What is happening in American politics today? Most would agree that public confidence in government is declining; some would assert it has collapsed. Americans like to believe that public opinion swings between two extremes. We teach our children the "pendulum" cliche: public sentiment moves in one direction until it goes too far, at which point reason prevails, and it moves back toward the center. An underlying assumption to this cliche, when it is applied to American politics, is that the two ruling political parties represent the opposite ends of this pendulum. It is comforting to assume that the two parties will shepherd this volatile public opinion. But what happens when public sentiment breaks out from this "reasonable range" defined by the two parties? Can the parties always adjust in time to prevent chaos? As the American People become more sophisticated in this information age, can public sentiment be confined within this range, or is a breakdown inevitable? Is there evidence today that such a breakdown is occurring?
Let's look at the U.S. Presidency. Most Americans identify with the U.S. President; he or she represents not only our leader, but our history and identity as a People. Since JFK's assassination in 1963, America has elected seven Presidents. The first was overwhelmed by the Vietnam War and abandoned politics; the second resigned in disgrace. Each since has had a tenuous relationship with the People. With the exception of Ronald Reagan, each chose to run for re-election and was (or will be) rejected by the American People. This level of rejection is unprecedented in American history. In the 188-year history of the American Presidency before 1976, only seven sitting American Presidents ran for re-election in the General Election and lost. (One of these seven, Grover Cleveland, won the popular vote in 1888, but lost the electoral vote.) The last time a sitting American President lost re-election before 1976 was in 1932, when FDR defeated Herbert Hoover. In the last twenty years, however, three of the five Presidents ran for re-election and were rejected. Clinton will make it four of five in 1996. Is this new dissatisfaction with our Presidents a precursor to historic change?
Consider just the last two election cycles. The 1992 election represented a rejection of the Republican Party. The People threw out Republican President Bush, and the Democrats retained control of both Houses of Congress. The 1994 election represented a rejection of the Democratic Party. The Republicans seized control of both Houses in an historic election. The pendulum is swinging awfully fast. Do these events represent the death rattle of the American political system?
We've seen this happen in other countries. Although comparisons between the political systems of the United States and the Soviet Union are often invalid, it is fair to draw analogies from past world events. When the old-line wing of the Communist Party finally lost credibility with the Soviet People, the "progressive" wing, with Mikhail Gorbachev as its leader, fell into power. Many Soviets and the world at large reveled in this change. Many called it the "Gorbachev Revolution." But, only a few years later, Gorbachev had lost control and was scrambling to slow the revolution. Ultimately, the Soviet political system was incapable of accommodating these changes, and the political system and the Soviet Union itself experienced quick deaths.
Today in America, the old-line wing of the Ruling Class (better known as the Democratic Party leadership) has finally lost credibility with the American People. The "progressive" wing of the Ruling Class (the Republican Party leadership) has thereby fallen into power. Many Americans revel in this change. Many call it the "Republican Revolution." But, will the Republican leaders be scrambling in a few years to slow the revolution? Is the American political system capable of accommodating these changes, or might it suffer a quick death?
Sure, the American political system can adjust, but can it adjust fast enough? Some believe such events would simply trigger the rise of a third party to replace the Democrats or Republicans, thereby averting anarchy. But isn't it more likely that, with such a change in public sentiment, the American People will reject partisan politics outright? Won't the People believe that party loyalty is no longer a surrogate for real democracy? Can the U.S. Constitution facilitate or constrain such a revolution? Regardless of the answers to these questions, we must start planning now.
end