“The world of American Politics is populated with individuals that rely on the ignorance of the masses to maintain their seats of power.”

It’s been well over twenty years since a fellow traveler working a local campaign said that to me. He wasn’t a political genius – just a disgruntled pollster on his fifth or sixth round of scotch, trying to drown his sorrows over a recent loss.

I’ve remembered the statement all these years, but rarely dust it off. In spite of the fact that I’m generally a cynic, that one is just a bit more cynical than I usually am. Right now it comes to mind not for its cynicism, but for its truth.

While many warn of the negative implications(2) of the Citizens United Supreme Court ruling, and some offer potential responses to it, there is very little talk about truly practical solutions. Pointing out that ruling is misguided, or suggesting legislative remedies either do nothing, or leave openings for future similar rulings.

At this point no matter which side one is on with this issue, it can be assumed that everyone speaking out on this ruling is relying on the veracity of that statement given to me by a not-so-sober pollster. Either one is out there crying to protect the masses from the evil corporations, or rejoicing at the lifting of previous restrictions in campaign advertising. If there is a middle ground where people are demanding that the public be offered more education on the political process, they are being drowned out.

Now more than at any other time in our history, information is currency, and we are awash in it. We are bombarded with it from the moment we wake, until we drift off to sleep. It is impossible to avoid it. That is the crux of the argument for both sides, one claiming that those with the most money will be able to drown out the rest, and the other claiming that the people are entitled to information regardless of the timing or source. The irony is that both are right.

Instead of crying foul or rejoicing in a hollow victory, there should be a general outcry for increased voter education. Losing an election because the masses were influenced by the loudest voices or winning simply because one’s message dominated the airwaves are equal. The first is an obvious loss, but the second is not real victory either. When voters realize that they were bought with lies or distortions or simply a passing fad, the “winner” loses their support in the long-run. Ignorance of the masses can win the day, but rarely earns long-standing loyalty – sooner or later the masses figure out the truth.

As it stands right now, voters often don’t know what they are voting for. Campaign managers rely on this. I’ve spent scores of campaigns working at the polls, and watching voters that didn’t know what the job descriptions were for the local row offices they were electing officials to fill. I learned to hate the little button that lets voters choose a straight ticket. The one thing I loved was answering questions – if someone bothered to ask me about who was on the ballot, or about the offices up for grabs, I knew that at least that person wanted to attempt to make an educated choice.

When I worked to promote voter registration, I would regularly tell people that they should sit down and think about what they wanted their elected officials to do for them before casting their ballots. They should pay attention to the advertisements, but not assume that they were truthful. Finally, if they were still in doubt, I said that they should stop and talk to the pollsters on the way in to the polling place – all of them, not just the ones associated with their chosen party. A few times I actually ended up being questioned at the polls by voters I’d recruited, and those times are easily some of the best memories I have.

The Citizens United ruling is an opportunity. There has been a great deal of rhetoric about change over the past couple years, and now we’ve been presented with a chance to prove whether or not real change is in the wind. Will we roll over and let corporations dictate what voters do at the polls simply by spending money? Or will we take this opportunity to reach out to the masses and drag them out of the ignorance that so many political operatives rely?