September 4, 2003
DO WE REALLY NEED TWO PARTIES THAT BELIEVE IN FREEDOM?:
Something to Talk About (Matthew Miller, 9/04/03, NY Times)
What American politics urgently needs, in other words, is not a new left, but a new center. Democrats need to refocus domestic debate around a handful of fundamental goals on which all Americans can agree -- goals that in turn become the new basis for setting fiscal priorities and tradeoffs.Yes, there will be fights over details. But if we first ask what equal opportunity and a decent life in America mean, can't we agree that anyone who works full time should be able to provide for his or her family? That every citizen should have basic health coverage? And that special efforts should be made to make sure that poor children have good schools?
Fixing these problems will take federal dollars, an amount of cash that is mistakenly viewed as "unaffordably liberal" under existing terms of debate. In fact, an agenda that covered the uninsured, subsidized a new living wage of $9 an hour and adequately compensated teachers would cost less than two cents on the national dollar, or 2 percent of the nation's gross domestic product.
Such new angles of vision are necessary if we're to get serious about America's biggest domestic problems. But the first step is for Democrats to climb out of their decade-long crouch. Republicans have been allowed to frame the conversation for so long that the terms of public debate have become surreal. After all, Margaret Thatcher would have been tossed from office if she'd proposed anything as radically conservative as Bill Clinton's health plan -- which still would have left several million people uncovered and had the private sector deliver the medicine.
As Democrats start sprinting toward their primaries, the candidate who can take what the Republican Party denigrates as "wild-eyed liberal dreams" and reframe them properly as simple common sense will have the best chance to beat President Bush -- and of deserving to.
Facing the impending decimation of the Party in November 2004, liberal commentators have adopted the idea that this is their 1964, when a candidate returns his party to first principles and, though he loses badly, motivates a generation of activists. The problem with this theme, as Mr. Miller notes, is that none of the Democratic candidates is truly in favor of classic Democratic (Statist) solutions to problems. Where Barry Goldwater was associated, fairly or not, with a willingness to use nuclear weapons to end the Cold War and wholesale opposition to the New Deal, there is no contender today who is willing to advocate these two rather basic refoms of Mr. Miller's: universal health care and a universal living wage. Sure, they all oppose any effort to privatize Social Security or use vouchers in public schools and they all support some kind of hike in taxes, but none are willing to advocate the tax levels that would be required to pay for all of this, nor the trade protections that would be required to keep jobs here if everyone made $9 an hour. All of us who value a vvibrant and competitive two-party system have to join Mr. Miller in hoping that the Democrats find their Goldwater, someone willing, even eager, to return the Party to its noble New Deal/Great Society past. Americans already have their party of freedom, The Republicans, what's lacking is an alternative party of security--why not let the Democratic Party be that party again? Posted by orrinj at September 4, 2003 8:27 PM
A Democratic party that believed (once again) in security would be a great improvement over the present party that believes only in itself, and helping its friends and most importantly, punishing its enemies. But where's the fun in that?
VOTE GREEN PARTY!
Posted by: Jack Ovejo Astrakani at September 25, 2003 6:34 PMOr we kill the dog?
Posted by: at September 25, 2003 7:23 PMI was just wanted to ask if you had a very Merry Christmas / Holiday, and to wish you the very best for the New Year.
BTW, In saw something on another blog site I think it is a good idea to let as many people / bloggers know about. I was just organizing my vacation for later this year and stumbled across the above web site about Bali, where I was considering going. But just read what it says there and especially between the lines; unreal. A travel agent there Bali Discovery Tours of Sanur went to their friend the police chief and made trouble for someone visiting the island who had caught this travel agent offering unauthorized room rates on the Internet for the Hotel Santika Beach in Kuta, which is where I was going to stay, but thank God I am not now (I am not even going to Bali becuase of this) - seems to me like the hotel did not exactly help!
The poor guy was detained by the police for 4 days and had his passport illegally seized. He was not released until the British Embassy filed a formal complaint. Of course, there were no charges!! This is absolutely terrible. Please, please, please, join me in saying "Stuff Bali - I'm going somewhere where they treat people like guests, not enemies".