Let's have a show of hands by people who are fed up
with the way politics is practiced in America.
Activists, party operatives, mediaguest bookers
interested in conflict, not resolution of problems and
all fund-raisers, put your hands down. The rest of you
pay attention.
On Jan. 7 in Oklahoma City comes what may be the
best chance we've had in a long time to begin to end
the polarization and partisanship that has gripped
our political system for more than three decades, a
political system that benefits a limited few and harms
most of the rest of us.
Conveners of the meeting include several prominent
Democrats: former senators Sam Nunn of Georgia,
Charles Robb of Virginia and David Boren of
Oklahoma, and former presidential candidate Gary
Hart. Republican organizers include: Sen. Chuck Hagel
of Nebraska, former Republican Party chairman Bill
Brock, former Missouri senator John Danforth and
former New Jersey governor Christine Todd Whitman.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a former
Democrat and former Republican who is now a
potential independent candidate for president,
will also attend. There is speculation Bloomberg might
use the gathering to launch his own candidacy on a
fusion model, though he denies it. Boren told The
Washington Post, "It is not a gathering to urge any
one person to run for president or to say there
necessarily ought to be an independent option. But
if we don't see a refocusing of the campaign on a
bipartisan approach, I would feel I would want to
encourage an independent candidacy."
Cynics might view this gathering of moderate
Republicans and Democrats as a Trojan horse for
the Hillary Clinton campaign, though a Bloomberg
candidacy might take votes from both party
candidates. This would be different from when
Ross Perot ran in 1992, taking votes away from
President George H.W. Bush and handing the
election to Bill Clinton who won with only 43
percent of the popular vote.
Still, let's accept this gathering as a sincere attempt to
repair our broken politics, unless it proves otherwise.
The stated purpose of the meeting is to "go beyond
tokenism in building an administration that seeks
national consensus" on important issues and problems
facing the country. This would mean naming more
than a single cabinet member from the opposing party.
Any administration committed to consensus must go
further, while selecting people who pledge not to
undermine the president's policies.
How would such a bipartisan administration operate?
As Democratic strategist Bob Beckel and I have written
in our book, "Common Ground: How to Stop the
Partisan War in America," the first step is to agree
that a problem exists which government can fix. Most
of the partisanship in Washington never reaches the
first step. Each side impugns the motives of the other.
Each side refuses to allow the other to succeed, fearing
electoral benefits to the other party. This is a
prescription for failure on all levels, foreign and
domestic.
Our second recommended step is to take the best
ideas for solving the problem from both sides
without compromisingthe principles of either party.
Take poverty. Bob and I agree there is a role for
government and the private sector in helping the poor.
We both like micro loans popularized by Nobel Peace
Prize winner Muhammad Yunus and we agree that
government can guarantee them. If the objective is to
reduce poverty and encourage self-reliance, rather
than to score ideological points that benefit a tiny few,
people can use micro loans to start small businesses
and emerge from poverty.
Other consensus positions can be reached on issues
from abortion, to taxes and government spending,
if the goals are first agreed upon and each side
believes it is contributing to actual problem-solving
instead of playing political games.
Most of the country practices compromise in their
business, social and personal relationships and
wonders why government can't do the same. It can
if it is liberated from crass partisanship. While
reserving the right to label Monday's meeting a sham
if it proves to be so, I prefer to encourage the stated
intentions of the conveners and participants, because
a serious attempt to reach common ground is in the
nation's best interests.
No comments:
Post a Comment