COLUMN: Ending the partisan whiplash
We humans are fickle creatures, and nowhere is this better observed than in U.S. partisan politics. One party will typically control the presidency and do reasonably well in Congress for about eight years, until voters tire of that party and vote to “throw the bums out” and give the other party a chance at governing. Such changes are natural and even desirable – the long-term control of a government by a single party can be a sign that democracy isn’t working right.
These days, however, the throws of cyclical partisan change have reached a fevered pitch. Rather than making targeted appeals to the political center, our increasingly polarized party leaders try to win elections by appealing to the extremes in their respective parties, calling it a return to “true” party principles. The consequence, however, has been an acceleration of the normal cycles between parties. As soon as one party begins to press an agenda too far from the center, that party is removed from office.
In 2008, the republicans were declared a defunct brand after significant losses in both the 2006 and the 2008 elections. Yet, instead of a typical eight-year cycle, the nation is already poised to “throw the bums out” just two years after one of their party’s most successful elections in recent years.
What explains such rapid change? It is the failure of the democrats to rein in the left wing of the party. In 2010, the gains their party made among moderate voters in the last four years will largely be lost, and republicans will likely take control of the House of Representatives (and possibly the Senate).
Make no mistake about it, though, this is not just a failing of the Democratic Party. Many republicans, pushed by Tea Party activists, are now advancing an extremist agenda themselves, calling for a constitutional amendment that would limit government spending to 15 percent of the gross domestic product, essentially making it impossible to fully fund our national defense, Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security programs. Should republicans indeed take control of Congress running on a message of “throwing out the bums,” but then advance an extremist agenda, it will be only a very short while before they themselves are the very bums being thrown out, perhaps even in 2012.
Our parties are becoming increasingly polarized because they think these extreme positions help them win elections. One reading of the evidence may support this – the intense push from the extreme left during and after the 2006 and 2008 elections gave the democrats super-majorities in Congress, and the current push from the right-wing could well win control of Congress for the Republicans. However, a closer look reveals that these wins are hollow because they do not build an enduring majority. Karl Rove’s claim to having built a permanent republican majority by appealing primarily to the republican base, rather than to moderates, fell to pieces beginning in 2006, and President Barack Obama’s pledge to redraw the electoral map in the U.S. to favor democrats appears destined to fail, at least for now. These efforts fail because they do not make the party more inclusive and appeal to the mass of Americans in the political center.
As things stand today, the party that wins in moderate states and congressional districts is the party that will govern. There are simply not enough die-hard liberals or conservatives in this country to forge a permanent majority for an ideologically exclusive party. What we need today is party leadership that focuses on building long-term coalitions by catering to the center. The democrats need a more centrist tax policy and need to cultivate their party’s credibility for reducing excessive government borrowing and spending. The republicans need to boost their image of inclusiveness among immigrants, ethnic minorities, gays, and the economically disadvantaged. The party that best learns to appeal to the center and end these fits of partisan whiplash stands to be advantaged for many elections to come, and would become a party that serves the American people rather than feeding their frustrations with the government.
Damon Cann is an assistant professor of political science. He is the author of “Sharing the Wealth: Member Contributions and the Exchange Theory of Party Influence in the U.S. House of Representatives,” and multiple articles on American campaigns and elections.