Nixon's the One!

In one of the more interesting television commentaries last week, CNN pundit Fareed Zacharia had an interesting take on who is responsible for the nation’s ills: Richard Nixon. I almost fell out of my chair. He claimed that the Watergate scandal changed the culture in Washington. Congress enacted all of these sunshine and disclosure laws requiring the people’s business be done in the light of day instead of in the smoke filled room. All of this disclosure means the public can see how its representatives are actually voting and conducting themselves. This prevents said representatives from obtaining compromise in private where that compromise might cost them the next election back home. Really?

Because I am a true believer in the smoke filled room and power politics, he may be right. This country has moved steadily towards ideologically pure political parties for the past thirty odd years. If you do a timeline, you will probably see the trend towards polarization picked up speed with Nixon’s resignation, and the Carter’s election after Ford pardoned Nixon. That, plus residual distrust in government after the Vietnam War, led to not only institutional changes in Congress relating to how it conducts business and lobbying rules, but to changes in the how Presidential candidates are nominated.  Out with the power politics and in with those annoying primaries where people actually get to vote.

Ideologically pure political parties have long existed in Europe. It works there because the Europeans use a parliamentary system where the victorious party takes control of the entire government. It sinks or swims accordingly. If they don’t do the job, they get the boot. We don’t have that kind of a system. We have a shared power system which can end in deadlock and gridlock. Whether that is good or bad is in the eye of the beholder. The current deficit debate is the result of that system.

I’m not sure anyone wants to go back to the days of cloak room politics. On the other hand, it DID move politics towards moderation. Party bosses picked who they thought could win. In Presidential politics, the nomination would not be clear sometimes for several days, and often not until two in the morning the night of the nominations. Not now, when it’s time for the party convention, you know who the nominee is going to be by simply adding up who won what primary and caucus. Boring.

The voters in the primaries tend to be ideologically pure activists, especially in states with closed primaries. This is aggravated by the movement of many voters from political party identification toward being deemed Independents. That may be noble on the surface, but the vast number of independents who don't participate in the primary process are left with a general election choice of either someone from the right or left more distant from the center than the Indpendents might wish.

At the legislative level, members of the House are particularly open to scrutiny by the political extremes in his/her party that can run a candidate against the incumbent in a primary. And they are up for re-election every two years making them vulnerable when the heat is on. It’s tough to do what’s right for the country when it may or may not coincide with ideologically pure voters at home.

On the other hand, this is a republic. Our representatives are supposed to represent our views in Washington, good, bad or otherwise. That is the eternal dilemma for all politicians. Should I vote my conscience or vote to please my constituents who might not have access to information that I have? That's a tough question.

Political theory aside, its good to know that as our credit rating is about to be downgraded, as we are about to default on our debt, as we fight three wars, as we prepare to deal with Obamacare, we know who to blame. Nixon's the one!  Damn...I should have voted for Hubert Humphrey!