The other day, in response to a Washington Post article about the Myth of the Middle, I wrote that without the moderates, our hyper-partisan political environment was going to kill the country.
We’ve hit gridlock, which is fine, except there are a number of issues that require action, and if nothing is done about them, the country’s in big trouble.
Obviously, I’m not the only person who sees this problem, as David Broder demonstrates in today’s WaPo:
It was not nostalgia or a desire for companionship that brought four former Senate leaders together in a meeting room on Capitol Hill on Tuesday morning, but rather a sense of alarm at the breakdown in civility and at the fierce partisanship that has infected Congress and blocked action on national priorities.
Politely but firmly, not wanting to criticize their successors in what styles itself a great deliberative body, the two Republicans and two Democrats who once tried to run the place warned that something has gone awry.
[snip]
Tom Daschle of South Dakota said, “Our goal is not to find common ground among the four of us on every single issue but to find those areas on which common ground can be found, and then see if we can become the catalyst for bringing that common ground to Congress.”
I wish them luck.
Unfortunately, Broder’s article has garnered very little attention — probably because those who stand to benefit most from this type of thinking haven’t the slightest interest in engaging in it. They’re all too busy slinging mud and getting even.
Interesting… I find it ironic that Tom Daschle would be one the “spokesman” for this group, almost as much as if I heard that Tom Delay was on a “bipartisan” anything.
Even with that, though, I suspect there are too many scores to settle inside the Beltway for this type of thing to take hold just yet. Although, it is probably the only way we are going to actually get anything done…
~EdT.
I find it ironic that Tom Daschle would be one the “spokesman” for this group, almost as much as if I heard that Tom Delay was on a “bipartisan” anything.
Yes, I was surprised by that too. OTOH, it indicates how far out of control things have really become.
Broder’s obsession with centrism is beyond ridiculous. The notion that moderates are the solution to political problems caused by a government run almost entirely by one party is a farce. Broder can’t separate the idea of moderate results with moderates themselves. In our oppositional political system, we get moderate results with divided or alternating governments, not by putting moderates in charge. The majority of swing voters figured this out last November, returning Congress to Democratic control.
Furthermore, most of Broder’s so-called moderates, like Lieberman, are actually quite radical on various issues. Being a warmonger and also pro-union does not make him a moderate.
Broder and his fake centrism are the problems in Washington. Active political disagreement and opposition is the solution.
That would be a great line wouldn’t it, if Tom Delay commented that even he wouldn’t have gone that far.
It appears to me that one part of the reason for the new climate, is that not only is the senate divided very close by party this session, but it has been for several elections now. Most of the 90’s through 08 will be marked by the majority party having barely enough people to just pass something and move on. If there were greater numbers in the majority, it would be much harder for the minority party to have any sway. And when the next election keeps looking like it could go either way, then that keeps everyone distracted more than if it was going to obviously be this or that.
Another issue to complicate this divide, is that I think some of the things that need action are things that have just been pushed off for many sessions and now its clear that we can’t just keep pushing them off. Social Security, immigration reform, Louisiana’s coastline, and the deficit are not new issues to the people elected in 2006.
Andy —
The debate about moderates and/or centrists — and what one is, exactly — comes up a lot at The Moderate Voice. I wouldn’t describe myself as a centrist, for instance, but I try very hard to understand the other point of view, which sometimes tends to moderate my thinking and reactions.
I agree with that statement in an historical context, and it’s worked well in times past. I’d further agree that the recent one-party in control has been absolutely disastrous.
I don’t think, though, that the current level of opposition is what the Founders had in mind — or if they did, then it’s because they hadn’t envisioned a government that has become so completely involved in our lives.
Nor, I doubt, that they would have ever envisioned it as such.
~EdT.