Conventions need an overhaul

By Debbie Irmen (Contact) | The Daily Journal

Published Thursday, March 27, 2008

As we come into the political convention season, I recall watching the 2004 Democratic convention and found it both interesting and exasperating — and entirely unnecessary.

It was interesting because of the passion some speakers expressed during their addresses, as well as in the equally passionate response from the audience. Of course, what the cameras didn’t show were the people looking bored or nodding off.

I've attended conventions — not a political one — but my guess is one convention is pretty much like another — there are long stretches of inactivity, followed by stretches of high activity.

By the time the speakers hit the podium, the audience is ready to cheer for anything or anyone who will relieve the boredom.

I loved seeing the crazy outfits delegates wore and it brought a smile to my face. Crazy outfits abound at the convention. Why? I don't get how dressing goofy translates to the serious business of picking a presidential candidate, a platform or other convention business.

What exasperated me was watching all the hoopla and doing the math. It cost $103 million for the Democratic convention and not to be outdone, probably about the same for the GOP event.

Both the Democratic and Republican conventions cost taxpayers millions of dollars — for what purpose?

To pick a political candidate, my husband said.

We have known the Republican candidate for a few weeks now. As the primaries passed, and the candidates dropped like flies, McCain was the only one with the creditability to continue.

While the Democratic candidate remains up in the air, I doubt we need to hold a convention to determine who to put on the ballot in November.

For many years, it was probably necessary to hold a convention to pick a candidate, but not in this day and age and it’s time to reconsider the whole process.

So, there must be another reason to spend so much of our money — taxpayers contribute to the primaries, the caucuses, the conventions and the elections — but the other reason continues to elude me.

What I do know about attending conventions is they sure fire a person up. Excitement levels are at an all-time high following one of these events.

Still, must the political parties spend so much of our money generating excitement among voters? If they are trying to excite voters enough to visit the polls, perhaps they ought to wait until the week before the election, because another thing I know from attending conventions is the high wears off pretty quickly.

I can’t help but ask why the money spent on political conventions isn’t channeled to more worthy causes: housing the poor, feeding the hungry, education, health care, jobs, to name a few.

I can only imagine the boost these programs would have if they had received several million dollars for helping people.

I still wonder, four years later, why the parties will waste money so, and further, blatantly publicize it. And why we were watching it.

My husband is rather philosophical about the whole process — If he’s paying for it, he’s going to watch it.

Good point.

Still, the waste is shameful and perhaps it's time to rethink how presidential candidates accept the nomination of their party.

Debbie Irmen’s column runs Thursdays.