MISSOURI WATCH: GUESS WHAT: CAMPAIGNS ARE FOR VOTERS

Along about this time every biennium I remind myself to repeat what all of us know but many are inclined to forget:

CAMPAIGNS ARE FOR VOTERS, NOT POLITICIANS!

Fulling recognizing that this reminder is rarely noticed, much less observed, I still feel it incumbent to mention this small, too often overlooked fact that stems from the hallowed Constitution of the United States. For within the text and amendments of this single document that has saved America from anarchy on more than one occasion, there can be found the provisions for holding elections, which -- and this may be shocking to some -- include no special rights or privileges for public office candidates that do not also exist for the rest of us.

Somehow, over the decades that have passed since this document was first written, there have evolved certain practices, now virtually encoded in statute books, granting extraordinary powers to a small group of citizens who have met the age and residency qualifications and with payment of a relatively modest sum of money have automatically made themselves legal candidates for public offices.

Depending on the work ethic, salesmanship and physical stamina of these designated candidates, a select few will emerge from various elections as powerful individuals who will shortly influence, for better or for worse, the lives of each and every one of us. Although there was a decided lack of these candidates a few decades ago, they now appear in such abundance that society has even had to organize still more political parties to accommodate the demand. Some have worried that if this proliferation continues at its present rate, our general election ballots will be as wide as they are long. The prospect is troubling, not because of the growth of the ballot size but because a larger field of candidates increases the prospect of even greater mistakes of judgment by voters.

The founding fathers envisioned elections as being rites of passage for both voters and their governments, creating a unique form of constitutional government that would replace the divine-right royalties and/or bureaucratic aristocracies that were then widespread in the rest of the civilized world. The concept worked splendidly, far better than most had imagined, and throughout much of the last century, we voters were able to maintain the powers and rights our founders had granted us.

It is almost possible to determine the exact date this system began its transformation but it occurred sometime between the two great world wars. The change seemed to be complete by the inauguration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1933, following the near-collapse of our governmental system not from overt mistakes but for the opposite reason: the seeming inability -- or at least the perception of this inability -- of our democracy to resolve the serious problems of its citizens.

With the system in something approaching inert ruins, there seemed to be no reasonable solution but for citizens to demand active leadership from the occupants of these offices, and so we began to see extraordinary efforts from all manner of new officeholders, with FDR merely one among many, both Democrats and Republicans, who stepped forward to volunteer. If these times were troubling, they were also historic, as the nation watched, with only a bare whisper of protest, as our president demanded, and received, from Congress extraordinary, often unconstitutional powers to correct the perception, if not the reality, of reality, of federal and state government in decay.

The age of the vigorous, ambitious and sometimes overbearing candidate emerged, amid little notice from a public that seemed relieved to be witness to aggressive leadership in both Washington and state capitals such as Jefferson City. History will never be able to record whether the old system would have succeeded or failed, and the decision on that is still out, for the second great war of our era came and went, and suddenly the challenges of the 1930s became the agenda of the late 1940s and 1950s.

By then the era of the candidate was well established, fortified by such leaders as FDR, our own Harry Truman, our old commanding general Dwight Eisenhower and then, the start of the second generation with such presidents as Jack Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon. A decade later we elected Ronald Reagan, who seemed to epitomize his predecessors, promising leadership that went much deeper and broader than even Roosevelt had hinted at.

There is one final, all-important lesson this electoral transformation has produced that is worth noting, again and again: despite vigorous, even inspired aggressive leadership, the essential success of our system of government depends in the final analysis on the energy of the governed, ordinary citizens like you and me. We should by now recognize that all the dynamic leaders our land can produce will not resolve America's tribulations without the consent and active participation of the governed.

During the campaigns in the weeks ahead, candidates for every important federal and state office will promise us uncounted visions, miraculous transformations and earth-shaking improvements -- gifts they cannot deliver without our support and help. If we believe their promises will benefit America and Missouri, we have an obligation to support them, but if we believe they will be harmful, even counterproductive, we have an equal responsibility to oppose them.

Above all, let none of us forget that these are our elections and we alone have the right to determine their outcome. neither let us fail to remind those who seek public office that they are working for us, not the other way around.

~Jack Stapleton of Kennett is the editor of Missouri News and Editorial Service.