I know that I've ranted about the rightward drift of the Republican party before, so forgive my self-indulgence, but this issue seems very topical with the recent switch of Arlen Specter to the port side of the spectrum.
On one hand, I sympathize with Specter, and the electoral calculus he's dealing with. I mean, how can you lose to a guy named "Toomey"?
Still, I don't like the fact that Specter switched, not because I feel like he's got any need for loyalty to the GOP, but because his switching parties, by altering the institutionally-structured balance of the senate (if I understand this stuff correctly), has the potential to pull policy to the left. I've always favored a moderate policy in general, and I would like to see a situation in which any major policy changes are the result of negotiations between representatives of all parts of the political spectrum--the end result would then tend to be closer to the center.
If, by switching parties, Specter puts the power to dictate policy into the hands of the Democratic Party, policy will tend to move farther to the left, I think, than I'm comfortable with. I'm okay with a moderate leftward shift in general--policy has clearly pulled us too far to the deregulatory right in recent years, but is it too far to go to exclude Republicans altogether?
On the other hand, maybe this sort of thing will be the kind of incentive the Republican party needs to get its head on straight and figure out that it can't be competitive if it doesn't move back to the center. I would like the New England Republican ethos back. Sadly, that appears to be unlikely for the present.
I don't think any Americanists read my blog. If they did, I would ask for opinions.
No comments:
Post a Comment