PLAGUES AND POLARIZATION CAN TAKE TIME TO CURE. POLARIZATION and the toxic political environment it has produced won’t end quickly. Neither will it happen at all unless the voters understand this is not a game like King of the Hill we played as children. This is about the type of country we want to live in and desire our children and grandchildren to inhabit.
We have too many enemies who want to destroy us from without to indulge in political fratricide and destroy ourselves from within. Al Qaeda is our enemy, not the party to which we do not belong.
Like a plague, the infected are either going to have to be moved from the area of greatest contamination (through term limits), or voters are going to have to tell their representative and senators they are “mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.” They will need to support those who sincerely attempt to practice bipartisanship with the objective of not winning power for its own sake, but instead acting in a way that promotes the general welfare and the interests of their constituents.
Politics is a lot like television and the movie industry. When a new show or film is a hit, others seek to emulate it and numerous copycat programs and movies soon follow.
We believe that if just a few Republicans and Democrats begin building personal relationships that translated into progress on important issues—as they once did—the “fever” might spread, positively infecting other members who would like to see the climate change. But most are reluctant to take the first step for fear of being clobbered by the polarizers.
The alternative is more of what most people hate—legislative gridlock, out of control spending, including earmarks—an out of touch Congress that has little in common with average citizens and an attitude of entitlement for the seats they hold, rather than one of public service.
There are some hopeful signs. In May 2007, a bipartisan group of senators announced agreement on a major overhaul of immigration laws. The group had met quietly for months. Its members included liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans. The final product employed common ground principles; the group agreed there was a problem and agreed on common goals; the outcome included new ideas that had not been a part of previous immigration reform debates; the proposed legislation reflected the historical orthodoxies of both parties…bipartisan consensus at its best.
President Bush immediately endorsed the proposals, while both Democratic and Republican candidates for president, showing the courage of pigmies, immediately rejected the package or hid behind “extreme reservations.” The polarizing community went into full combat mode. The right attacked it as “rewarding law breaking and amnesty”; the left called it “cold, heartless, and unworkable.”
The immigration package may well be a victim of the 2008 election, but it is a start. At the minimum, we should show respect for the bipartisan effort and not simply dismiss it. More important, we should take note of the effort to address a major issue such as immigration reform and not ignore it like so many other things the government does on our behalf. We pay too little attention to what government is doing, and spend too much time, after the fact, complaining about what it has done.
Ultimately, it is up to all of us to stop treating politics and politicians as an irritant and start paying attention to what they are doing in our name and with our money. If we get the kind of government we deserve, we will be in worse shape than we thought. Clearly, we are not getting the government we are paying for, as more is spent—whether by Democrats or Republicans—and the same problems never seem to get resolved.
Americans have notoriously short attention spans, but we must pay more attention to our government and the politics and politicians who run it. Otherwise, things will only get worse, and it will be (as it is now) our fault for letting it happen.
So, what will it be: More combat, leading to more anger and a perpetuation of our broken political system, or common ground? The question should answer itself.
Does it?
If Bob Beckel and Cal Thomas—coming from complete opposites of the political spectrum—can find common ground, what’s everyone else’s problem?
A final word for polarizers who might be reading this. It doesn’t hurt to change your ways; in fact, it is liberating. When we began this book, we had reservations about our chances of completing Common Ground without serious disagreements and “a failure to communicate” with each other. We had some disagreements, but we worked through them. You know what we discovered? It feels much better to give a little and get an agreement than to insist on our position and get nowhere.
Who knows, if you become a “born again” common ground person, you might actually get a whole lot more than you might think. One thing is certain: if you insist on being a polarizer, you will produce nothing but more frustration for everyone and a perpetuation of a broken system, which will lead to even more cynicism and less citizen participation in the nation’s political life. And that will mean even fewer people will be in control of a greater number of us. Does anyone believe that is a good thing?