There is nothing in the Constitution that says we should only have two parties, the Democrats and Republicans; the present bi-party system just evolved - or I guess 'devolved' may be the most currently-apt expression, from the primordial political soup. Although two may be the status quo, three or more is not out of the question, and might be useful these days.
Third parties have given it a try from time to time. Most not very seriously, but every now and then they pick up an interesting (if quirky) leader and get some traction. Think Ross Perot. Ultimately, these efforts fail because for whatever reason these parties tend to pick up fringe and very vocal adherents. These folks drive the party platform to the extreme and so turn off potential recruits to their cause. They just don't end up seeming like serious, grown-up parties.
But we just might need them (or at least one of them) now, whether behaving maturely or not.
You see, our government is locked in what can't be called anything other than a stalemate. The House, controlled by the Republicans, passes bills that the Senate, controlled by the Democrats, can't accept; and the bills the Senate sends to the House hit a brick wall of denial. Same goes for just about every aspect of government, except defense, where at least some level of practical agreement is usually reached. (Is it that much easier to agree to military action than it is to come to agreement on health care?)
So what we might now need is a tie-breaking force. Opportunities for coalitions and alliances that can find the votes to break the stalemate.
Of course we'd have to hope that we only get one, or at most two, additional parties that are successful enough to be attractive as coalition partners. Any more than that and you could end up with very shaky coalitions with governments forming, failing, and reforming ad nauseum.
At this point, I think the Nation could stand a little third party craziness and whatever upset stomach that may potentially cause, just to get the government off the dime and doing something.
Third parties have given it a try from time to time. Most not very seriously, but every now and then they pick up an interesting (if quirky) leader and get some traction. Think Ross Perot. Ultimately, these efforts fail because for whatever reason these parties tend to pick up fringe and very vocal adherents. These folks drive the party platform to the extreme and so turn off potential recruits to their cause. They just don't end up seeming like serious, grown-up parties.
But we just might need them (or at least one of them) now, whether behaving maturely or not.
You see, our government is locked in what can't be called anything other than a stalemate. The House, controlled by the Republicans, passes bills that the Senate, controlled by the Democrats, can't accept; and the bills the Senate sends to the House hit a brick wall of denial. Same goes for just about every aspect of government, except defense, where at least some level of practical agreement is usually reached. (Is it that much easier to agree to military action than it is to come to agreement on health care?)
So what we might now need is a tie-breaking force. Opportunities for coalitions and alliances that can find the votes to break the stalemate.
Of course we'd have to hope that we only get one, or at most two, additional parties that are successful enough to be attractive as coalition partners. Any more than that and you could end up with very shaky coalitions with governments forming, failing, and reforming ad nauseum.
At this point, I think the Nation could stand a little third party craziness and whatever upset stomach that may potentially cause, just to get the government off the dime and doing something.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment