Throw the Bums Out! An End to Party Politics [UPDATED]
By Anita Finlay ("Ani") on August 5, 2009 at 6:30 PM in Bamboozling, Campaign promises, Congress (House & Senate), Obama's Broken Promises, Political Strategy
Mickey Edwards’ weekend editorial in the LA Times, The (political) party is over, states that
…“the parties once served a purpose, but they have degenerated into a system that discourages independent thought and undermines representative government” and “…loyalty to one’s political club often seems to trump objective decision-making.”
Amen. This is nothing new, however. Contrary to President Obama’s claims of being post partisan, his aggressive push of fealty to his “club” is just as bad as Republicans backing President Bush no matter what. Increasing numbers of voters registering as independents, voters holding tea parties and calling their party and individual representatives on the carpet is both a good and bad sign – it is a good in that voters are paying attention, fed up with being patronized and ignored. It is bad that they must take precious time away from work and family and get out a pitchfork to goad their representatives into remembering how to properly do their jobs in the first place.
Mr. Edwards cites the following example of party politics and groupthink:
Last month, when the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions became the first to vote out a healthcare reform bill, not a single Democrat thought questions about the proposal, which included a government-run plan, were sufficient to raise doubts about moving forward. Not one Republican thought the current state of American healthcare justified the proposed legislation.
If legislators decided how to vote by weighing the concerns of their constituents, looking to their own philosophies of government and evaluating proposals on their merits, one might assume that at least one or two Democrats would have balked, and perhaps a Republican or two would have voted to go forward. But we don’t live in that kind of political world.
(snip)
Granted, there are distinctions in political philosophy that draw people to one party or the other (a natural coalescing), but it is nonetheless clear that there is far less independent thinking going on than good governance would demand. (California’s two senators, incidentally, were among the worst: Barbara Boxer voted with her party 95.5% of the time; Dianne Feinstein, 94.2%.)
Mr. Edwards points out that we were appalled at President Bush’s use of signing statements. Now that President Obama is using them, there is nary a peep from the media or his virulent supporters. How is this acceptable?
Edwards states:
Loyalty to party undermines the very essence of representative government, which depends on entrusting members of one’s community to act in one’s stead as an evaluator of legislative policy.
What author Peter Shane labeled “Madison’s Nightmare” has come true: We live in a world of constant partisan warfare, a never-ending battle between “my club” and “your club,” undermining the belief that a citizen’s vote truly counts for something.
I did not elect my representatives to toe the party line. I expect them to be intelligent enough and courageous enough to do what is best for the people who put them in office, not to vote their coffers or personal interest.
As a lifelong Democrat, 2008 was obviously a rude awakening in many ways. I came to understand that labels mean far less than the individual carrying them. I vote the person now, not the party. I vote the issue, not groupthink. I registered as an independent because I am no longer comfortable blindly handing over my vote.
In conclusion, Edwards tells us:
Political theorist Bernard Crick wrote that “politics is how a free people govern themselves.” Strong political parties, on the other hand, are how a free people lose that ability. Parties choose which candidates can be on the November ballot, and do so in primaries and conventions that cater to the extremes. Parties reward fealty and discourage independence. In an earlier time, before the Internet, when it was hard to get information about candidates and they had to depend on party support for campaign funds and volunteers, political parties made sense; today, they are passe, black-and-white television, remnants of a time that has passed.
He makes a good point. Since President Obama is fond of using the internet to his advantage to get his message out, it is likewise heartening to know that educated citizens and citizen journalists are now leveling the playing field by getting their message out as well.
If our political parties are only capable of loyalty to themselves, disconnected from the needs of the average voter, it is time more of us grew our connection to each other. A commenter recently posted that Americans on opposite sides of the aisle have more in common than they realize. I agree. All they need do is look past the polarizing rhetoric their respective parties use to divide and conquer for their own selfish ends. If we can do that, we’ll be on to something.
What say you?
If you are noticing an uptick of independent voters, or “independent behavior” so to speak, I’d love to hear about it.
, the basis for the Best Motion Picture Nominee (Golden Globes) starring Brad Pitt.
, the novel by John Le Carre, a new motion picture starring Gary Oldman and Colin Firth.
by 
* (Included in the 
* 
.by David Fredosso who wrote 2008's 
- You'll have access to 18 million movies, TV shows, songs, magazines, and books, as well as ultra-fast Web browsing with Amazon Silk -- faster than iPad. Full e-mail and document access and a keyboard. Fire can transmit what is on your screen onto a connected TV or monitor without an accessory. It runs Flash (iPad doesn't). 
