. "If the consistency or foundation of that vision is lost, that's when people become uneasy." But achieving a vision and taking a stand may not be enough if the issues don't capture the public's attention. Although the Republicans are beginning to make good on their Contract With America - a IO-point plan that includes a balanced– budget amendment, a middle-class tax cut, higher defense spending and term limits for legislators - issues such as wel– fare reform and health care, named as the top two concerns of the public in a recent Wall St. Journal/NBC News poll, may prove much more difficult to tackle. If that happens, trust may still be hard to find. "Our founding fathers set up a very fragmented government, one in which it's very hard to get any major public policy changes through," Drinan says. "The lack of trust makes it more difficult to develop these policies, and when they don't appear, it leads to even more distrust." Whether or not distrust and resentment of politicians will run rampant in the coming years is only a matter of conjecture. What is clear is that most political scientists believe it is too soon to bemoan the destruction of our political system. This is, after all, politics, and anything can happen.

~~a..1ig;:aim.~:ai,t;, e>:r :a::>~a..1ig;:aim.~:ai,t;,?

It's too soon to tell whether people are any more turned off to politics now than they have been historically. Norton and Pfau note that some political scientists are proposing that the 1994 election represents a dealignment, an idea that suggests people will increasingly refuse to identify with either major political party. Such theorists claim that the deconstruction of the Democratic and Republican parties, and the rise of a new third party, will result.

:I.& I us D

N E

M A G A Z