I agree that too much outside money is part of the problem. But, as another writer notes, overthrowing Citizens United is the only solution to too much money. And yes, our “single party system” does not help, but it is difficult to imagine that the Republicans go back to Minneapolis with President Donald Trump in the White House.
But blame our caucus system makes no sense for me. Some writers have suggested that the Caucus system was “excluding”, but I have frequented the Caucus since 1968, first as a student, then as a dad who works and now as retired, and nobody ever refused me. A writer suggested that online caucus would be better. Better for millennials perhaps, but not for the elderly. And this suggestion ignores the true beauty of the caucus: to meet your neighbors, old and new, and have a chance to understand their opinions – even if it consumes a little of your precious time.
Some writers suggest that the real problem is that the caucus are dominated by the radicals and the extremists, and a writer even unearthed an accusation of Joseph McCarthy of “travel companions”. (Really?) I suspect that the real tacit beef is that some of the people of the caucus do not resemble us. Or dress different, or have difficult accents. And of course, it’s stupid when people ask me what my pronouns are. But I think that is called political commitment – which we need more, no less.
Anti -chagal writers want to put the reins of the government back into “real” minneapolitans – those who do not attend the caucus? Guess what they don’t do with any other? The majority do not vote in the primaries. And many people who vote do not understand how the choice works. Of course, our caucus system could be improved, but the elimination of the caucus will not improve commitment, it will reduce real commitment and give even more power to those who have obscene amounts of the campaign.