Democrats need common platform to oppose GOP
Core message should unify party
Gordon L. Weil
The Democrats like to fight.
But they are getting it wrong. Instead of fighting against Trump and his
MAGA Republicans, they fight with one another.
Progressives and moderates each argue that their party must
adopt their message as its platform.
Each group claims to know what will give Democrats control of Congress,
while charging the other side is doomed to lose.
Will Rogers, the prairie humorist, famously proclaimed, “I
am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.” For many, the thought still rings true. The party struggles to organize a winning
campaign.
The master of forming winning coalitions was President
Franklin D. Roosevelt. He had to unify
northern Blacks and blatantly racist southerners behind a common program. He stressed issues that they shared, while
making some concessions to each side.
The result was his 1936 reelection, when he carried all but two states.
Progressives want a more activist federal government, social
reform, and political change. Moderates
want to focus on bread-and-butter issues, to avoid social issues, and political
restoration. Each side’s commitment to its own beliefs gets in the way of their
finding a platform built from issues that both believe are important.
Obviously, the Democrats’ best hope of winning is as the
alternative to an unpopular President Trump.
While merely opposing Trump may not be enough to yield a congressional
majority, it is their campaign’s basis. Beyond defeating Trump, his practices and
policies, the Democrats lack a unified program based on shared views and
concerns.
The party might rally around a platform recognizing the
needs and hopes of most Americans and refraining from ideas, however worthy to
either wing of the party, that fail to recognize the practical and current
concerns of voters. The Democrats should
build on the opportunity Trump has given them and should avoid either looking
too far back or too far ahead.
Here’s what a core Democratic platform could include.
Tariffs are a traditional source of revenue and protector of
emerging economic sectors, but they have become the president’s political
plaything, raising raises costs for consumers.
His policy cuts trade deficits by limiting imports rather than boosting
exports. Democratic policy should stress
American strengths and no longer enhance its vulnerability.
The Abraham Accords were meant to foster peace between Israel
and its Arab neighbors through cooperation rather than confrontation. Why not extend that thinking to Iran? A closer economic relationship could do more
to defuse Iran’s threat than futile acts of war.
Ukraine, Taiwan and Palestine policy should emphasize the
traditional American opposition to territorial takeovers, reversing the Canada
and Greenland blather. The U.S. freed the
Philippines and other countries and has fought against the territorial
expansion of aggressors. It should
oppose attempts to subjugate others.
Science does not have all the answers, but it has brought
much longer lives and much less disease.
Abandoning research harms the American people and makes the U.S.
dependent on others. With a leading role
in the sciences, the U.S. is assured of worldwide influence. Without it, America risks becoming a
dependent country. Saving science is a
must for the Democrats.
The judicial system should be based on the concept of
justice for all. Trump packed the
Supreme Court to produce a loyal ideological majority, fixed on boosting his presidential
power. The Court’s bias needs to be
brought into balance. A Democratic government
should restore a nonpartisan rule of law.
Americans are losing health care insurance. While “Medicare
for all” is too glib to persuade voters, the Democrats can promise coverage for
all, which can be done through private insurers as in Germany and Switzerland.
The failure of immigration policy reveals the unwillingness
of the parties to compromise. The
country needs both real border security and more immigrants. The Democrats should declare their
willingness to compromise to reach a viable, long-term policy. They should take the lead in promoting
bipartisan negotiations.
It is unrealistic to expect an early return to cooperation
and negotiations between the two parties. Their differences are too deep, and
the undisciplined use of social media has transformed disagreement and reasoned
debate into impulsive fury. Voters say
they want pragmatic compromise, but it’s not likely.
Voters also want less heated charges and claims. The Democrats should pledge division without
divisiveness. And practice civility.
Disagreements among Democrats are normal. Congressional elections are not a presidential
vote; what wins in New York need not be identical with what works in
Georgia. One wing of the party need not
dominate it everywhere, and each can make its case district-by-district while all
promote the common agenda.
Moderates and progressives can pursue their agendas and
avoid speaking ill of one another. And all
Democrats could now create a unified platform that states their party’s core goals.
It’s not an either-or choice.
No comments:
Post a Comment