A Tea Party is Better than Two Party

From Ms. Murkowski's flckrWhen Lisa Murkowski launched her write-in campaign for the Alaskan Senate seat she currently holds it might have formally come without the blessing of Republican establishment, but their secret sympathies must lie with their former caucus member.  As the Tea Party's Republican body count grew, the marriage of convenience's true cost must have dawned on all but the most pure hearted of conservatives.  Sure, all this ginned up anger points left, but from a vantage so far right that even stalwart conservatives have become targets for venial ideological transgressions.  At some point politician self-interest had to kick in and Ms. Murkowski drew the line in the sand.  If the Tea Parties want to weaponize low-turnout primaries to punish even minor dissent then ousted Republicans can make their case to the general public.  Murkowski, and Charlie Crist, offer a path for moderate Republicans who fret about their seats.

Nate Silver thinks she has a substantial, but difficult shot at winning.  That would be a refreshing turn of events.  Not only because it would be a popular repudiation of Tea Party excess, but because it might provide a workable arrangement for a third party.  I say that even though I can't imagine a third party less interesting than the Tea Parties.  I love their avowed claim of "fiscal restraint," but in practice they seem to prefer identity politicians like Sarah Palin over actual fiscal conservatives like Bruce Bartlett and Mitch Daniels.  Yet, even assuming the newly independent Tea Party was given over entirely to its worst impulses it still would offer a great benefit to this country.  We need more parties, especially ones that represent a different axis than the current American left-right.

A two party system features the disadvantage of forcing all possible political disagreement into two large packages to choose from.  In practice most people have a pretty obvious preference; it doesn't seem like a big deal to have constrained choice because you want one of the options.  Our constraints often are more dire than our strong preferences indicate because the vector is negative: you might not really love the Democrats, but compared to those Republicans...  Negative preference fuels the culture war; we pointlessly struggle because the two party system must focus on negligible differences until they accrue into substantive malice. Lacking the ability to support candidates we truly believe in, we despise the candidates on the other side.  The Tea Party would offer the most conservative voters a means of expression outside of the Republican party.  

I have no reason to believe this could happen, but with competition to their right and the loss of the most hardline of their base the Republican party would have to move towards the center.  The opposite could also happen- and so far has happened- and Republicans could try to outcompete the Tea Party on the fringes of the right.  In the long term, however, that is not successful legisltative strategy.  I do believe the Tea Parties have staying power, just not the popular strength to dictate National Policy by scaring Republicans into compliance lest they face a primary challenge.  Republicans have already begun to tire of that arrangement.

Over time both parties have come to view their policy solutions as ends in and of themselves.  The expansion of equity, liberty and security are the ultimate goals of policy.  Meanwhile, tax cuts, a social safety net, national defense and good government are only the means of providing greater human flourishing.  My apparent bias duly noted, this problem of mistaking the means for the ends has become particularly acute in the Republican party.  It has devolved into a institution that insists it knows the answers before it hears the question.  Seemingly everyone trumphets David Cameron Toryism, but with good reason.  Good center-right governance, the Eisenhower, Bush Sr. and Clinton administrations for example, has historically been a boon to this country.  I hope that the Tea Party has the seeds of that type of conservative growth in this country.

Comments

[Christopher Carr]

The Tea Party started out as a grassroots movement which frankly had a legitimate cause: calling on a democratic government to account for its excesses. I must say I'm incredibly disappointed in the way the movement has been weaponized by ideological combatants. I hope Lisa Murkowski kicks ass or at least shakes the Republican Party up. It would be nice to have any sort of centrist win any kind of election anywhere. Let's hope the Republicans embrace the vision of America offered by Mitch Daniels over that of Sarah Palin.