By Matt Bisanz

Over the last four weeks leading up to this year’s election, we have witnessed many things. We have observed the continuing Foley sex scandal, the Kerry education scandal and the resignation of convicted congressional representative Ney. Each of these stories has been exploited in the media as an indicator of which party will prevail in the election. The question I have is: Why should any of these scandals affect politicians not involved in the scandal.

While it may make sense that the Republicans who helped cover up the Foley scandal should be hurt in the elections, it makes no sense that any Democrat other than John Kerry should be hurt by his comments on Iraq. While Kerry may feel on some Freudian level that a lack of education leads to one’s entry into the military, the real question is: how has the Democratic Party on a whole voted on education laws? Even more importantly, how has my local representative voted on education laws?

It may be nice to know that representative Ney waited seven weeks after his conviction to resign from Congress to collect the extra pay due him, but how many “fact finding” missions did my local congressman take on my taxpaying dime last year?

However, that seems to be the problem these days in Washington. The actions of one individual are magnified to be indicative of the party as a whole, even though the rest of the party may vehemently oppose them.

Part of the problem can be traced to the media. For better or for worse, most people get their news from national-style sources. Be it CNN & Fox News on television or the Washington Post and The New York Times online and in print, very little news is produced solely for local consumption. Yes, there may be local sources like Newsday or the local nightly news, but compared to the big nationals their impact is miniscule. Since there is a limited space, it makes sense to take the most sensational story in the nation and apply it to the entire national population. The downside though is that John Q. Public thinks that all Republicans are child-predators and that all Democrats look down on the military.

Another part of the blame can be placed on the politicians themselves. When George Bush signs a bill giving money to some town in Nebraska for a corn museum, the congressional representative from that district of Nebraska will make certain to take credit for that money, even if he had nothing to do with it. To that same extent, when a politico takes a fall, everyone associated with that politico takes a fall.

The final part of the blame can be placed on society as a whole. If you are a Democrat, all Republicans are evil and out to destroy the world. Regardless of the actions of an individual Republican, they are lumped together as the “evil opposition” and take on all the worst traits any Republican has ever shown. If it should ever be reveled that some Republican mayor in Idaho is a cannibal, the next time a picture of President Bush is shown on television, someone will bring up his “thirst for flesh.” Really, it is a problem of commonality. The only thing linking all Democrats in the House is that they are Democrats. Society therefore perceives the actions of one as representing the actions of all.

This broad perception based voting hinders both sides. It’s why a Republican candidate for town council in Arizona and a Democratic candidate for the Board of Education for Manhattan, Kansas lost their races. When it is perceived that all Republicans are corrupt child-predators and all Democrats are corrupt army-haters, the democratic process fails. It is unfortunate that few can separate the individual from his or her party.