A Time for Transpartisanship

Yesterday's news about Arlen Specter changing parties, likely leading to a filibuster-proof Democratic majority in the Senate, has Democrats justifiably elated about the possibilities to move through bolder legislation.

Some jubilation is justified but we need to be careful not to neglect a still deeper need for our country -- to heal our fractious political process and move beyond partisan bickering in a way that leads both major parties to work collaboratively on creating the best solutions for the American people rather than simply jockeying for power. The challenges we face are too vast to handle from one side of the ideological aisle alone; it's an all hands-on-deck moment in history.

The final decisive tipping of the power scales to the Democrats can thus mark the shift from an era of partisan horse-trading to transpartisan collaboration on solutions. The former is an era of politics by force; the dominant party simply jams its ideological agenda down the throat of the other. Or, when blocked, that party offers pork-style concessions that don't benefit the American people. This style of politics soured the American people on our government, undermined our sense of hope and created divides in what should be one, united American people.

So long as the Republicans held the filibuster wildcard after the last election, there was still an opportunity to drag out the era of politics by force. Now that they are about to lose that option, they need to refocus on influence, ideas, and creative solutions that strengthen legislative initiatives. In other words, they need to win points on merit rather than strong-arm tactics. If party leaders toss ideological grenades rather than generate solutions, the respect of America people for them will dwindle.

The Democrats, on the other hand, need to demonstrate that they can do two things simultaneously. First, advance the legislative mandates for which the American people have elected them. And second, to wield considerable power in a way that is respectful and honoring of other political positions and thus acts to heal the political civil war we've been living through. This stance welcomes the ideas, input and creativity of other parties rather than ignoring them on ideological grounds. The Democrats thus need to evolve the political culture of Washington in the next two years, as well as turn America around economically and psychologically. Gloating, lording power over Republicans, or ignoring input and ideas other parties will perpetuate the political warfare. Wounds that fester now erupt later, to the detriment of us all.

That is why now is the historical moment when we need a strong national transpartisan movement, such as is offered by ReunitingAmerica.org, a group co-founded by former Republican politico Joseph McCormick who recognized the deep healing needed in our political process after seeing the ways the warfare tore his own life apart. In recent years, they have had succeeded in bringing together an Energy Security summit, with Al Gore convening key progressive leaders and Grover Norquist convening key conservative leaders in a search for improved dialogue and better solutions. MoveOn.org and the Christian Coalition found enough common ground from a similar gathering to produce a joint newspaper ad on net neutrality. The group has recently shifted from a leadership-only focus to creating a grassroots Transpartisan Alliance.

I attended a gathering in Berkeley last night that is focused on piloting a Transpartisan Alliance movement in the Bay Area. The goal is to have skilled local facilitators help us move beyond polarized political identities to identify shared values and common purposes, so that we can ultimately generate a more holistic approach to democracy. It was a hopeful group filled with both left-leaning and right-leaning people, all with important ideas about how to ignite a transpartisan movement, from developing toolboxes to citizen summits.

I believe that the strong tilt in national power towards the Democrats can offer a window for this transpartisan work to gain traction and lead to the healing of partisan wounds and the building of effective bridges of collaboration. Doing this at a personal, local level is essential, as is doing it on a national level. As each of us finds greater political wholeness, integrating the perspectives of the other "side" into our own, we can work more effectively on the truly daunting problems facing our country. The less creative energy we waste in political friction, the more effectively we can create the next evolution of our country -- a whole systems shift that stretches from the grassroots to the White House.

If you feel called to play a leadership role in building such a movement, I encourage you to contact Joseph McCormick at [e-mail].

Comments

[rmm4402]

Good luck with this.... definitely an uphill battle.

The switching of parties by Sen Specter has most people on this site celebrating the fact that they will now be able to - as you so well put it - jam their ideological agenda down the throat of the Republicans.

The Democrats have been given the mantle of power - Pres Obama has reminded the Republicans on a couple of occasions that he won - why compromise ??? The Republicans feel that the Democrats have it all wrong and their fiscal policies will hurt ithe country in the long run - why help them???

Again - I applaud your idea. I just don't think we'll get there any time soon. There is really nothing out there to unite us. As I see this country right now - if we were invaded and taken over by a foreign power - most people would be more upset with and be content to blame people of the opposite political party than they would be with the invader. We probably have as great a split as we did during the Civil War - however instead of a geo-political split - it is an ideologica­l/cultural split.

Being a student of history - I really am amazed at the speed with which our national culture has fractured to the degree that it has - it is really remarkable - not something I thought I would see in my lifetime.

Again - good luck.

[Querent]

I see the author of this piece finally decided to let those who disagree with him post. Otherwise, there would be no posts. The problem with our political situation today is not too much partisanship. The problem is that one political party consistently and cynically tries to advance its agenda by making arguments which are not rational, but instead appeal to fear, demographic antipathy, and resentment. Talk of bipartisanship or of transpartisanship is talk which is not aimed at dealing with the disease, but with trivial and unimportant symptoms. The problems we face are how to make our economy sustainable, how to preserve our environment, how to allow all members of our society to be productive, fulfilled members ot it, how to deal with world hunger and overpopulation, and of course the list goes on. How to placate the Republicans so that they will participate in good faith is the least of it, not to mention that any such effort will prove to be a massive waste of time and effort.

[PlaceboStudman]

Are you serious? You progressives make no sense. You talk about "transpartisanship" and cooperation and some fantasy utopian "Can't everybody just get along?" ideal, without realizing that the very thing you are advertising is the beginning of the death march of Representative Democracy. Let's get real, and be honest, a lot of people DONT want to come together to work out their differences. If anything, more and more people are splintering off into independants. And that isn't even counting the fact that there are now currently 4 political parties. Progressives, Democrats, Retro-conservatives (aka real conservatives) and Evangelical Neo-cons, to say nothing of those who support the Green or Libertarian party.

What we need isn't transpartisanship, we need MULTI-partisanship to evolve

[Linda Gonzales]

I don't think you know what the 'Reuniting America' group is actually doing, nor have you probably participated. It's very easy to make assumptions about groups because you project meaning to their name, but if you don't know their background and haven't participated with one of their programs, I won't jump to conclusions so quickly. I would recommend judging the 'tree' by it's 'fruit' before writing this group off.

[PlaceboStudman]

I don't care about groups or their catchy little trendy names. I care about ideas and how we collect and find different ideas and opinions that come from different perspectives. But the ideas of bi and transpartisanship sound an awful lot like trying to take us down the road to Dictatorship by Committee. And let's face it, that IS what "the permanent democratic majority" that everyone is talking about is. It doesn't matter if you get to vote for which candidate you like most, if every candidate is from the same party, or even from different parties but have the same ideas We need different ideas, different perspectives, different opinions or we run the risk of becoming Nero playing the fiddle as Rome burns

[Liberal2]

The problem, children, is failing to understand what the problem is.

In a nutshell, conservatives thought Hitler was okay and wanted to sell as much iron, steel, and oil to Imperial Japan as they wanted to buy.

Please explain where the common ground is with a political philosopy that says any compensation paid to the CEO is fine, but any pay raise through a union contract is evil?

What we need is public financing of all political campaigns including primaries.

Mary Matlin, James Carvel's wife, who is a republican strategist, once admitted why private financing of campaigns is a republican prequisite: she said (at the time) there were more democrats than republicans willing to work to elect a candidate.

[Tavi]

There is no doubt that each side finds much fault with the other. But that is precisely the point being put forward in this article.

In general, Democrats are more amenable to using the political and democratic process to affect their preferred changes. They are more willing to engage in dialogue and collaborative strategizing to come up with policies and suggestions that are a little more representative of the daunting array of diversity in this country -- political, religious, racial, etc.

Mr. Dinan is suggesting that, because the Democrats *in general* are more willing to act like Grown-Ups, it is incumbent upon them to make the first move, as it were. Not ALL conservatives are racist, radical religious extremists. Some, in fact many, are fully capable of engaging not only in civilized dialogue but in putting forth viable, substantive political arguments that can serve to keep our country and our politicians in check, especially when it comes to massive spending solutions -- which, let's face it, Democrats love.

Politics have become like a bad marriage in the country, and both spouses not only want out, they really want to kill each other. I blame the GOP for that. They have behaved, and continue to behave, exactly as Bill Maher so scathingly described, like an abusive, rejected, abandoned ex-husband -- who's spouse just left him *for a black guy.*

I applaud this suggestion regarding Transpartisianship, and encourage skeptics to attend a workshop in person before dismissing the concept out of hand.

[J G H]

Sorry, but there is so little of positive value in the Republican credo that this is not credible. What will more likely happen is that the Republicans will continue to repel its last remaining moderates. The new bipartisan debate will be between the left and right wings of the Democratic Party.

[Linda Gonzales]

I take it you haven't participated in a program like this before? Don't be discouraged before you even try. Or, you could sit back and watch the rest of us do the heavy lifting if you are so inclined.

[Liberal2]

Gee, why don't you name one good policy that came from conservatism. (Hint: there "ain't" one, otherwise you'd have moved to Saudi Arabia.)