OFF TO THE RACES

What Happens When Parties Move to Extremes

The moderate middle, which midwifed pragmatic policies, has been abandoned as politicians dig into ideological foxholes.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., speaks at a rally for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton at St. Anselm College in Manchester, N.H., Monday, Oct. 24, 2016.
AP Photo/Andrew Harnik
Charlie Cook
Add to Briefcase
Charlie Cook
Dec. 22, 2016, 8 p.m.

Busi­ness, and in­deed the whole eco­nomy, ap­pre­ci­ate and prosper with sta­bil­ity and pre­dict­ab­il­ity. Wild pen­du­lum swings in policy, wheth­er from left to right or from right to left, are dis­rupt­ive, but they are be­com­ing in­creas­ingly com­mon. Re­pub­lic­ans had a free hand to do what they wanted in 2005 and 2006 when they had the White House as well as Sen­ate and House ma­jor­it­ies. The same was true for Demo­crats in 2009 and 2010.

Note that each party paid a price in midterm elec­tions after they gov­erned as they pleased. The ag­gress­ive use of ex­ec­ut­ive and reg­u­lat­ory powers in re­cent years means that even a party just hold­ing the White House can drive policy very strongly in its ideo­lo­gic­al dir­ec­tion. Rules pro­mul­gated by the En­vir­on­ment­al Pro­tec­tion Agency and the Na­tion­al Labor Re­la­tions Board are good ex­amples of that. Now we can ex­pect those policies to be re­versed, with the pen­du­lum swinging as far or fur­ther in the op­pos­ite dir­ec­tion.

This trend is be­com­ing more ad­vanced than in the past be­cause of two things that are hap­pen­ing sim­ul­tan­eously. First, our elec­tions are get­ting in­creas­ingly more par­lia­ment­ary in nature. Tick­et split­ting is get­ting rarer, with straight-party vot­ing be­com­ing the norm. Every Sen­ate race this year was won by the same party that car­ried that state in the pres­id­en­tial race. Ac­cord­ing to fig­ures com­piled by Cook Polit­ic­al Re­port House Ed­it­or Dav­id Wasser­man, the House had a pat­tern that was fairly sim­il­ar. Only about 24 Re­pub­lic­ans will be sit­ting in dis­tricts car­ried by Hil­lary Clin­ton, only about 12 Demo­crats will be in Don­ald Trump dis­tricts, and only about 32 (7 per­cent) of House mem­bers won elec­tion by less than 10 per­cent (pres­id­en­tial res­ults by con­gres­sion­al dis­trict won’t be made fi­nal un­til early next year). This means that few House mem­bers have any real reelec­tion con­cerns as long as their dis­trict bound­ar­ies re­main the same. They can vote with their party as much as they want without fa­cing ser­i­ous chal­lenge from the op­pos­i­tion party.

The bal­last that kept each party from lurch­ing to one ex­treme or the oth­er is now al­most nonex­ist­ent. In the not-so-dis­tant past, mod­er­ate-to-con­ser­vat­ive Demo­crats in Con­gress, of­ten from South­ern or rur­al areas or small towns, would bolt from their party on meas­ures per­ceived as too lib­er­al. In sim­il­ar fash­ion, mod­er­ate-to-lib­er­al Re­pub­lic­ans, of­ten from the North­east or from urb­an or close-in sub­urb­an dis­tricts, fre­quently sided with Demo­crats on is­sues seen as in­im­ic­al to their con­stitu­ents. In party primar­ies, the dy­nam­ic has changed as well. Can­did­ates can go to ideo­lo­gic­al ex­tremes without pay­ing a pen­alty at the polls be­cause of their polit­ic­ally mono­chro­mat­ic states and dis­tricts.

Both parties are more ideo­lo­gic­ally co­hes­ive than ever be­fore. Little holds Demo­crats back from mov­ing left or Re­pub­lic­ans from shift­ing to the right. The cen­ter of the Demo­crat­ic Party is mov­ing in­creas­ingly to the left, closer to Bernie Sanders or Eliza­beth War­ren than to Hil­lary Clin­ton or Joe Biden. It is un­likely that Demo­crats will nom­in­ate a pres­id­en­tial can­did­ate as re­l­at­ively cent­rist as Clin­ton any­time soon.

Sim­ul­tan­eously, the Re­pub­lic­an Party is get­ting more and more con­ser­vat­ive. If the un­pre­dict­able Don­ald Trump had not won the GOP nom­in­a­tion, Ted Cruz al­most cer­tainly would have. More mod­er­ate con­tenders, in ret­ro­spect, nev­er had a chance. Both parties ex­per­i­enced a surge in pop­u­list feel­ing, as il­lus­trated by the suc­cess of Trump, War­ren, and Sanders.

Each party is con­vinced, not ne­ces­sar­ily wrongly, that their first pri­or­ity upon tak­ing power is to re­verse everything that was done on the oth­er side’s watch. Each party wants to push the en­vel­ope as far as they can while they’re in power. As­sume for a mo­ment that the Af­ford­able Care Act is largely re­pealed, and ex­ec­ut­ive or­ders and reg­u­la­tions are un­done: What will Demo­crats have to show for their years in the White House oth­er than los­ing ma­jor­it­ies in the Sen­ate and House, as well as a pas­sel of gov­ernor­ships and state le­gis­lat­ive seats across the coun­try? Would a more mod­er­ate ap­proach have had a bet­ter chance of cre­at­ing last­ing policy, per­haps without the polit­ic­al back­lash that seems to have oc­curred in 2010, 2014, and 2016? Will Pres­id­ent-elect Trump learn from the pain­ful ex­per­i­ence of the Demo­crats? Prob­ably not.

What we are see­ing is the end of bal­ance and ideo­lo­gic­al pre­dict­ab­il­ity. The day is gone when Demo­crats gen­er­ally pur­sued cen­ter-left policies and Re­pub­lic­ans pre­ferred cen­ter-right policies. Shifts in party con­trol cer­tainly brought changes in policy, but gen­er­ally not rad­ic­al changes. It’s un­likely that poll­sters in either party will be ad­vising their cli­ents who are fa­cing con­tested primar­ies to ad­voc­ate bal­anced, prag­mat­ic solu­tions.

We are go­ing through a markedly un­stable and volat­ile peri­od in our polit­ics and policy, with wild and of­ten ex­treme gyr­a­tions. This can’t be healthy for the coun­try, but it is the new polit­ic­al real­ity. Politi­cians fol­low their con­vic­tions as long as it means win­ning elec­tion.

What We're Following See More »
RULED ANTICOMPETITIVE
Judge Blocks Aetna/Humana Merger
6 hours ago
THE LATEST

A D.C. federal judge has blocked the proposed merger between health insurers Aetna and Humana, ruling that "the merger of Aetna and Humana would be likely to substantially lessen competition in markets for individual Medicare Advantage plans and health insurance sold on the public exchanges." In the deal, Aetna was set to buy Humana for $37 billion, but will now owe Humana a $1 billion break-up fee.

Source:
ALSO WITHDREW FROM TPP
Trump Signs Executive Orders
8 hours ago
BREAKING
WAS SEEN AS COMMITTEE SWING VOTE
Rubio To Support Tillerson
9 hours ago
BREAKING
FORMER CONGRESSWOMAN
Trump To Nominate Heather Wilson Secretary of Air Force
9 hours ago
BREAKING

On Monday morning President Donald Trump announced his intention to nominate former congresswoman Heather Wilson to the post of secretary of the Air Force. If confirmed, Wilson, who is currently president of the South Dakota School of Mines & Technology, would become the first Air Force secretary to have graduated from the Air Force Academy.

TO BE CONTINUED?
Flynn Under Investigation For Communications With Russia
9 hours ago
THE LATEST

"Michael Flynn, the National Security Adviser to President Trump, has been under investigation—and possibly still is—for what has been described as his 'repeated contacts' with a Russian official." Flynn's communications with Russia were being probed by the FBI, CIA, NSA, and Treasury Department. The probe was reportedly triggered by Flynn's phone calls with Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak on the day then-President Barack Obama announced new sanctions. It is unclear if the investigations will be continued following Donald Trump's inauguration.

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login