The Parties Versus the People

An Interview with Former Congressman Mickey Edwards

August 14, 2012

Mickey Edwards served Oklahoma and America for 16 years in the United States Congress and currently directs the Rodel Fellowships at the Aspen Institute. He is the author of a ~1@BODYURL[id=114kcurl742]@ “The Parties Versus the People: How to Turn Republicans and Democrats into Americans.” NCoC’s Kristen Cambell chatted with him recently about the state of politics in our country—how we got into what he believes is a dysfunctional system, and what can be done to correct this moving forward.

Kristen Cambell: Having been in Congress and now an executive at the Aspen Institute, you have both an insider and outsider perspective on political structure and process. Based on your comprehensive experience, what do you think is the root cause of a dysfunctional political system?

Mickey Edwards: It actually took me a while to fully understand the root of the problem I was seeing in Congress and, for that matter, in many state legislatures. After I left Congress, I had an opportunity to spend nearly 15 years teaching government at Harvard and Princeton, which left me with a lot of time to reflect on what I had seen and to understand what was causing the inability of public officials to talk honestly with people on the “other side” of the political divide. The more I thought about it, the more it became clear to me that the real problem was not in who was being elected but in the political system we had created in which they had to be elected and in which they then had to govern. We had set up a system that actually rewards incivility and punishes compromise and problem-solving. We’ve handed control over the system to political parties that can decide which political candidates voters will be allowed to choose between, that can draw congressional district lines to put their own party advantage over the right of citizens to be represented by somebody familiar with their concerns, even to stack congressional committees with loyalists pledged to follow the party line. Once you really see how it works, it’s quite clear where the problem is.

KC: Was there a particular event or experience that motivated you to write ~1@BODYURL[id=114kcurl743]@

ME: Strangely enough, Kristen, the initial impetus for the book came many years ago when I was still a member of Congress. I held frequent meetings with my constituents, sometimes three or four town meetings a day, and in one of those meetings a constituent asked why I had not achieved a certain goal that he and I both shared. I gave a typical political answer, especially for a member of the minority party: I had tried, I said, but the other political party controlled the congressional agenda and was to blame for blocking every attempt I made to get the result that the constituent and I both wanted. At that point, another member of audience jumped up from his seat, pointed his finger at me, and shouted “I am sick and tired of hearing Republican this, Democrat that” and the entire room burst into applause. I never forgot that and I never did it again. What finally led me to write this book was more of a cumulative experience, watching day after day as Republicans and Democrats divided into rival teams on almost every issue that came before Congress, almost all Republicans on one side and almost all Democrats on the the other side, with party leaders vowing that their primary goal was to defeat the other side. It dawned on me that they were thinking of themselves primarily as Republicans or Democrats, members of different “teams”, not as members of the same team, the American team. It was really shocking to realize that; it just brought home very powerfully all of the thoughts that had come to me as I reflected on my experience and watched the political process from the outside.

KC: People talk about the desolate state of the political establishment right now as though it was some sort of utopia for the 225 years that brought us to this point. Has there been an ideal moment in time in which the system was functional, respectful, and effective, or do we just hear about the problems more now thanks to open government transparency initiatives, the Internet, and the 24/7 news cycle?

ME: Excellent question. Clearly, we have had great conflicts in the past. But we’ve also had a very long history of Republicans and Democrats finding ways to forge political compromises to get important things done. It’s hard to believe now, but on even the most contentious issues of the day – Medicare, Social Security, even the interstate highway system which created economic ruin for many small towns – bipartisan majorities came together to create legislation. Even the most contentious nominations to the Supreme Court – of people like Douglas and Brandeis and Frankfurter – received overwhelming bipartisan support. It’s not the news cycle or the internet; things really are different now. I don’t know who will win the next presidential election, or who will be the next person to leave the Supreme Court, or who the next President will nominate for the Court, but I do know that no matter who it is, it’s almost certain that Republicans will be almost unanimously on one side and Democrats will be almost unanimously on the other side.

KC: Moments in time like the women’s suffrage and civil rights movements were extremely vitriolic and partisan at their time, but lead to more just and equitable policies that created a better country for us today. Therefore, is partisanship itself inherently a bad thing, or is it a messy and ugly necessity of democracy?

ME: Kristen, we really have to distinguish between two terms that are often used interchangably but are quite different. Polarization – a divison between people with different, and strongly held, views – is a natural part of a democratic system of government. There are more than 300 million of us, with different backgrounds, experiences, and philosophies. Division is natural and a vigorous debate between those differing viewpoints is what distinguishes democracy from dictatorship. Many of the most important advances in our history – the civil rights movement and the right of women to full participation in the political process, for example – did not come from the political “center” – they were quite significant departures from the historical norm. Partisanship, on the other hand, is – to use your term – “inherently a bad thing”. Because partisanship, by definition, is the taking of positions based not on principle but on party identity. Instead of “what’s good for America” the question becomes “what’s advantageous for my political club?”

We can have strong differences but if we act in good faith, we can work through those differences and find the areas of common ground. But if we put party first, and think only of the next election, we will simply become more and more dysfunctional as a nation, unable to address even the most pressing problems.

KC: Great point– language is important, which brings me to my next question. In the book, you thoughtfully differentiate between government leaders and party leaders—between rivals and enemies. These are subtle nuances that are often overlooked. How do we revise our political discourse and behavior to bring focus and attention back to the real issues where they belong?

ME: Ultimately, it’s up to us. We can change the rules, and that will help. Eliminating closed primaries, party control of redistricting, partisan congressional committees, etc., in other words changing the incentive system, will be a big step forward. But we can also take matters into our own hands through referenda, initiative petitons, and direct pressure on our elected officials. We have the system we have because we allow it; we have the power to change it, and we have to do that.

KC: In a previous NCoC.net ~1@BODYURL[id=114kcurl744]@ we asked who took civility out of politics: politicians, the media, or the public. You present a fourth option – the parties. Who do we hold accountable, and how?

ME: Actually, I try to point out that the party system – which all of the first four Presidents strongly opposed – encourages incivility. But it’s not the only villain. Politicians have to be held accountable for their language and their behavior. Members of the media – not just talk-show hosts, but network owners and directors – bear much of the blame for their willingness to allow the flood of invective and non-stop nastiness while they rake in the profits. Too many of us only talk to people who share our own political views and react angrily to other viewpoints; when we do that, we’re to blame, too.

KC: ~1@BODYURL[id=114kcurl745]@ bipartisanship be incentivized? If so, why and how?

ME: In a system that depends on winning votes, the only real incentives that can work are those that reward working together in a bipartisan (or, preferably, nonpartisan) manner. In California’s new open primary system, it is now important for candidates to reach out to a much broader cross-section of the electorate, including members of the other party and independents. That’s a good incentive. Praising our members of Congress when they co-sponsor bills with members of another party, or cross the party line to vote for proposals that emanate from the other side, will help. So, too, will shaming them, publicly, for unflinching adherence to the party line. The power to determine incentives is in our hands if we choose to use it.

KC: The subtitle of you book is “How to turn Republicans and Democrats into Americans.” Are there specific people you believe currently put party aside and exemplify the leadership philosophy you’re championing?

ME: Sure, there are a number of them in Congress and, significantly, a large number in state and local offices, many of whom will eventually hold federal office; in my day job as director of the Rodel Fellowship Program for the Aspen Institute, I know many of them. The very first “fellow” in my program was Gabby Giffords, who was then a member of the Arizona legislature, and she’s a perfect example. There are many very good people out there – but to move up in the system, they will have to fight their way through closed primaries dominated by hyper-partisans who will try to block them. Change the system and we can fix America; it’s that simple.