Voting as an indicator of democracy?

For decades the working stiff has looked to the Democratic Party for salvation and protection from the Republican Party. And, let’s face it, we do need protection from a party that has claimed the rich and famous as its constituents.

The Democrats, on the other hand, claim to represent the middle class, the working class, and the poor and, in effect, supposedly protect us from the excesses of the top 10 percent. How effective has their representation been?

As Karl Marx has stated, “The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing classes shall represent them in parliament.”

If Democrats represent the bottom 90 percent of the population, how do Republicans ever get to win elections? In this past “off year” election, the Republicans had sweeping electoral victories gaining control of the Senate as well as maintaining their control of the House of Representatives. What allowed that to happen?

Despite the Democrats control of the administration and the Senate, they have failed to improve the lives of the bottom 90 percent. In fact, for many, life has become more difficult.

The Democrats failed to put forth any programs that dealt with the real problems of ordinary people, like jobs, poverty, racism, immigration, the closing of abortion clinics, etc. Even where they have been active, like with minimum wage and health care issues, their response to the needs of the people has been inadequate.

For example, the Affordable Care Act offers people a better opportunity to purchase health insurance but still leaves millions of folks, including undocumented immigrants, without insurance. Also, Obamacare does not necessarily ensure that people will avoid medical bankruptcy due to chronic, long term medical expenses.

During negotiations and planning, Obama removed the single payer option from consideration despite the fact that it had overwhelming popular support. The single payer plan would remove the profit motive from health care and ensure that all citizens receive appropriate medical services during their lifetime. It would also reduce by millions of dollars the costs of administration of these programs which, instead, could be put to use for medical services.

Despite these potential benefits for the people, Senator Max Baucus, Democrat from Montana who chaired the Health Care Reform panel in 2008, had those who wanted to advocate for a single payer program at the negotiating table, arrested. They were clearly not welcome. Instead, the health care insurance companies were well represented and agreed to the Affordable Care Act. Would they agree to legislation that would cost them money or lower their profits?

Then we have the issue of the minimum wage which is currently $7.25 per hour, which is $290 per week and $15,080 per year. Many, if not most people earning minimum wages, must hold second jobs to help pay their bills. Many, if not most, also supplement their wages by receiving public assistance like food stamps. In other words, our tax dollars are made available to these exploited, underpaid people to allow the wealthy corporations to continue their exploitation.

Democrats to the rescue. President Obama puts forth his plan to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour or $404 per week and $21,008 per year. It’s nice to receive a raise but will this solve the problem? With the increase in salary, many people will no longer qualify for public assistance so that the end result will be that, not only will the quality of their lives not change, but may actually get worse.

Many people, especially the elderly who often need drugs to stay alive, pay exorbitant prices for these drugs. Yet, the Obama (Democratic) administration worked out a deal with the pharmaceutical industry to not negotiate for lower drug prices if the pharma agreed to deliver $80 billion in savings some time in the future. This is roughly the same deal that George W. Bush cut with the drug makers when he was legislating Medicare’s new coverage of drug purchases. It is the same bargain that Democrats in Congress universally condemned as wasteful and corrupt. The deal does not smell any better now that a Democratic president is embracing it.

These are three examples of how the Democrats appear to be working for working people, offering what appears to be progress but, in effect, maintaining the status quo and protecting the interests of the top 10 percent.

It is reported that as much as 60% of eligible voters did not turn out for this past election, most of them potential Democratic supporters. Are they merely apathetic or might they be discouraged knowing that it matters little in their lives whether a Democrat or Republican triumphs?

Fred Goldstein, in his article in Workers World points out, “tens of thousands of people are fighting against police killings and harassment as well as mass incarceration. The campaign to stop voter suppression is widespread. Millions of immigrants have been struggling since 2006 to get rights and ­legalization. Across the country low-wage workers have been demonstrating for a $15-an-hour minimum wage and the right to have a union. In September some 400,000 people demonstrated in New York City alone against climate change. Thousands are demonstrating against the Keystone pipeline and fracking by the oil company predators. Above all, millions are unemployed, underemployed or have dropped out of the work force, yet there was not a word during the campaign about a true jobs program to put them back to work at a living wage.”

These issues were ignored by both parties. Yet, we wonder why people are not voting. Why should they? Both parties represent the capitalist class and trying to fix the Democratic Party is a fools’ errand.

This is the first year that the income of the representatives in the House averaged over $1 million each. Some of the important Democratic Party congresspeople are among the 25 richest members in net worth, as of 2012. For example, Mark Warner of Virginia at $257 million; Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut at $103 million; Nancy Pelosi at $87 million; Dianne Feinstein at $68 million, Alan Grayson at $40 million, and so on.

And, yet, we still believe the myth that these millionaires will represent us.

We need a third party that truly represents us, the 90%.

Dave Alpert has masters degrees in social work, educational administration, and psychology. He spent his career working with troubled inner city adolescents.