Wednesday, June 26, 2013

Secret Statistics?

The problem with Gerrymandering is that you are running only against those in your own party. This applies to state legislators and members of the House of Representatives. And the primary reason you implement the convoluted redistricting in the first place is to give your party a majority in the relevant districts that it would not have enjoyed without that geographic distortion. And while it is a brilliant solution to maintain control at a district level, if the majority of the country is moving in another direction, you are mired in having to vote for stuff that a shrinking minority of American voters… like the ones that define your Gerrymandered district… believe is essential for any official to get elected locally.
Stuff like making immigration really difficult – even for highly desirable technology experts and kids who have spent almost their entire lives in the United States and really don’t know any other country. Stuff like giving bad labels to gay and lesbian relationships and opposing free choice of marriage partners – creating a cacophony of legal conflicts such as what happens when a legally married gay couple moves to a state where that rite is not recognized. Stuff like continuing to propose legislation that eliminates or severely restricts abortions. Stuff like trying to define multi-cultural America as being a “Christian” nation.
Stuff that is never going to get past the Senate or signed by the President, while ignoring dealing with issues that will define the United States for generations to come… like creating jobs for the rising younger generations, preparing them with solid education and training, fixing and expanding the infrastructure that makes America work, leveling the playing field between average and rich as well as creating new research in fields that put the United States back into a global leadership position.
With retiring Senators and Congress people, the Republican Party has an opportunity to expand their representation in both houses of Congress in the 2014 mid-term elections. Particularly in the House, their Gerrymandering efforts virtually insure that the GOP will remain the majority. But as hordes of ultra-conservatives slap down their own when they embrace a moderate stance – like an viable immigration policy or a less vitriolic response to gay marriage – they are continuing to define the GOP as the functional equivalent of the Tea Party, a once smaller constituent of the Republican Party. And Demographic trends suggest that for the GOP to be able to elect a president in future years, this is an unsustainable path.
Today, if you are running for a House seat as a Republican, most probably it’s all about the ultra-right-wing, religious fundamentalist “Base.” Your election will be decided in the primary – against other conservatives – since the Gerrymander has eliminated any meaningful Democratic opposition in the main election. But running for a House seat means a highly focused campaign that appeals pretty much only to that Base, despite what that probably means for Republican efforts in the next presidential race in 2016.
The lessons of Mitt Romney and the failed Republican presidential platform of the last presidential election seem to have been lost. “After Republicans lost the presidential election and seats in both the House and the Senate last year, many in the party offered a stern admonishment: If we want to broaden our appeal, steer clear of divisive social and cultural issues.
“Yet after the high-profile murder trial of an abortion doctor in Philadelphia this spring, many Republicans in Washington and in state capitals across the country seem eager to reopen the emotional fight over a woman’s right to end a pregnancy. Their efforts will move to the forefront on Tuesday when House Republicans plan to bring to the floor a measure that would prohibit the procedure after 22 weeks of pregnancy — the most restrictive abortion bill to come to a vote in either chamber in a decade.
“The bill stands no chance of becoming law, with Democrats in control of the Senate and the White House. Republican leaders acknowledge that its purpose is to satisfy vocal elements of their base who have renewed a push for greater restrictions on reproductive rights, even if those issues harmed the party’s reputation with women in 2012.” New York Times, June 17th. Former presidential candidate and current U.S. Senator (Arizona), John McCain, Florida Senator Marco Rubio, ex- Florida Governor Jeb Bush and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie have each drawn the wrath of many of their fellow Republicans for not being sufficiently conservative on various issues that are considered sacrosanct by the Base.
While in the short term, this might keep our legislative branch in check and favoring GOP vectors, in the long term such practices will slowly strangle the GOP as the tiny minority party of the dying and bitter vestiges of America’s past. Will moderate Republicans rebel and take over? Will a new party of moderate Republicans rise from the ashes… or am I missing a set of secret statistics that will vindicate Republican conservatism as the new American policy of choice for most Americans?
I’m Peter Dekom, and no one will benefit if America becomes a one party state of Democrats without checks and balances of a second strong loyal opposition party.

No comments: