Review: No Way to Pick a President by Jules Witcover

This review examines the book "No Way to Pick a President" by Jules Witcover. To begin with, the author is very qualified to write on this subject. He has been a competent journalist for over 50 years, covering national politics since the Eisenhower administration. He has written for New House Newspapers, L.A. Times, Washington Post, Washington Star, and the Baltimore Sun, among others. The author has also contributed to many national magazines, and written several books.

The specific problem that the author writes about, in his opinion, is the corruption of the U.S. presidential election process. He believes that, over the last fifty to seventy-five years, the politics involved with campaigning and the ways in which nominees present themselves have been altered severely. Soft money, hired guns, and the importance of appearance are just a few issues that the author feels have corrupted campaigns, and will continue to unless things are changed.

The basic causes that the author lists for the existence of these problems are the commercialization, and appeal, of television, and the expanding use of soft money in campaigning as a result of the expense of television ads and such. He claims that the advent of politics in television almost completely eliminated local interest in politics. Image became more important than information as the parties have relied more and more on sound bites and negative attacks, and less on content.

The author proposes several things that he feels should be done in order to solve this problem. He believes that special-interest groups and soft money have taken over campaigns, and has turned the partisan system into one big IOU. His solution is to prohibit candidates from raising any money for their campaign, which he says would separate the connection of money with power. He also believes that the people have to quit being so apathetic towards politics, and find out how the candidate stands on the issues, not just how he stomps his opponent. The author feels that television has screwed up the system, and the best way to fix it is to stop negative campaigning, and to stop the flow of money into a campaign, which gives them the opportunity to say whatever they want to on public airwaves. Though he puts forth many ideas on how to mend this broken political system, the author doubts that any reform will come soon, noting that presidents come and go with little change in the campaigning process itself, due to a lack of care among the voters.

There is an enormous tendency on the part of the author to be very wordy, use complex sentences continually and without need, and to ramble on without contributing anything essential or new to the subject. An example of this is: "Meanwhile, the 'mother's milk of politics' continues to flow in defiance of laws riddled with loopholes that are sought out and exploited by the armies of hired guns in both parties." Another mild example is: "Only by convincing political leaders in the fifty states that they must make a concerted effort to bring order out of the current chaos can we restore public comprehension of, and confidence in, the process [of selecting candidates]." The majority of the book is written in this way, making it very difficult to understand in some areas. The author writes in a chapter-by-chapter style of "the first page explains the problem, the next twenty pages give lengthy examples of this problem" throughout the whole book. Though it is wordy, he uses these many examples to persuade his readers to change their minds about it. The majority of the book is devoted to the facts behind the corruption in campaigning.

There are many questions that a perceptive reader should keep in mind while reading this book. How big of a role has television played in presidential campaigning? Why have the American people turned apathetic towards politics, and why did this apathy start? At what point do special-interest groups become politically powerful in campaigns?

Although I already agreed with the author about the problems in campaigning before I read this book, there are a few new thoughts that he talked about in detail that have convinced me even more of the corruption that lies beneath, including how it may have started. He gives ample evidence that the increase in popularity of television has lead to the creation of an apathetic nation and to the never-ending flow of soft money into the campaigns.