Russert’s passing affects election

In June, Americans received sad news. Tim Russert, who was host of NBC’s “Meet the Press” for 17 years, had passed away.

As the calendar slowly creeps toward November, I realize more and more how different the coverage of this election will be without Russert.

I don’t think any of us truly realized back in June how big of an effect Russert’s passing would have on the 2008 election. Now, however, I think we’re starting to see some major differences between this election and elections in previous years.

The first election I can remember clearly was in 1992. Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush and Ross Perot were vying for the White House. Russert had been hosting “Meet the Press” for less than a year before the 1992 campaigns began. My father was a weekly viewer of “Meet the Press,” so I was exposed to the show from a very young age.

At the age of seven, I didn’t really understand most of what was going on with the 1992 election. However, I did understand one thing: if the man on the TV show my dad watched asked a question, it would be answered—even if it meant being asked multiple times.

Over the years, I began to understand the topics being discussed by Russert and the nation’s politicians. I can’t really say that I learned much about politics from my high school education—“Meet the Press” was the major source of my political education.

In the three presidential elections since 1992, I have faithfully watched “Meet the Press.” Even before I had the chance to make my opinion heard in the 2004 election, I thought it was important as a citizen to keep up on what was going on in Washington.

I genuinely trusted “Meet the Press” to be fair, honest and, most importantly, tough on the candidates. No other interview came close to being as difficult as one with Tim Russert.

So what’s going on this year? I have struggled during this election season to find an interviewer who can make the candidates squirm as much as Russert did. I have struggled to find a TV program that can answer all my questions the way Russert did.

While I have made a concrete decision about who I’ll vote for in November, this year I had to do my own research. Instead of relying on tough interviews to learn the candidates’ plans and stances on the issues, I’ve had to really go out and search to find the answers.

Even the media coverage of the election isn’t the same. Try as they might, Katie Couric, Tom Brokaw and Charlie Gibson still haven’t done half the job Russert would have—especially in an election with so many issues at stake.

And who’s going to be there on election night with the dry erase board to explain the electoral vote process to us. I don’t think many Americans would have understood the last two elections without Russert there to explain the Electoral College to us.

Last weekend I found myself thinking that I would tune in to “Meet the Press” to get Russert’s take on the election. Then I remembered that I couldn’t. A feeling of sadness swept over me as a realized that electing the president would never be the same again.

I’m sorry I didn’t say this sooner, Mr. Russert. You will be greatly missed.