December 01, 2005

Terry Gross interviewed Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson as I drove home this afternoon [streaming audio here]. They're political science professors - one from Yale, one from Berkeley - and the authors of Off Center, a new book that analyzes the Republicans' defiance of "the normal laws of political gravity:"

They have ruled with the slimmest of majorities, yet transformed the nation’s governing priorities. They have strayed dramatically from the moderate middle of public opinion, yet faced little public backlash. Again and again, they have sided with the affluent and the ultra-conservative, while paying little heed to the broad majority of Americans. And more often than not, they have come out on top. [...] Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson provide a groundbreaking explanation of the Right’s new might—and make clear why this troubling state of affairs can and must be changed.

One explanation for this puzzling success, they explained to Ms. Gross, is that the Republican majority has changed the way legislation is handled in Congressional conference committees. Prior to the Republican ascendancy, if the House and Senate passed different versions of the same bill, the legislation went in to conference so that the differences could be ironed out. The bills were then resubmitted for a straight up or down vote, with no amendments.

What the Republicans do, apparently, is exclude all but the most conservative Democrats from the conference committee process, and make substantive changes to the bills that were not part of the original legislation when it left the chambers, and which often tilt that legislation towards the fulfillment of a more conservative agenda. During the interview, one of the authors characterized this as:

...a really powerful form of agenda control, because in many cases you'll get a bill that has a popular label on it, like a tax cut, or a bill for a prescription drug benefit, that politicians are very reluctant to vote against, even if they know that the details of the legislation have been rewritten in ways that are quite objectionable.

So, let's be clear:

1. Legislation is passing one or both chambers of Congress.
2. It's then being rewritten in Republican-controlled committees in ways that Democratic Congress-persons find objectionable.
3. Said Democratic Congress-persons are voting "Yea" anyway...because it would look bad if they didn't.

According to its own publicity blurb, Off Center asks (and presumably offers answers to) the questions:

Even though most Americans are politically moderate, American politics is careening to the right. Why? What can be done?

It seems to me that the opposition party ought to, you know, oppose stuff, based on things like integrity, and perhaps - if they're feeling feisty, and it's not too much trouble - a general refusal to inflict bad policy on the citizenry of the United States. It doesn't matter if the bill's going to pass anyway: just take a stand. And then - I know this is a little extreme, but stay with me - articulate the reasons for taking that stand!

So, part of the answer to "Why?" is that too many Democratic members of Congress have apparently placed fearful political expediency above principled service to their constituents.

As for what can be done about the situation...it would probably help if the Democrats grew a backbone or two.

I suspect, however, that the professors don't agree:

Hacker and Pierson call for new reforms to increase the political resources of the middle and to make elections more competitive and politicians more accountable. With some important reforms, they believe the center can hold.

In other words: re-regulate the process! That always works, especially when your side is losing.

The fact is : the Democratic party is flaccid, weak, and rudderless. And that's not good for the country.