Should America try a multi-party political system?

What’s Wrong with the America’s Electoral Process?
LACK OF CHOICE
Every election Americans get two choices at the polls. Red or Blue. Democrat or Republican. Conservative or Liberal. Us or Them. We are one of the few “democracies” who have come to the conclusion that too many parties, too many candidates, quite literally too many idea are WAY too difficult to handle. The result has been obvious. Instead of having any sort of choice at the polls, Americans choose between two virtually identical candidates. Moderate-Left. Moderate-Right. The most frightening aspect of this ridiculous (dichotomy?) is that the result has been to alienate many groups of people who have so much to lose (and, in a more positive world, so much to gain). No one gives a shit. No cares about what’s going on in the world around them. Many people choose not even to vote. Granted, there are MANY reasons that this has occurred (one day I’ll approach some of these) including the poor quality of information about the world and nation around us, a general self-centered way of life we’ve created for ourselves, technology which has created virtual communities at the expense of real communities, and, the one most relevant to this here rant: total apathy based on the assumption that who cares who gets elected, nothing will change. All the candidates are the same.
What if we decided, the whole country, that this two party system we’ve grown up with, we’ve grown to accept, needs to change? What if we could change our country to a multi-
party system? What if we could join parties that were focused on specific issues?
What I’ve gleaned from the country around me is that most people aren’t as disinterested as the low voter turnout would suggest. People are just disinterested in politics and politicians who are so busy trying to please everyone that no one is happy. The truth of the matter, most people are fiercely passionate about issues. People are fiercely passionate about a handful of issues affecting their lives directly. I care greatly about the strength of the American economy on the world stage. I care greatly about maintaining (and fixing) the United States’ role as peace maker around the world. I care greatly about creating a highly educated populace through quality public education readily available to everyone. If you speak with many people about the issues that matter to them, you’d hear everything from education to economics to the “War on Terror” to national security to saving hungry children in Asia and Africa to gay marriage to abortion rights (or lack-there-of).
How would these people respond if politicians were divided into smaller camps that cared about certain issues? Let’s take a look at the current presidential candidates and see how the election would look in this new America. John Edwards would be leading the “Roosevelt Democrats” or, to take a page from German democracy, the “Christian Democrats,” focusing their energy on the needs of middle class America. Americans who are more focused on health-care, higher wages, and education. This group would include much of the Democratic strength still remaining in the Midwest and South. Clinton and Biden would be fighting it out for the nomination of the “Moderate Democrats.” Giuliani and McCain would be the power names among the security minded, fiscally responsible version of the Republicans. Newt Gingrich and Fred Thompson would be crusading for the “Reagan Republicans.” And then there would be other smaller parties focused on more specific issues. The Evangelicals would back a party focusing on a Pro-Life / Anti-Gay agenda. Think Al Gore and the Environmentalists, Kucinich and Howard Dean with the Anti-War Party. There would be a legitimate place for the Green Party, the Libertarian Party, and every other group of people who wanted their opinions not only heard, but acted upon.
How would this work? Well, we’d have to change some major aspects of our current system. Congress would have to be chosen proportionally based on national votes. No more 5 representatives from this state and 26 from that state. I understand the idea of the Confederacy, but shouldn’t the National Government have the interest of the National Government in mind? Not the interests of the corn farmers of Iowa or the technology industry of Silicon Valley? I am certainly not suggesting we take away rights from the States. The relationship between the states and the federal government would hardly change (except a likely side-effect of less reason for pork). The greatest change, at least in my mind, would be that NO PARTY WOULD HOLD A MAJORITY! Congressmen and women would be forced to compromise based on the core wishes of their constituents. One day John Edwards and Hillary Clinton would compromise on health-care proposals, because health-care is a key issue for each party. The next day Giuliani and Biden would agree on foreign policy initiatives. Additionally, elections would no longer have to be a huge rush for the middle. If an issue is important to a party, they would stand by. This will force some to turn away from their party, but it will encourage others to get into the game of politics in the first place because their voice is heard.
Isn’t that the first lesson in Democracy 101? Isn’t that what our elementary school teachers tried to teach us about why America broke away from England in the first place? George Washington and Thomas Jefferson wanted their voices heard. That’s what Democracy is all about. That’s what the American dream is all about. The current system doesn’t allow this.
LET THE PEOPLE BE HEARD!