Two heroes, two eras, one state of political mind

Passing Dreams


 

 

Our heroes tend to be folks who do the things we think need to be done and say the things that we think need to be said.

I have two new heroes this week, not because of what they’ve done, although many of their deeds were remarkable, but because they have been able to clearly articulate concepts with which I agree and believe to be important to our democracy.

Before revealing who they are, here’s what they said:

The first wrote that it is “the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain” partisanship.

“It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.”

Wise man, I thought, remembering many instances where it seems to me that the will of the party, rather than independent thought and the will of the people, are the motivations behind public service.

And from new hero number two:

“Americans have allowed government officials, under assertions of expediency and party unity, to ignore the most basic tenets of our constitutional order: separation of powers, federalism and the rule of law. The result has been the consolidation of political power and the near disintegration of representative democracy.

“These are consequences of a mind-set among the political class that loyalty to party is more important than serving the American people or protecting our governing institutions. The parties value winning for its own sake, and at whatever cost. Instead of acting as an independent branch of government and serving as a check on the executive branch, congressional leaders of both parties expect the House and Senate to act in obedience or opposition to the president and their colleagues on a partisan basis.

“In this hyperpartisan environment, congressional leaders use every tool to compel party members to stick with the team, dangling chairmanships, committee assignments, bill sponsorships, endorsements and campaign resources. As donors recognize the growing power of party leaders, they supply these officials with ever-increasing funds, which, in turn, further tightens their grip on power.”

So who are these American heroes?

Number one, believe it or not, is George Washington, a founding father who cared so deeply about the new republic that he answered its every call, speaking truth to power even when unpopular.

Number two, like Washington a first-generation American, is Michigan Congressman Justin Amash.

Amash burst into the spotlight last week when he announced that because of disenchantment with partisan politics he would abandon his lifelong affiliation with the Republican Party, instead declaring as an independent.

His father was welcomed to America at age 16 as a Palestinian immigrant. His mother is an immigrant, too, and like them he turned to the Republican party because it stood for limited government, economic freedom and individual liberty — principles that had made the American Dream possible for his family.

Now he sees the political class as not dedicated to principles, but to winning at any cost.

That’s what makes George and Justin heroes. They said and did what they thought was right despite potential political consequences. Most politicians these days say and do things because of politics.

It was true under President Obama, who laid down the law especially related to energy use and development and business regulation, then cracked the whip to ensure his foot soldiers toed the line.

It’s even more true under President Trump, who has perfected the approach that “if you’re not with me you’re against me.”

Whatever happened to independent thought? Give and take? Point and counterpoint?

It’s been replaced by “my way or the highway.”

Today Republican members of Congress, including those from North Dakota, dare not break with the president for fear of the political consequences.

When ground is staked out by the president or the floor leader, it is automatically considered to be sacred ground for the good of the party, because in the final analysis, it’s not so much what gets done as it is who wins.

It’s not how you play the game, it’s whether you win or lose.

That’s certainly not what the huddled masses see as the best or most representative way to govern by the people and for the people.

On that, two new Americans agree, one from the 1790s and one from 2019.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.