Sunday, February 25, 2007
3rd Party?. . .An Uncomfortable Conclusion
We are all no doubt familiar with this often-used phrase:
Ever since the 1992 presidential campaign of Ross Perot, I have been infatuated with the idea of an independent-minded third party to take serious issuess above the traditional, two-dimensional political fray. Twelve years later (2004) I tentatively concluded that starting such a movement was institutionally impossible, and three years later (just moments ago) I have also concluded that sustainingg a movement in a way that is both genuine in intent and consistent with its founding is also not possible.
This post began with an observation about human nature, and it is indeed human nature which flattens the vision of a third party that I hold so dear. Because it is my belief, that once a third party finds power, its founders and its leaders and its participants will individually (and ultimately) succumb to placing self-preservation over policy. That will either lead to calls for a 'fourth' party, or reinvigorate one of the traditional parties.
Democracy 2 pOintzero is about solutions, not problems. If nothing else, the 'agitation' of a third party will compete for resources and mind-share thus forcing the traditional two parties to either posture or legitimately approach issues differently. This is a limited (albeit positive) effect.
Instead, I now believe that we look no further than history to understand that the way to address big issues in the most powerful of ways, is through the powerless. In other words, domestic politics have relied upon so-called 'Blue Ribbon' commissions when the traditional politic is either incapable or overwhelmed (or both) to take on an issue.
Some examples:
The National Commission on Social Security Reform
President's Commission on Strategic Forces
Commission on Federal Election Reform
And so I'd propose the establishment of a permanent body called "The Emerging Opportunity and Threat Commission". The panel would be staffed with representatives from think-tanks linked with universities (not industries) to total 75%, and private (non-executive) citizens who demonstrate 'extraordinary' interest or expertise. It would be tasked with tackling issues which have horizons of 10 or more years into the future and be prohibited from working on 'current' events or issues regardless of magnitude. Funding would come from the federal government, and issues to be studied would require a unanimous vote from the President and congressional majority and minority leaders.
The scope, composition and mandate of this commission would significantly insulate it from falling prey to politics-as-usual, and not detract from neitherr the resources or unflinching focus that large issues require.
Think about some of the potential issues:
Energy Independence
Medicare
US-China Relations
Campaign Finance Reform
Retooling of Domestic Education Curriculum
Sounds crazy? All feedback and thoughts are welcome!
Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutelyRarely however is the phrase's origin provided: (An observation that a person's sense of morality lessens as his or her power increases. The statement was made by Lord Acton, a British historian of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries).
Ever since the 1992 presidential campaign of Ross Perot, I have been infatuated with the idea of an independent-minded third party to take serious issuess above the traditional, two-dimensional political fray. Twelve years later (2004) I tentatively concluded that starting such a movement was institutionally impossible, and three years later (just moments ago) I have also concluded that sustainingg a movement in a way that is both genuine in intent and consistent with its founding is also not possible.
This post began with an observation about human nature, and it is indeed human nature which flattens the vision of a third party that I hold so dear. Because it is my belief, that once a third party finds power, its founders and its leaders and its participants will individually (and ultimately) succumb to placing self-preservation over policy. That will either lead to calls for a 'fourth' party, or reinvigorate one of the traditional parties.
Democracy 2 pOintzero is about solutions, not problems. If nothing else, the 'agitation' of a third party will compete for resources and mind-share thus forcing the traditional two parties to either posture or legitimately approach issues differently. This is a limited (albeit positive) effect.
Instead, I now believe that we look no further than history to understand that the way to address big issues in the most powerful of ways, is through the powerless. In other words, domestic politics have relied upon so-called 'Blue Ribbon' commissions when the traditional politic is either incapable or overwhelmed (or both) to take on an issue.
Some examples:
The National Commission on Social Security Reform
President's Commission on Strategic Forces
Commission on Federal Election Reform
And so I'd propose the establishment of a permanent body called "The Emerging Opportunity and Threat Commission". The panel would be staffed with representatives from think-tanks linked with universities (not industries) to total 75%, and private (non-executive) citizens who demonstrate 'extraordinary' interest or expertise. It would be tasked with tackling issues which have horizons of 10 or more years into the future and be prohibited from working on 'current' events or issues regardless of magnitude. Funding would come from the federal government, and issues to be studied would require a unanimous vote from the President and congressional majority and minority leaders.
The scope, composition and mandate of this commission would significantly insulate it from falling prey to politics-as-usual, and not detract from neitherr the resources or unflinching focus that large issues require.
Think about some of the potential issues:
Energy Independence
Medicare
US-China Relations
Campaign Finance Reform
Retooling of Domestic Education Curriculum
Sounds crazy? All feedback and thoughts are welcome!
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Probability Nil, Potential Unlimited: The D.2.O Ticket for President
2008 is racing towards us at full speed.
There are of course the partisans (e.g., Clinton, Edwards, Brownback, Hunter), and there are those who are constructive centrists with which D.2.O adamantly embraces.
It is here and now that the least likely, but most forward-thinking ticket is proposed: Obama-Gingrich.
Get back up from the floor and into your chair, these are not typos. And nor are the reasons why this ticket would truly launch a new politic, a Democracy 2.0:
Barack Obama
Media darling, man of the people. Get past the hype and you're left with a very serious individual who is very serious about improving America.
Newt Gingrich
Media target, a man who has changed. Newt in the 1990s was as partisan as one could get, even bitter and at times aggressive. But the past several years have revealed a person deeply committed to solving large issues in a non-partisan way.
With Obama as president, American pride and optimism will be reborn and the faith of our allies renewed. With Gingrich as vice president, "third-rail" issues such as healthcare can be solved in a fundamentally different way.
There are of course the partisans (e.g., Clinton, Edwards, Brownback, Hunter), and there are those who are constructive centrists with which D.2.O adamantly embraces.
It is here and now that the least likely, but most forward-thinking ticket is proposed: Obama-Gingrich.
Get back up from the floor and into your chair, these are not typos. And nor are the reasons why this ticket would truly launch a new politic, a Democracy 2.0:
Barack Obama
Media darling, man of the people. Get past the hype and you're left with a very serious individual who is very serious about improving America.
- Steers clear of partisanship
- New, fresh perspective
- Life experience has ingrained perceptions and values never-before held by any candidate for president
- An inspirational figure for all Americans across all generations
Newt Gingrich
Media target, a man who has changed. Newt in the 1990s was as partisan as one could get, even bitter and at times aggressive. But the past several years have revealed a person deeply committed to solving large issues in a non-partisan way.
- Praises those of different political views, Hillary Clinton is a specific example
- Launched not-for-profit, non-partisan grassroot organizations to tackle big issues such as healthcare
- Experience in government provides an understanding of how to mobilize resources (normal or crisis circumstances)
- A person who is looking to advance concepts and issues important to the next generation and those after it
With Obama as president, American pride and optimism will be reborn and the faith of our allies renewed. With Gingrich as vice president, "third-rail" issues such as healthcare can be solved in a fundamentally different way.
