|
Political
Vacuum at Center - Jeffords' Deflection Portends Birth of
New Party
By Andrew Reding, Pacific News Service, May 25, 2001
In deciding that he could no longer serve in the Senate
as a Republican, Jim Jeffords can be seen as a symbol of new
divisions in U.S. politics -- one along regional lines, another
unhappy with both major parties. The two may mark the beginning
of the first new viable political party in more than a century.
Pacific News Service associate editor Andrew Reding directs
the Americas Project of the World Policy Institute, where
he is senior fellow for hemispheric affairs.
Vermont Senator Jim Jeffords' defection is about a lot more
than control of the Senate.
It is the most recent sign of two extraordinarily significant
trends in American politics. One is a sharp regional polarization.
The other is growing dissatisfaction with the American two-party
system.
Not since the years before the Civil War has this pair of
trends been so prominent. Once again, the split is largely
between north and south. And, though there is no sign of a
new civil war, we appear to be headed for a period of political
turmoil and stridency.
As in the 1850s, social issues are the prime causes of polarization.
Back then it was slavery that divided the states. Now it is
the role of religion in public life, as expressed in conflicts
over abortion, school vouchers, and prayer in public schools.
The Republican Party once led the fight against slavery. Now
it leads a different kind of moral crusade, to convert the
United States into something of a Christian republic.
Nothing so divides a society as efforts to prescribe moral
or religious norms, as the daily tragedy of the Middle East
demonstrates. Western Europe, where religious passion is at
an all-time low, is enjoying unprecedented peace and civility.
Not so the United States, where the rise of the religious
right is upsetting the workings of the two-party system.
Here's the dilemma. The religious right is a minority in the
United States, and has little chance of becoming a majority
in an increasingly multicultural nation. Yet it has gained
effective control of the Republican Party, which holds power
in the White House and -- at least until Jeffords' defection
-- in both houses of Congress.
All this splits the country geographically as well. Multicultural
California, once seen as part of an emerging conservative
sunbelt, has become a Democratic bastion. So have New England,
the northern Midwest, and the prairie populist states -- once
the safest strongholds of Republicanism.
The more culturally homogeneous Southern and Rocky Mountain
states have become bulwarks of the Republican Party, as has
the southern Midwest.
The line dividing the two Americas is sharply drawn.
In this climate of polarization, Jeffords is unlikely to be
the last to switch sides. He is certainly not the first --
Senators Shelby of Alabama, Gramm of Texas, and Campbell of
Colorado earlier switched to the Republican side.
Republican Senator Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island is no doubt
weighing his options, as is Democratic Senator Zell Miller
of Georgia. It is simply becoming difficult if not untenable
to survive as a Democrat in the south or as a Republican in
the Pacific and northern states.
This has little to do with the traditional liberal-conservative
divide. Barry Goldwater, long the epitome of American conservatism,
decried the rise of the religious right in the Republican
Party, saying it undermined individual freedoms.
A political void has opened between the two major parties,
similar to the one that opened between the Democrats and the
Whigs in the 1850s. Back then, that led to the birth of the
Republican Party. History may be about to repeat itself.
It is significant that Jeffords did not switch parties. He
became an independent. That, too, reflects a trend, particularly
in the north. Vermont's lone member of the House is an independent,
as are the governors of Maine and Minnesota. Some 42 percent
of New Englanders described themselves as independents in
exit polls last November, comfortably outstripping Democrats
and Republicans.
Absent reform in the two parties, independents will sooner
or later coalesce into a new party offering what most independents
want and no party now offers -- fiscally conservative, liberal
on social issues and personal freedoms. Such a party is sorely
needed to fill the vacuum in the center formed by the polarization
of American politics, and ease the threat to our nation's
tranquillity.
|