Politics, Principles, and the All-Powerful Party
The concern is less which party is worse, but which party will get off the dysfunctional merry-go-round first and who will engage to get them off of it.
Scott Howard studies political science and journalism at the University of Florida.
As I type this, great deliberation is going on in Washington DC. Principled men, elected by their constituents, are debating the great ideas of our time. They take a final vote when the debate ends, and a cross-party coalition of principled men will prevail. The victors will be gracious in their victory, the defeated humble in their loss, and the world will continue to go round.
At least, that’s the dream.
Alas, this is not Mr. Smith’s Washington. Such impassioned pleas to Congress happen less and less, and when they do the person giving the plea tends to be talking to an empty Congress. The actual situation in Congress tends to be people on one side of the political aisle lobbing insults and accusations at those on the other side of the aisle.
No actual discussion takes place, and Congress fails to legislate on even the simplest matters. This is especially evident when Congress tries to pass its annual appropriations bills. What should be a routine 12 bills tends to get ignored, and the end-result is almost always a massive omnibus package that has a funny habit of increasing spending of everything Congress wants to do, with no regard for fiscal sanity. Congressmen then go home to their districts, where they bravely tell their constituents that, if re-elected, they will fight for the same issues they said they’d fight for the last time they were elected.
It’s a vicious cycle.
The blame for this issue lies, first and foremost, with the state of political parties in the US today. Political parties are not necessarily a bad thing; the coalitions they build and the centralized power they can throw behind ideas are sometimes useful. However, the party system of the US today has decayed to the point of being counterproductive to good legislating.
In years past, when a political party outlived its usefulness the party died, being replaced by a new organization with a fresh commitment to ideas and to people. Today, however, that is not the case. The two major parties in the US today, the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, have each existed since before the Civil War. Their roots run deep, down from the national stage to state and even local politics. Almost every major politician today comes from one of these two parties, and every President since Abraham Lincoln has belonged to one of these two organizations.
This would not be so bad if the parties actually believed in the principles they say they believe in. A close look at each party, however, will show that this is not the case.
On the Republican side, the stated principles are those of limited government and free-market capitalism. The operational heads of the party, however, paint a different picture. In the House we have Kevin McCarthy, a man whose claim to power comes from being in party leadership for over a decade. In the Senate, Mitch McConnell has worked for decades to funnel money into his home state of Kentucky, and has been an accomplice in every budget bill passed since he took power. And, of course, we have Donald Trump, living in political exile but still very much pulling the levers of the Republican Party, a man whose blatant disregard for free-market capitalism was only made worse by his moniker as the “King of Debt”. Indeed, these are the great conservative champions of our day.
In the Democratic Party the situation is similar. The supposed platform is one of aggressive progressivism in the style of socially-democratic Scandinavia. However, the politicians in power in Congress tell a different story. Both Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi are dyed-in-the-wool establishment politicians, having served for decades each. They worked their way up the party ladder, and have been faithful representatives of the party itself.
While ostensibly counter to each other, these two parties have, in practice, more in common than meets the eye. The lock these parties have on elections, in particular congressional elections, is strong. The bills that come out of Congress when each party is in power are, essentially, the same, which shows that politicians care less about the principles they espouse and more about the petty politics of it all.
The parties are vicious in their shallow attacks on each other, but fail to support and defend the positions they themselves claim when it becomes convenient. Republican support of Donald Trump was a prime example of this. The man was not conservative, and yet the party marches in lockstep behind him.
We the people are also to blame. The lack of civic virtue in society today is alarming, but it should not be surprising. Since WWII, participation in the political sphere has steadily declined, and with it so to have principled positions in our political operatives. We have given up on critical analysis of what happens in Washington, and with that retreat the rampant partisanship of today’s America has gleefully advanced.
So long as we continue to just take what the parties and politicians say at face value, the principles that this nation was founded on and that we should hold so dear will continue to be forgotten.
The situation is dire. But there are solutions. The parties can be changed from within, if principled men stand up and fight for what they believe in. The old saying “you either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain” rings true, but if enough politicians choose to die as heroes, they may very well become martyrs.
Most importantly, though, we need to step up. If every one of us takes the time to study the ideas we are debating, look at our politicians, and hold their feet to the fire, then the problems listed above will cease to be as prominent as they are. We must act quickly and decisively, though. The actions we take today may determine the principles of tomorrow.
What if the problem isn’t the people on the other side of the aisle? What if the two-party system itself is creating a vicious cycle, making government less effective and driving us apart? The current ruling two-party duopoly is so ingrained in our system that we take it as a given but there is nothing in our Constitution concerning political parties. We have allowed the two ruling parties to institutionalize themselves in our political and governing systems not withstanding that legally political parties are not government but private associations. They therefore are not required to be open minded but can discriminate based on their own preferences. Along with being able to run the parties independently Congressional membership has the privilege of self-determining salaries, pensions, travel, and other TAXPAYER FUNDED perks while exempting themselves from certain federal laws, i.e. the Freedom of Information Act, safety and health investigatory subpoenas, protections against retaliation for whistleblowers, etc. Taxpayers are also asked to pay for these private clubs primary elections and campaign finance laws are rigged in their favor, just to name a few of the advantages they are afforded.
We have come to the point where one side of the aisle wants you to believe that they can declassify secret documents simply by thinking it and the other side of the aisle wants you to believe that you can change genders simply by thinking it. I believe America can survive the demagogues it’s the gullible audience that will kill democracy because democracy has no solution for how to fix itself when a large enough portion of the populace goes sour.
Everywhere in American life we demand numerous choices except in politics where we blindly give power to private entities to decide laws and determine who will run to be our representative, governor or president. WHY?
Good article. But I’d suggest it’s a tad incomplete perhaps. I’d like to put this forth in the spirit of constructively helping you to think through the subject matter with the hopes of improving your conclusion and proposed solution.
Scott, you suggest that the solution is: “ The parties can be changed from within, if principled men stand up and fight for what they believe in.” But yet you admit earlier in the piece that part of the problem in Washington is that we have politicians who show up promising vaguely to “fight” for their constituents. And each election cycle, they claim they’ll fight harder. But without a clear idea of what that means, it’s nothing but an empty generality that does little to end the dysfunction and (depending on the politician) perhaps furthers it. So the solution can’t just involve the Ben Sasses and Liz Cheneys of this world to just rhetorically fight harder. So my question is this: how exactly should they be constructively “fighting” in a principled way that would accomplish what you suggest: changing the parties from within?