Non-Representative Democracy

Last night, I filmed a debate between two surrogates of Obama and McCain. The showdown was hosted by the Philadelphia Architectural Committee, and the subject was how the presidential candidates would treat urban areas during their prospective terms.

It's an extremely relevant topic, but also an extremely dry one. Most infrastructure issues, I learned, involve complex negotiations over federal funding, allocation, and pork-barrel lobbying. It's not as if someone says, "We need a railroad here," and the railroad will soon be. Rather, the idea passes through dozens of committees and revisions. By the time it emerges, it's usually voted down. And while I would love someone to say, "We need a national rail system that's affordable and functional," projects like that are generally viewed as money holes by the current administration and face tidal waves of opposition, especially given the currently financial state of our country. Yet, I can't help but think, if we have enough money to bail out banks, why can't we update our country's crumbling infrastructure?

Furthermore, the debate was attended almost exclusively by rich, white UPenn students. The debate focused on mass transit and infrastructure, issues that affect those who are bound to the city for life and don't make a lot of money. In a minority-majority city, there were two African-Americans in the attendance, and one was serving drinks.

This seems to send a pretty clear image of our country's political climate. It's no secret that white males still have almost all the power in the country, but it's so disheartening to see that even the democratic tradition of debate is still restricted to members of one race. Those in attendance were likely to never be affected by the issues presented: most will move to the suburbs, and I cannot imagine that any of them will be forced to rely on public transportation as their only means to get around the city. Yet those who are forced to rely and those who are deeply affected by the issues were not in attendance. It's virtually maddening.

When I went to argue my case before SEPTA last year during the possible budget collapse, I was one of the few white people in the audience, and that made sense to me; I'm usually one of the few white people on the subway. The audience reflected the ridership, and the community that was affected. But yesterday, there was no sort of representation like that. Instead, we all chatted over white wine and catered edibles. It was as if we were putting on a show for ourselves to show that we were concerned public citizens who cared about the well-being of the poor riff-raff beneath, and it made me vaguely ill.

Something is rotten in Denmark when those who are the most affected are not even invited to the table.