Amendment 28 to the U.S. Constitution Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators or Representatives, and Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States. |
The Rise of Independents
The future lies with those wise political leaders who realize that the great public is interested more in Government than in
politics . . . The growing independence of voters, after all, has been proven by the votes in every Presidential election
since my childhood—and the tendency, frankly, is on the increase.
—Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1940
In the more than sixty years since FDR predicted the rise of independence in the American electorate, analysis of
congressional voting records shows that Washington has grown more polarized, driven by ideology and disdaining
compromise, than at any time in the recent past.
This trend has especially been on the increase since the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, and continued to grow with
the anti-Clinton fervor of the 1994 Newt Gingrich–led Republican Revolution. As columnist George Will has written:
"Some ideologically intoxicated Republicans think Democrats are not merely mistaken but sinful . . . Some Democrats,
having lost their ideological confidence, substitute character assassination for political purpose."
This polarization has been cemented by redistricting—creating safe congressional seats for incumbents to occupy
without the built-in check and balance of a credible opposition candidate. Currently, 90 percent of congressional seats
are considered "safe." Once upon a time in America, people chose their congressmen; now congressmen choose their
people.
As Congress has grown more partisan, however, the electorate has grown steadily more Centrist, with the number of
self-identified moderates rising from a bare plurality of 36 percent in 1980 to 50 percent in 1998 and 2000. At the same
time, the number of Americans who are reluctant to identify themselves completely with either political party has been
steadily rising.
In the mid twentieth century, party identification was a badge of honor. According to the National Election Studies program
at the University of Michigan, fifty years ago 47 percent of voters identified with the Democrats and 28 percent with the
Republicans, while just 23 percent were independents. In the year 2000, however, those numbers were almost reversed,
with 40 percent of American voters describing themselves as independents, 34 percent as Democrats, and 24 percent
as Republicans.
Twenty-three percent of Americans agreed that "the two-party system works fairly well," while another study found that
only 14 percent of the electorate said they always supported the candidates of a single party. This willingness to vote for
candidates from different parties is another indication of independence and the corresponding inclination toward
Centrism. It amounts to a civil statement of discontent with the two dominant choices and their divisive approach to
common problems. Centrism is civility.
Not coincidentally, as our professional politicians have become more partisan, Americans have reacted by voting in a
new era of divided government, balancing the power of the president with a Congress from the opposite party for all but
six years since 1980. The object of these voting patterns is not a wish for gridlock, but pursuit of the implicit assurance
that extremists in one party will not be able to hijack the national legislative agenda. Likewise, there is a presumption that
with a balanced government the best ideas from both parties will be the only legislation able to be passed. It is an
instinctive extension of the constitutional principle of checks and balances, an attempt to moderate excesses in an
excessively partisan era.
The steadily growing ranks of independent voters constitute a quiet revolution, and it is growing: This independent
plurality becomes even more pronounced when you look at the politics of younger Americans. Again, fully 44 percent of
those aged eighteen to twenty-nine identify themselves as Independents. Demographics are destiny.
"This old left-right paradigm is not working anymore," remarks author Douglas Coupland, who coined the term
"Generation X" with his 1992 novel of the same name. "Coming down the pipe are an extraordinarily large number of
fiscal conservatives who are socially left."
This independence from the traditional dogmas of left and right finds its political expression in Centrism. Centrism
accommodates a healthy degree of skepticism about the predictable rhetoric and rigid policy solutions ideologues offer
for every problem, while offering individuals the freedom to choose the best ideas from either of the two parties. Because
Centrist leaders are not slaves to ideology or party policy, they have a higher degree of freedom to speak their mind and
find the best solution to any given problem.
This commonsense perspective led to the election of Maine's popular and successful two-term Independent governor
Angus King. He was one of a group of Independent governors—including Connecticut's Lowell Weicker and Minnesota's
Jesse Ventura—who were elected in the last decade of the twentieth century. All were reformers who believed in fiscal
responsibility and social inclusiveness, and they rode to office campaigning against the ideological straitjacket imposed
by the two-party system.
"It's becoming more acceptable for voters to consider Independent candidates, and they're collecting more and more
votes," admitted the National Republican Senatorial Committee's former political director David Carney. "People aren't
sticking to just the two major party candidates as they once did."
Whereas in the past Independent third-party candidacies were driven by individuals representing the far left or the far
right—for example, Henry Wallace's Soviet-sympathizing Progressive Party campaign for the presidency in 1948, or
George Wallace's segregationist American Independence Party campaign in 1968—there is an undeniable trend in the
last several decades toward Independent candidates running as Centrists. They feel, as much of the public does, that
the two political parties are increasingly controlled by their partisan extremes and special interests. They are
compassionate but anti bureaucratic, socially inclusive but fiscally responsible. They are fed up with politics as usual
and determined to shake up the system. These Independent voices and Independent voters are on the rise as America
moves increasingly toward the center.
*End notes have been omitted
________________________________________
Excerpted from Independent Nation by John P. Avlon Copyright© 2004 by John P. Avlon. Excerpted by permission of
Harmony, a division of Random House, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted
without permission in writing from the publisher.
________________________________________
The future lies with those wise political leaders who realize that the great public is interested more in Government than in
politics . . . The growing independence of voters, after all, has been proven by the votes in every Presidential election
since my childhood—and the tendency, frankly, is on the increase.
—Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1940
In the more than sixty years since FDR predicted the rise of independence in the American electorate, analysis of
congressional voting records shows that Washington has grown more polarized, driven by ideology and disdaining
compromise, than at any time in the recent past.
This trend has especially been on the increase since the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, and continued to grow with
the anti-Clinton fervor of the 1994 Newt Gingrich–led Republican Revolution. As columnist George Will has written:
"Some ideologically intoxicated Republicans think Democrats are not merely mistaken but sinful . . . Some Democrats,
having lost their ideological confidence, substitute character assassination for political purpose."
This polarization has been cemented by redistricting—creating safe congressional seats for incumbents to occupy
without the built-in check and balance of a credible opposition candidate. Currently, 90 percent of congressional seats
are considered "safe." Once upon a time in America, people chose their congressmen; now congressmen choose their
people.
As Congress has grown more partisan, however, the electorate has grown steadily more Centrist, with the number of
self-identified moderates rising from a bare plurality of 36 percent in 1980 to 50 percent in 1998 and 2000. At the same
time, the number of Americans who are reluctant to identify themselves completely with either political party has been
steadily rising.
In the mid twentieth century, party identification was a badge of honor. According to the National Election Studies program
at the University of Michigan, fifty years ago 47 percent of voters identified with the Democrats and 28 percent with the
Republicans, while just 23 percent were independents. In the year 2000, however, those numbers were almost reversed,
with 40 percent of American voters describing themselves as independents, 34 percent as Democrats, and 24 percent
as Republicans.
Twenty-three percent of Americans agreed that "the two-party system works fairly well," while another study found that
only 14 percent of the electorate said they always supported the candidates of a single party. This willingness to vote for
candidates from different parties is another indication of independence and the corresponding inclination toward
Centrism. It amounts to a civil statement of discontent with the two dominant choices and their divisive approach to
common problems. Centrism is civility.
Not coincidentally, as our professional politicians have become more partisan, Americans have reacted by voting in a
new era of divided government, balancing the power of the president with a Congress from the opposite party for all but
six years since 1980. The object of these voting patterns is not a wish for gridlock, but pursuit of the implicit assurance
that extremists in one party will not be able to hijack the national legislative agenda. Likewise, there is a presumption that
with a balanced government the best ideas from both parties will be the only legislation able to be passed. It is an
instinctive extension of the constitutional principle of checks and balances, an attempt to moderate excesses in an
excessively partisan era.
The steadily growing ranks of independent voters constitute a quiet revolution, and it is growing: This independent
plurality becomes even more pronounced when you look at the politics of younger Americans. Again, fully 44 percent of
those aged eighteen to twenty-nine identify themselves as Independents. Demographics are destiny.
"This old left-right paradigm is not working anymore," remarks author Douglas Coupland, who coined the term
"Generation X" with his 1992 novel of the same name. "Coming down the pipe are an extraordinarily large number of
fiscal conservatives who are socially left."
This independence from the traditional dogmas of left and right finds its political expression in Centrism. Centrism
accommodates a healthy degree of skepticism about the predictable rhetoric and rigid policy solutions ideologues offer
for every problem, while offering individuals the freedom to choose the best ideas from either of the two parties. Because
Centrist leaders are not slaves to ideology or party policy, they have a higher degree of freedom to speak their mind and
find the best solution to any given problem.
This commonsense perspective led to the election of Maine's popular and successful two-term Independent governor
Angus King. He was one of a group of Independent governors—including Connecticut's Lowell Weicker and Minnesota's
Jesse Ventura—who were elected in the last decade of the twentieth century. All were reformers who believed in fiscal
responsibility and social inclusiveness, and they rode to office campaigning against the ideological straitjacket imposed
by the two-party system.
"It's becoming more acceptable for voters to consider Independent candidates, and they're collecting more and more
votes," admitted the National Republican Senatorial Committee's former political director David Carney. "People aren't
sticking to just the two major party candidates as they once did."
Whereas in the past Independent third-party candidacies were driven by individuals representing the far left or the far
right—for example, Henry Wallace's Soviet-sympathizing Progressive Party campaign for the presidency in 1948, or
George Wallace's segregationist American Independence Party campaign in 1968—there is an undeniable trend in the
last several decades toward Independent candidates running as Centrists. They feel, as much of the public does, that
the two political parties are increasingly controlled by their partisan extremes and special interests. They are
compassionate but anti bureaucratic, socially inclusive but fiscally responsible. They are fed up with politics as usual
and determined to shake up the system. These Independent voices and Independent voters are on the rise as America
moves increasingly toward the center.
*End notes have been omitted
________________________________________
Excerpted from Independent Nation by John P. Avlon Copyright© 2004 by John P. Avlon. Excerpted by permission of
Harmony, a division of Random House, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted
without permission in writing from the publisher.
________________________________________
| POLI-TEA THIRD PARTY OPPOSITION TO THE TWO-PARTY SYSTEM NY-23: A Timeline and Short Assessment roughly 5% of the vote. Though he ultimately lost, Hoffman's campaign proves third party roughly 5% of the vote. Though he ultimately lost, Hoffman's campaign proves third party candidates are viable contenders for elected office; that duopolist can be effectively marginalized candidates are viable contenders for elected office; that duopolist can be effectively marginalized by a maximum of effort and a minimum of creativity. I've been following this contest here at Poli-Tea since the end of July, and thought I'd assemble a time-line of the race from those posts: Tea since the end of July, and thought I'd assemble a time-line of the race from those posts: • June: Obama nominates Republican Rep. John McHugh for the position of Secretary of the Army. • Late July: With Republicans having already nominated Dede Scozzafava, Democrat Darrel Aubertine is expected to run on the Democratic ticket. Surprisingly, Aubertine announces he will not seek the office. The Conservative Party of NY attacks Scozzfava, vows to run their own candidate in the Race. The NRCC continues running television ads against Aubertine, though he is no longer in the race. • First week of August: The Conservative Party nominates Doug Hoffman. • Second week of August: Democrats nominate registered independent Bill Owens. McHugh's confirmation is pushed back to September. CPNYS tries to persuade the GOP to drop Scozzafava and endorse their candidate. • August 25th: Having previously stated that "if Dede Scozzafava is the best New York Republicans can do, we might as well just hand the seat over to the Democrats," Red State's Eric Erickson endorses third party candidate Doug Hoffman. • First week of September: Hoffman is profiled in the Washington Times and the Weekly Standard. At Daily Kos, Kos himself calls Scozzafava "the most palatable candidate." • Third week of September: McHugh is confirmed as Secretary of the Army. The Hill begins coverage of polling in the race, stating that Hoffman's numbers are "surprisingly high." • September 30th: NY's governor calls for the special election on November 3rd. Hoffman obtains endorsements from the Club for Growth, Fred Thompson, the American Conservative Union and the Susan B. Anthony List. • October 6th: At The Washington Times, Kara Rowland considers the possibility of a "tea party effect" in the special election. • October 8th: The National Republican Campaign Committee releases ads attacking Hoffman. |
| • October 16th: The greater portion of the online conservative commentariat comes out in support of Hoffman. • October 23rd: Sarah Palin endorses Hoffman. Numerous GOP officials and politicians begin to jump onto the Hoffman bandwagon. • October 28th: Limbaugh endorses Hoffman, stating "this isn't a third party race." • End of October: Scozzafava suspends campaign and endorses the Democrat Owens. Thus, beginning only with the endorsement of the Conservative Party of NY, Hoffman eventually garnered the support of the national conservative grass-roots and most of the Republican establishment. Democrat Owens, on the other hand, won with little or no support from the liberal-progressive grassroots, and the explicit endorsement of the Democratic establishment, from the president and vice president on down. In an article on the race from October 18th, Jazz Shaw wrote at Pajamas media that Republican Scozzafava "began raising eyebrows immediately, sending conservative blogger Michelle Malkin into apoplectic fits." It is worth noting, however, that though Scozzafava did indeed begin to raise eyebrows among independently-minded conservative activists immediately, Malkin and the conservative Republican blogosphere's "fits" did not commence until roughly the middle of October, over two and a half months after Hoffman received the CP nomination and almost three months after Scozzavafa's nomination. This delay may well have cost Hoffman the election. As I've noted before, whether Hoffman won or lost, duopolist ideologues would claim victory: in the case of a win, he would have been declared the "true" Republican, while in the case of a loss, his candidacy would be determined to prove the futility of third party and independent activism. Having endorsed Hoffman against his better judgment early on, Eric Erickson now reverts back to good old fashioned duopolist ideologizing: "there has all of a sudden been a huge movement among some activists to go the third party route. We see in NY-23 that this is not possible as third parties are not viable." As stated above, and in fact, the special election in NY's 23rd proves that third party candidates can indeed be viable contenders for public office. All that is required is for people to cease throwing their time, money and votes away in support of the Democratic- Republican two-party political status quo. POSTED: WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 04, 2009 LABELS: NY'S 23RD |
On Political Parties Thomas Jefferson warned us; "In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution" - Thomas Jefferson (Kentucky Resolutions) As did George Washington in his farewell address; “I have already intimated to you the danger of Parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on Geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the Spirit of Party, generally. This Spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all Governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest frankness, and is truly their worst enemy. "It serves to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration....agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one....against another.... it opens the door to foreign influence and corruption...thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another." Samuel Adams quote to the loyalists "crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you, may your chains sit lightly upon you and may posterity forget that ye were ever our countrymen.” |
| What do I stand for and what do I want to do if elected to represent the people of my district, Tennessee and America as a whole? This is the question that lies before us and requires a multi part answer that is not rhetoric, campaign promises (that usually cannot be kept) and or the same old song of 99.9 % of the GOP or Conservative websites; which usually runs the gambit of; energy independence, securing the borders, strong defense, fiscal responsibility, lower taxes, less government blah, blah, blah, blah etc blah…… Empty and broken promises and platforms. The Dems promote peace, socialist ideals, use terms like Post- American, wealth distribution, health care for the needy etc, blah, blah, blah, etc, blah…… The old saying of “talk is cheap” no longer applies as the talk in DC continues to come at a cost to the everyday American struggling as my wife and I are to make ends meet. From “tax and spend to spend and tax.” The barrage of bills proposed virtually daily by both houses are an insult to the vision of our founders and in 99.9% of the cases these bills are unconstitutional. What can we do? What can I do? I would like to try them and then string them all up and hang them along the Potomac! Of course that is not civil and I am being radical. We need to return to the foundation of this nation and the roots of the Constitution. This is not rhetoric or BS. States that are declaring their sovereignty under the weight of fiscal irresponsibility in DC have reached a breaking point. Yet the same party’s control the purse strings of those states and are intertwined and are the party politics that have all but destroyed this nation. We are on the verge of the next domino to fall in the real estate banking market. Drive around your town or the nearest big city you can see the empty store fronts, offices, industrial parks lay in waste either complete and unoccupied or abandoned by developers in the midst of construction. You can find You Tube video of Michigan in ruins, Cleveland and parts of Los Angeles and Chicago that look like something out of a third world country or a movie set from one of those movies like the “Day After” nuclear destruction, or Will Smith’s “I Am Legend” that portrays the aftermath of a plague that kills most of humanity and transforms the rest into monsters. Go and look at our inner cities and what has happened. This is the product of years of progressive spending, ideologies that have sought to negate the American dream and destroy the entrepreneurial spirit that built this nation. The continued onslaught on the rich has been a smokescreen for the poor to continue and perpetuate class and race disparities for the benefit of those who are in power. We have all been duped into the two party mantras which merely divide us into groups of liberals or conservatives; Christians or atheists; red state or blue states; the Blue or the Gray representative of the Union or the Confederacy; black, white, Hispanic, Native American, Oriental or Asian. We have succumb to the greatest indoctrination program in world history that rivals that of the Roman Empire, the Third Reich or former Soviet Union. While we were sleeping the rich despots, greedy con artists with the help of our own government have put us in hock up to and beyond the next three generations if we survive. If you don’t believe this, then you vote the incumbent you believe has done a good job or the party line out of fear the other party will win. This is no contest this is America as we have known it at stake. Educate yourself on what your representative has done then look at the party agenda regardless of your party affiliation. Know what your US House of Representative is supposed to do and that excludes bringing home the “bacon” to the district because no matter what you are paying for it. Understand what your representative is doing by following and watching who funds his or her campaign. Question everything they do as this will help to keep them on the offensive and they just may fear doing the wrong thing. You are We the People and our strength and numbers outnumber the largest union, party, lobby and special interest, this is the campaign to take back America!. Take Your Stand November 2nd 2010 The 2nd Revolution Has Begun! |
| See Facebook for info on events Joe is attending. |
| Web Design, Graphics and Photography by Darice Ragan Videos by Dustin Williams |
| Web Design, Graphics and Photography by Darice Ragan Videos by Dustin Williams |