The Northern Light

Hooray! It's an election year. For the next nine months we get to enjoy watching the fallout of our system: friendships destroyed by petty partisan bickering, families torn apart by random lines drawn in the sand and repetitive campaign ads that say the same exact thing regardless of the candidate they're pitching. And topping off this delectable political sundae is the cherry of knowing that you will probably end up feeling bad no matter who you vote for.

Unfortunately, because of our blindly accepted, two-party system, actually being proud of one's vote is rarely an option. Instead of being able to vote for a candidate who inspires us, our hand seems forced, and we vote against what we hate and not for what we want.

Having only two parties creates a false dichotomy, suggesting that there are only two sides to every issue. Every issue immediately falls into black or white, with all possible shades of grey nonexistent or ignored: either you hate women or kill babies. Either you support America or the terrorists. Either you want to totally privatize social security or keep it totally federalized.

Even scarier is when the two sides agree on something large portions of the population opposes. Suddenly, there is no one in power to speak for their interests. Current examples include the latest war in Iraq, the PATRIOT Act, NAFTA and a fiscally liberal policy. Perhaps those who support these issues are right to do so, but that doesn't change the fact that there should be some option at the ballot box for voters who disagree.

So, if there really are so many people who aren't represented, they should just run for office themselves, right? After all, if there really are so many of them, they'll win.

Regrettably, our society paints anyone who would dare run for public office without the endorsement of one of our two major parties as deviant political outcasts, either delusional idealists or self-interested limelight seekers. The public ostracizes them from the mainstream political forum with lame excuses like "stealing votes" and "no chance of winning." These days it seems like having anything other than an R or D on your voter registration card is worse than having a scarlet A on your chest.

It's a common story among independents that Hitler and Stalin could run for president as the Republican and Democratic nominees, and Jesus Christ could run under a third party, and people wouldn't vote for him because independent candidates don't have a chance of winning. Instead, the public would weigh the cons and decide who was less despicable between the two dictators.

In Alaska, we are lucky. Our tradition of independence and nonconformity gives us the occasional race with more than two viable candidates. In every gubernatorial race for the last 16 years (except the most recent one) has featured a three-way race, and back in the crazy boom-days of the '70s, write-in candidates and libertarians made regular strong showings. This year Andrew Halcro will run as an independent and looks to be a contender regardless of how the primaries turn out.

Not that our state is some kind of third-party haven. All of our legislators are Republicans or Democrats. This becomes increasingly problematic when you look at their platforms.

Both the Republican and Democratic parties in this state support drilling in ANWR. Regardless of whether we should drill, where are people who favor protecting the region supposed to turn?

It isn't that Democrats or Republicans are wrong in general or on any specific issue. People who think they are adequately represented by one of these parties should by all means vote for them. But, there are many times when two parties aren't enough to adequately represent the nuances and subtlety of the diverse political landscape. The commonly seen line with conservative on the right side and liberal on the left is woefully inadequate in describing the innumerable possibilities in the actual political spectrum.

According to polls, Democrats and Republicans only comprise about two-thirds of Americans. That means more than 70 million people in this country don't fit neatly into one of the cookie-cutter sets of beliefs.

People who are pro-choice but against gun-control, or pro-school vouchers and pro-environment, or any number of infinite combinations, are left in the lurch, forced to compromise their principles.

More choices and more voices is a very good thing, a very democratic thing, and should be applauded and striven for in every election. Ours is the only democratic process on Earth with less than five major parties. Regardless of their politics or sanity, thank goodness for the Ross Perots and Ralph Naders who expand our candidate selection and bring new ideas to the table. Here's to hoping the rumors of former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura running for president in 2008 are true, simply because a major third option is a step in the right direction of a more fair, expanded and representative government.

Article Tools