Disclaimer: This post will focus on the current state of America’s political climate. When writing about politics, I think it’s important to disclose my political leaning, at least at a high level. To this end, I’m a liberal and plan on voting for a Democrat in the upcoming election.

If you consider the office of the President it is, amongst many things, a position of power within the United States and, by extension, the world. There have been 10 election cycles over my lifetime. I can only truly remember 4 of them but because I grew up during the others they were always present in my education.

To a certain degree it makes sense that the “same names” would reappear throughout American politics. Mobilizing a majority within populations ranging from 246.8 million in 1989 to 333.3 million in 2022 requires significant resources. I suspect that the network of families, combined with the financial resources, and the experience make the chances of political success higher than your average politician.

I continue to ask myself if there is something fundamentally wrong with this pattern that we should seek to avoid. Consider these facts identified by Bryan Cranston in Family ties: why political dynasties rule in America’s democracy.

1. “almost half of the elected representatives to the first US Congress (1789-1991) served alongside a blood relative”
2. “almost 400 parent-child duos and more than 190 pairs of siblings have served in Congress.”
3. “More than 700 families have had two or more members in Congress.”
4. “…my research has thus far identified 167 families with members elected to public office for at least three consecutive generations. Twenty-two families have had at least four consecutive generations elected to public office, while four families – Bachuber-Doyle, Cocke, Lee and Washburn – have had at least five generations.”

One thing that Cranston attributes this to is name recognition. Name recognition allows voters to stick with what they know. Another thing that I found interesting while digging into this was the fact that in total 15 Vice Presidents have gone on to become President.

There’s definitely no easy answer to solving for the problem and it’s not to say that candidates with household names are unqualified. But the sameness of the candidates leaves me feeling disengaged.

One idea I think worth entertaining is the idea of publicly funded elections. While this wouldn’t address the marketing advantage of household names directly, it would ensure that even lesser-known candidates have a fighting chance. In today’s climate, the household names attract the donors and are the often funded well enough to ensure a certain level of success regardless of merit.