Maybe now the Democratic Party can empathize with the rest of us. As Republicans celebrate, as Democrats mourn the elections of 2002, third parties and independents shake our heads and say, "Same old, same old." For 140 years, the Republican and Democratic parties have dominated the American political landscape. Now, the Republicans have control of the White House and both houses of Congress. If they stick together for the next two years, the Republicans can run the tables, pass whatever legislation they please, hand out tax cuts regardless of how they effect the economy, invade whichever countries they deem expedient enemies and roll back environmental legislation to the early 1960s.

How does it feel, Democrats, to know that for at least the next two years, your ideas don't count? No one has to listen to a word you say. You're completely powerless. All because our Constitution allows for a winner-take-all electoral college, which ignored Al Gore's victory in the popular vote. But even Mr. Gore did not receive a popular majority. Ralph Nader and Pat Buchanan made sure of that. Oh Democrats, how you wish that Ralph had just heeded your pleas to drop out of the race and hand the Green vote to your candidate. How different might the world seem now with Al Gore as our sensationally popular president? Imagine your party riding his coattails to victory in both House and Senate. Imagine receiving a mandate from the American people to tax and spend all you like. Pour money into education and social programs without oversight or checks and balances.

The democrats, are not a bad party. But when they do their coercive best to beat down third party challengers, the differences between the donkeys and the elephants begin to fade. But fear not, I come not to bury the Democratic Party, nor to praise the Republicans. I have an idea I hope you can embrace along with all the rest of us standing on the sidelines.

Imagine if you will, a government that represents all the people, not just a contrived majority. How often have you felt yourself choosing between the lesser of two evils? Wouldn't it feel good to know that your vote at least put someone in position to challenge a trigger-happy president? Give pause to a tax-and-spend Congress? Debate the best forms of domestic and foreign policy?

OK. Quick quiz: When does 10 million equal zero?

In 1968, almost 10 million Americans exercised their right to vote but received zero representation in their government. They voted for George Wallace of the American Independent Party. While I disagree with most of what Mr. Wallace stood for, it distresses me to think that the 14 percent of Americans who voted for him were denied any part in a congressional forum to express and debate their dissenting ideas. Ross Perot received 19 percent of the vote in 1992 but his Reform Party likewise got cut out of government. Ralph Nader's Green Party was polling at 6 percent before the Democrats scared half his supporters into voting against Bush. Does the Green Party have six senators in Congress? No. Three? Not even one representative in either house of Congress.

Now imagine a world in which the 13 currently registered political parties in America all sent representatives to Congress based upon the percentage of voters who supported their ideas and their candidates.

There are many models for the kind of true representational government I'm suggesting but they all start with the idea that the make up of Congress should reflect all the ideologies supported by citizens in the proportion in which candidates espousing those ideologies received votes. Because so many people don't vote, the average candidate vying for a seat in Congress needs to attract a scant 19 percent of eligible voters to gain election. And why don't people vote? Because the major parties don't represent their views and because they don't believe their vote will have any impact.

But imagine that we conducted congressional elections in two stages. First would be the registration process. Everyone would have a chance to change or renew one's party affiliation. Each party would then be guaranteed a percentage of representation in Congress proportional to the number of voters registering for that party. So if the Green Party could register 20 percent of Oregon voters, they would automatically receive one seat in Oregon's five-person delegation to Congress. If their registrations fell below a certain threshold, they would not receive an automatic seat and those registrants would be free to vote for another party. On election day, candidates would run only against members of their own party. Twenty Green Party candidates could run against each other for the one guaranteed seat. Their leading vote-getter would be elected and an alternative voice would be heard in Congress.

So how about it, Oregonians? Would you like to turn the concept of one person, one vote into a reality? Would you like the issues to be debated continuously in a true-representation Congress or are you content to settle for the revolving door we call our current election process?

(Ron Bell lives in Coos Bay.)