Every election season is contentious, but this one is becoming especially nasty. The Republican Party is fracturing. Much of the division is ideological in nature but I often find myself on the opposite side of people with whom I thought I shared core values. Feelings are being hurt and friendships are being ruined. I think it is fair to say the party itself is in jeopardy.
Political parties are coalitions of factions. Even in the best of times the coalitions are tenuous. Both parties are seeing obvious conflicts between the different factions in their party. The Republicans have the Chamber of Commerce people and the Pro-Life people and the Liberty people and the Fiscal Conservatives. Obviously most people belong to a number of these groups but it is a mistake to think everyone in the party agrees on everything.
The party is only as strong as the common bond between these political factions. When the factions fight each other, the party gets weaker. When they cooperate, the party strengthens. When one group gains power at the expense of another, or when any group is ignored or disrespected, there is a danger of losing those members either to another party or as a result of them simply staying home. To win, the party needs to come together.
This year’s nominating process started with 17+ candidates and has become quite a circus. Much has been made recently about the process we use to determine who the nominee will be. The rules we use have been called unfair. Accusations of cheating abound. The process and rules seem arcane and many feel the whole thing is “rigged”.
I have been observing the process up close. It IS pretty complex, but I am getting to the point where I think I understand it.
I want to ask you to join me in a little exercise. If possible, let’s ignore the current race and the current candidates. Let’s fast forward to, say, 2032, when all that is going on now will be part of the history books. And let’s decide how we should decide on the party’s nominee in 2032.
The first concept I want to look at is the idea that a nominee needs to be the choice of a MAJORITY of Republicans. Ideally a nominee would have a majority of the votes of individual Republicans in all states, but that is normally not feasible. Especially if we start with a crowded field the votes are split in a number of ways and getting an absolute majority of all votes cast is unlikely.
The problem with only having a plurality and not a majority is that it allows a single faction to dominate others and to control the party with a minority. Requiring a majority requires a consensus candidate that has the backing of a majority of the party. It preserves the coalition. It requires cooperation and negotiation and a concern for the views of different factions in the coalition. There will never be perfect unity but requiring a majority at least ensures that no one group will dominate and ignore the others.
The convention is a mechanism for obtaining that majority. Since every Republican voter cannot come together to negotiate and cooperate we elect representatives to go to convention on our behalf. At the convention those delegates can negotiate and cooperate to come to a consensus choice of a candidate.
If we simply have a primary in each state and add up the total popular vote to see who has the most votes then the entire nature of the party would change. The biggest faction would simply dominate and smaller factions could be safely ignored. I do not believe this would be a winning strategy. It would also eliminate the need for a convention in terms of choosing the nominee. There may still be one, but it would have little meaning beyond a pep rally.
Most of the current angst about the process involves the process of selecting the delegates who will go to the convention. If we assume that there should be a convention to choose the nominee then the delegate selection process matters. Some would suggest that the delegates should be based strictly on the primary results and should be forever bound to vote for the same candidate. Unfortunately that would leave no way for the delegates to come together and achieve a majority consensus.
The current process, at least in Missouri, starts with caucuses at a very local level. I believe both primaries and caucuses should be closed, meaning you must register as a Republican in order to vote or caucus. If you choose not to be a part of the party then you should not have a voice in what the party does.
The current system (in Missouri) bounds delegates at the convention on the first vote to the results of the primary. This is appropriate, and gives a voice to the primary voters. If a candidate wins a majority on the first vote then there is no need for the delegates to work to achieve that majority; it has already been achieved. But if there is no majority then delegates will have to be free to change votes to achieve one.
But who gets to be a delegate? Long ago party bosses would select delegates. Now we have caucuses. If you can vote in the primary then you can attend the caucus. The current procedure is that slates of delegates are presented to represent a local area in the state and congressional district elections. After slates are presented and verified they are voted on by the caucus attendees. The winning slate of delegates moves on to the next stage.
There has been much discussion of Roberts Rules of Order, which is pretty much the universal set of rules that all bodies tend to use to maintain order in meetings. Anyone can study them. They do not change day-to-day. Roberts Rules were not created to rig the system or to give an advantage to one side or another; they exist to ensure the process is fair. Democrats use them. Republicans use them. Everyone uses them. Complaining about the unfairness of strictly following Robert’s Rules is an argument that will fall on deaf ears. Complaining when they are not followed is entirely valid.
If you do not show up to vote at the caucus then you do not get to complain about who is chosen to be a delegate. If you show up but lose the vote then you are complaining about democracy. Caucuses allow smaller factions that are passionate to show up in greater numbers and have their voice heard. Since we are hypothetically talking about the 2032 race there is plenty of time to mobilize your team. You know the caucuses are coming. Just get your people to show up.
Obviously different states have different processes and we can observe and learn from what works well, and not-so-well, in other states. Perhaps there is a better way for Missouri to determine which 52 Republicans are chosen as delegates to the National Convention. But having observed the process, I am not sure I know what would be better.
Ideally in the end the 52 delegates we send should represent a broad spectrum of the Republicans that make up our state, rather than simply 52 people who only represent the largest vote-getter in the primary. Ideally all of the different parts of the Republican coalition would be represented. The system is indeed designed to try and accomplish that, by having local caucuses from every region of our state send representatives to decide who goes to the convention. Each caucus is to be majority rule and follow Roberts Rules of Order.
No, it isn’t perfect. There are going to be problems and complaints in 2032. Some are going to feel that the process is unfair. There will be cases where the rules are not followed properly. There will be people who will try to disrupt the process. But the idea that the system ITSELF is “rigged”, and that the process is inherently unfair, is simply not true.
There are a lot of people who are not very happy right now. Many people who I consider friends are angry with me. I am NOT angry with them. We simply disagree. We are in competing factions right now, but we are all part of the coalition, at least for now. The exception would be a person or two who decided to make this personal and attack individuals who hold different views. I will not tolerate abuse.
I am passionate about liberty and fiscal responsibility and limited government. I am going to defend those core values and I will be critical of candidates who do not share those values. The candidates can take the criticism, but their followers often get offended. They are angry at me for attacking their candidate. They are angry that I cannot support their candidate.
I am a part of this Republican coalition because it is currently the best vehicle for me to advance the values that I care about. If you are part of this party for some other reason, I would ask that you re-examine your motives for being a Republican. Most of us are very angry that our elected officials have completely betrayed our values and ignored our concerns. This is something Trump and Cruz people agree on; Washington is broken and we are not going to sit by and watch this continue.
If the Republican Party is not going to represent us, then we are either going to have to change it or we will have to leave it. If they are going to cave to Democrats at every turn and pass bloated Omnibus Bills and fund Planned Parenthood then we are going to have to abandon them and find another way. Trump keeps saying the party is broken, and there is truth in that.
What I would ask my Trump-loving friends to understand is that Donald Trump does not share my core values. In fact, he outright rejects them. It is easy to be critical of politicians for being, well, political when they discuss issues. They seem to pander and placate and agree with all sides at times. It may seem attractive to hear someone like Trump refuse to do that and to not care who he offends, but what he is doing is alienating other parts of a fragile coalition.
A President of the United States needs to lead the free world. To do so, he must be a politician. He has to be a coalition builder and be able to bring people together. He has to avoid disrespecting people with different views. Likewise, the Republican nominee needs the same skills if they are to win the general election. Firing up your single faction with fiery rhetoric plays really well with the members of your group, but when you insult everyone else you risk losing them, or worse, creating enemies.
Like Trump, I am not much of a coalition builder. I have been called divisive, and it is undoubtedly true. I am a champion for Liberty. I have been and will continue to be critical of my legislators for failing to be fiscally responsible. This fall when they pass another bloated Omnibus Bill I will once again be very publicly critical of them, because they are ruining the country for my grandchildren.
If Trump wins the nomination I will not be happy but I will not call the process unfair or “rigged”. And if Cruz wins, the process will not be unfair or “rigged” either. The process was established long before anyone declared themselves a candidate. And if anyone feels their views are no longer represented by the party they either need to work harder to be heard or realize there are no chains keeping you from leaving.
No comments:
Post a Comment