Government's intimidating nature detracts from democracy

The environment of government is intimidating to citizens. Although America, arguably, has a strong, cemented structure, it's this rigidness that can be disconcerting to curious laypeople whom otherwise might like to be more politically active. Two years of being the editor of a college newspaper and a myriad of public affairs reporting experiences from a slew of newspapers and television stations has made this abundantly clear to me.

When I am assigned a new town government to cover, it is not easy to get started. The first thing I do is try to buddy up with the last reporter to get my bearings. Towering court houses and stuffy town halls full of men in suits are not exactly a fresh-baked-pie atmosphere for us non-elected folk.

If there is no other reporter to help me, I am alone. I drift through the empty halls of the public buildings where I can hear my heels click with every step until I stumble across a clerk. Clerks are angels sent from heaven with public records and the knowings of everyone and everything. She — as the clerk is, in my experience, always a she — is friendly, but skeptical of new observers.

I feel that my experiences of being forced to attend many public meetings and digging through many public documents have taught me a lot about the structure of government and its environment. Most people do not have this experience. They do not know where to get an agenda, what a resolution is, when they are allowed to speak and ask questions, etc. This is intimidating for outsiders. This is supposed to be the "people's" government, yet, through both apathy and a lack of understanding and education, most people can't find their way through a court house — or know that they are allowed to be there. This is sad.

I feel that American government has a strong structure. This strong structure does lead to delays in policy passing, but at the local level we can be directly involved in how policy, laws, regulations are made. I think people do not take advantage of this because of the unwelcoming environment that comes with the intimidating hierarchy and lack of outreach on the part of our government to solicit views from constituents — whom they are supposed to represent.
Government, of course, is not solely to blame. Apathy about government is overwhelming in the United States. This is not the 1970s when students would protest on malls across the nation. Rarely do we see any uprising at Maine's statehouse or at the local level. CSPAN's ratings don't compare to those of MTV's. But what happens behind the doors in Washington, D.C., and even in Town Hall chambers affects each citizen every day of his or her life. Taxes, medical care, public transit, where you can build a house — all the things that impact citizens seem foreign to them.

When a new reporter comes in and wants to become my Student Government beat reporter I give them a schpeel. "It isn't fun. It's a lot of hard work and many boring meetings — but, as you work on it, it will become the most interesting, inflammatory subject ..." etcetera. But each one of them is always terrified to sit through a meeting. The structure of most governmental meetings is that all the elected officials sit at one table and are observed by the media and citizens who have opinions they wish to be shared. These people too are usually shaking. They are unsure when to speak, what they can and can not say and where to sit. This may seem arbitrary, but when citizens do not know how to partake in a democracy, except to get their information second-hand and to vote every four years, this is not effective. I blame the hostile environment of government.