A Christian Liberal is NOT an oxymoron.

Posted by XT on November 12th, 2008 in US News

Pete Abel at The Moderate Voice is the latest to ponder if the collapse of the Republican Party might lead to a post-partisan America. He writes:

It could happen again, and if I were still inclined to contribute to the GOP’s future, I’d rely on that history to energize my flagging spirit. But as it stands now, I hope history cycles in a much different direction this time; that the GOP continues its rendezvous with atrophy. I hope this not because I wish to see the Democratic Party dominate, but because I wish both major parties to wither away until they are as marginalized and worthless as the Green, Libertarian, and Constitution parties.

He continues:

Now, before you mock my naiveté — as I know you will, because you did so the last time I raised these questions — know this: I have anticipated at least two categories of potential guffaws: The first will be uttered by those who believe the modern cost of campaigning makes it impossible for everyone except the wealthiest candidates to run without party mechanics behind them. And the second will be uttered by those, apparently in the minority, who fret about one-party control of government.

Consider me in neither group. I, too, consider parties to be a political evil. However, they are a necessarily evil.

Consider a solidly blue state like New Jersey, where I live. The last Republican elected to statewide office was Christi Todd Whitman, who won with a one-point plurality (less than 50% of the vote) in 1993 (amid pretty sever voter suppression antics) and won a second-term by a one-point plurality in 1997. If the demise of one party was going to herald anything, it would have come to pass in New Jersey. Rather than make parties unnecessary, it has worked just the other way.

Winning the Republican Party primary gives the candidate access to a standing list of donors and political campaign professionals. Consider that the largely unseen and unheard GOP candidate for NJ’s Senate seat this year pulled in nearly 1.4 million votes. By contrast, the several independent candidates pulled in a combined 65,033 votes (split among five candidates), which is slightly less than 2% of the total vote. Clearly, there is something to being a Republican, even in a state that despises them. There are not enough independent voters to turn the election (even if the Socialist Party and the God We Trust group could agree on a candidate), much less to contest it in their own right.

Zimmer was competitive only because he had the backing of the Republican Party. It isn’t just the money – though that helped. Political parties exist because they overcome collective action problems. Like making the candidate known to a wide swath of voters. Sure, the internet could possibly do that, but why start from scratch when you could automatically enjoy the support of roughly a million people?

A party primary serves as an ideological clearinghouse for competing candidates. In New Jersey’s Republican primary for the Senate seat, there were three competing major players. If each of those candidates had gone into the general election, that 1.4 million votes that Dick Zimmer received would have been split three ways as well – though maybe not equally. But a losing candidate would have not even been as close as he was.

If you want look at it from the other direction, the Texas Democrats have long been derided as the worst run state party in the country. In 2006, with one of the most unpopular incumbent Republican governors in history, Rick Perry won re-election with only 1.7 million votes – 39% of the vote. The Democratic candidate pulled in 1.3 million (30%). The three independent candidates pulled in another 1.3 million votes – collectively outpolling the Democratic candidate. Despite the raw numbers being encouraging, it helps to understand that one candidate – Friedman – pulled from disaffected Democrats and first-time voters, while another – Strayhorn – pulled from disaffected Republicans and independents. The effect was for Friedman to pull away enough Democrats to doom the chances of Chris Bell, while Strayhorn pulled enough Republicans to keep it interesting. In effect, they cancelled each other out.

It’s called Duverger’s Law. A first-past-the-post system like ours discourages the development of smaller parties (and independents). It encourages the development of large, “catch-all” parties. Our system almost always results in one of two conditions: a two-party system with competing parties, or a single-party system with competing factions. There are notable exceptions – like India, which is dominated by regional parties. However, those regions are generally stuck with a micro-cosm example of Duverger’s Law.

And anyone who fears one-party rule should take a look at the UK or Canada. Both have unified one-party rule with competing parties. It works. Sometimes it works better than what we have.

The Republican Party may or may not be able to rebuild itself. If it doesn’t, some other party will gain dominance. Perhaps the Libertarians and Constitutionals will unite, who knows? But we will have a second major party, not a decline of both parties.

Sphere: Related Content