If it is true that democracy is safeguarded within the representative system, last week democracy was deceived in Massachusetts when the senate voted to end the Clean Election Law, thus clearing the way for the controversial piece of legislation to be definitely annulled in the state.

Now the law that was approved as a budget amendment will be sent for review to governor Mitt Romney who, all assume, will back up the senate’s resolution.

The senator’s vote, both in shape and content, was politically and morally a shameful and transparent example of the poor representation the million voters that approved the law in 1998 have in the senate.

The financial crisis suffered now by the state provided the senators with the perfect excuse to give the final blow to the law. Its opponents alleged that with the state’s economy bordering collapse it was not possible to finance legislation that offers tax payers money to finance the political campaigns of candidates that promise to limit their expenses and the contributions for this purpose.

Actually, our senators are not guarding the contributor’s pockets. In the long run the annulment of this law will be more expensive for the voters than the cost of its implementation. The following two examples are enough to show it: Thanks to the persuasion exerted over some senators the millionaire producers of the canine circuits are assisted with a 5 million dollar subsidy and corporations like Fidelity every year obtain a tax break that surpasses $254 millions.

And all this money comes from the taxpayer’s pockets.

With a senate controlled by the Republicans the Clean Election Law never had a chance to demonstrate its efficiency. But the Republicans were not the only ones to kill the law. Many Democrats helped them do it. Unfortunately, we’ll never know which ones because the vote was silent, which allowed the senators to hide their opposition or support to the law.

Therefore, the senators betrayed the popular mandate in the worst possible way without showing the face, as cowards do. There must be a reason for it. One with clean hands is not afraid to show them.

With the dismantling of the Clean Elections Law democracy loses and the voters that approved the law in 1998, attempting to end the powerful influence of the large corporations who buy political parties and candidates through campaign financing, lose as well.

The Clean Elections Law has worked efficiently in Arizona and Maine. Since this new legislation started to be applied in those states the participation of new candidates in the political race has increased.

Likewise, it could have worked in Massachusetts. Unfortunately, our legislators are not interested on it. The reason is that they are taking care of their jobs. In case you did not know it, in the last elections 69 percent of the legislators didn’t have opponents competing for their positions.

No one expects to coincide with each one of the decisions taken by the senators but in matters of such consequence the voters at least expect a profound debate and an open vote in both chambers not a legislative process as poor and unscrupulous as the one we observed last week.