Wilson County News
Commentaries header
Wilson County News • 1012 C St • Floresville • TX • 78114 • Ph: 830-216-4519 • Fax: 830-393-3219 • Email:
Thursday, Jul 24, 2014
Login
Not a subscriber? Click here.
Are you a WCN subscriber?
Set up your password.

 
E-Mail
Password
  Remember me
 
  Forgot password?
La Vernia News
Google
Google

Preview the Paper
Preview this week's Paper

Commentaries

Ruy the Day!




E-Mail this Story to a Friend
Print this Story

Disclaimer:
The author of this entry is responsible for this content, which is not edited by the Wilson County News or wilsoncountynews.com.
March 22, 2012 | 1589 views | 10 comments

By Jackie Salit

LindaKillian's book, THE SWING VOTE: The Untapped Power of Independents, is finally getting some attention. A string of authors -- Douglas Schoen , John Avlon, and Omar Ali , to name a few -- have been writing for years about the nascent movement of independent voters, now 40 percent of the country, to little notice from reviewers, pundits and the like.

But last week, Killian finally drew the wrath of Ruy Teixeira, a senior fellow at The Center for American Progress, writing for The New Republic Teixeira emphatically denounces Killian's book for propagating "the greatest myth in American politics: that independents are actually independent." He is outraged that Killian, a columnist for U.S. News & World Report.com and now a resident scholar at The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C., has dared to assert that independent voters are something other than partisans in disguise. Citing a University of Michigan National Election Study showing that some 80 percent of independents lean to one or another of the two major parties, Teixeira pronounces the 40 percent of Americans who are independents to be a fiction, and Killian to be either an idiot or an incompetent.

Wow! For a man (actually, make that a MAN) who has devoted his political career to resuscitating a Democratic Party governing majority (he co-wrote The Emerging Democratic Majority in 2002), you would think he'd be a little more cautious about denouncing independents. Otherwise, his hoped for majority may get another slam, as it did in 2010 when independents expressed their disappointment and frustration with President Obama's inability to conquer the partisanship in Washington, including the partisanship of his own party. Ruy might rue the day he tried to tear down Killian and the volatile movement-in-the-making she writes about.

Teixeira argues that voters are defined by who they vote for. Ergo, if independents vote for a Democrat or a Republican, they are really aligned with that party and are not independents at all. Hence, concludes Teixeira, why recognize the category at all? Leaving aside the obvious point that in nearly every election, the only choice voters have is a Democrat or a Republican, here's where the rubber hits the road. Independents may cast a ballot, or ballots, for one or another major party candidate, but they still feel it is important to maintain their independence. In 2008, 60 percent of independentscast ballots for Barack Obama in the 33 states with open primaries or caucuses, handing him -- rather than Hillary Clinton -- the Democratic nomination. Independents then went on, as a whole, to support Obama 52 percent to 44 percent over John McCain in the general election. They chose the Democraticnominee and the President, but they did not become Democrats.

Similarly, in 2010, when independents punished Obama for subordinating their demand for post-partisan governance to the Democratic Party agenda, they did not re-register as Republicans. The post-midterm election Gallup polls show the percentage of independents increasing (38 percent), the percentage of Democrats on a decline (31 percent), and the Republican levels virtually static (29 percent). At the very least, it seems to me, Teixeira has to offer an explanation of that.

The problem, though, is that to do so means he'd have to give up the equation he has made up: who Americans vote for is who Americans are, politically speaking. My advice is put aside all the polls, the data and the focus groups and just listen to what the 40 percent are saying. They do not wish to enroll in anypolitical party. In a system such as ours, where parties are quasi-governmental institutions which rule the roost, that is no small thing. It is an act of defiance against the partisan establishment. Will that defiance develop into an organized movement? Groups like mine which organize independent voters -- IndependentVoting.org -- believe it will.

To be fair, there are things in Killian's book with which I disagree, most importantly her tendency to characterize independents as "centrists." They aren't. They span the political spectrum on traditional issues. I know this from 30years of organizing. Even the Pew Center agreed that "The growing rejection of partisan identification does not imply a trend toward political moderation...". However much their ideologies vary, though, independents do coalesce around agendas for structural political reform, something that Teixeira belittles with a yawn, even though the parties wield an obscene amount of power over the political process. As former Congressman Mickey Edwards , a champion of nonpartisan reform notes, "The goal is not to destroy parties but to transcend them; to welcome their contributions but end their dominance; and to take back from these private clubs control of our own elections and our ownCongress."

Teixeira observes that Obama's efforts at compromise with Republicans cost him support among independents, which is surely true, but not because independents are really partisans, as he argues. Obama's efforts failed to win independent support because compromise between the existing political camps is increasingly seen as both futile and insufficient. Independents want a new kind of political culture in which parties, partisanship and ideology do not rule the day, a radical demand in the face of the existing culture. The Obama camp would dowell to relate to independent voters on that basis, but Democratic partisans like Teixeira seek to hold Obama hostage to a partisan coalition. There will never be a new progressive majority in this country without including independents as independents, not as "leaners." Given how partisanship is standing in the way of social and economic development, theDemocratic Party cannot substitute itself for that broader coalition.

Like most establishment analysts, Teixeira does not see or value things, in this casemovements, which are in the process of becoming. He is correct that NO LABELS and Americans Elect are vaporous, but that's because they are champions of centrism. They are not organizing independent voters to become a force for political transformation. They're trying to spruce up the old partisan system. Good luck!

The problem with political science, which Teixeira worships, is that it isn't a science and it's extremely political. Killian's book may have its flaws. But she did punch a hole in the Big Boys' prevailing political science paradigm, the one that is strangling the country. You go, girl! That's worth a read right there.

Jacqueline Salit is the President of IndependentVoting.org, a national association of independent voters, and author of the forthcoming book , Independents Rising--Outsider Movements, Third Parties, and the Struggle for a Post-Partisan America, to be released by Palgrave Macmillan (August, 2012).
 
« Previous Blog Entry (March 22, 2012)
 


Your Opinions and Comments
 
Rock'n chair Rambler  
Over Taxed, TX  
March 28, 2012 8:09am
 
 
"and the
four liberal slanted networks"

Why torture yourself? It's all spin and talking points. Plus, the women are ugly, man haters.
 
 
PRAIRIE GROUCH  
GRAND PRAIRIE TX  
March 28, 2012 7:27am
 
 
Rambler....Already read the Drudge, Breitbart, Townhall,
WSJ, Weekly Standard, American Spectator, National
Review, Bloomberg, Fox News, Jerusalem Post, and the
four liberal ... Read More Read More
 
 
Rock'n chair Rambler  
Over Taxed, TX  
March 28, 2012 6:47am
 
 
"a good source of info...."

Or, just read the Drudge Report.
 
 
PRAIRIE GROUCH  
GRAND PRAIRIE TX  
March 27, 2012 2:04pm
 
 
Rambler....Re AG...saw the interview....plan to Google..
curious about details of cases and number of convictions,
and what specific violations were prosecuted. By the
way, ... Read More Read More
 
 
Rock'n chair Rambler  
Over Taxed, TX  
March 27, 2012 12:46pm
 
 
"laws cost taxpayers money.."

Not all laws cost that much, though. But, they do cost something. Let's face it, government costs money. The less they do the ... Read More Read More
 
 
PRAIRIE GROUCH  
GRAND PRAIRIE TX  
March 27, 2012 12:19pm
 
 
Rambler.......Yep....laws cost taxpayers money..I'm
curious how much recent state laws have or will cost the
Texas taxpayer. Maybe I'll Google it.
 
 
Rock'n chair Rambler  
Over Taxed, TX  
March 27, 2012 7:44am
 
 
The best world would be no political parties, no coalitions, no back room deals. Better yet, no politicians at all. If we can figure out how to do that, all our problems ... Read More Read More
 
 
PRAIRIE GROUCH  
GRAND PRAIRIE TX  
March 26, 2012 8:22am
 
 
Rambler....Right on.....when the independents form a
party, produce a slate of candidates, and publish a
party platform, then it will be time to take them
serious. I would ... Read More Read More
 
 
Rock'n chair Rambler  
Over Taxed, TX  
March 25, 2012 8:59am
 
 
Independents, or fence sitters, the undecided, the uninformed and uninvolved, the unconcerned until it's their ox being gored..... yeah, the group that can go either way ... Read More Read More
 
 
Elaine K.  
Floresville  
March 22, 2012 9:44pm
 
 
New column posted.
 

Share your comment or opinion on this story!


You must be logged in to post comments:



Other Commentaries



Commentaries


Commentaries page govtrack.us
Commentaries who represents me?
 
^Top
  Copyright © 2014 Wilson County News. All rights reserved. Web development by Drewa Designs.
^Top