William Jennings Bryan 
George Norris July 2020
At the dawn of the 20th Century, Nebraskans put up political mavericks like George Norris and William Jennings Bryan. Recently Nebraskans sent Democrats Exon, Kerry, and Nelson to the Governor’s mansion and then the U.S. Senate. Like everything, political landscapes change. Today, Nebraska is predominately Republican. In the future, partisanship will shift from right to left, to moderates versus extremists. Trump’s policies often deviate widely from Reagan Conservativism, suggesting the change is underway. If you’ve walked into a voting booth and thought, I don’t like either of these candidates, you may be moderate. Don’t worry, most voters are.
“Trying to make sense of it all, but I can see it makes no sense at all.” (JerryRafferty, Stealers Wheel)
Historically political parties are little more than a
loose amalgamation of special interest groups cobbled together to form a voting
bloc. But today, both parties increasingly use ideological litmus tests to
solidify their base. However, Americans may be on the verge of rejecting this
one-agenda-fits-all politics.
Political Scientist Morris Fiorina found that
while the party platforms have become more extreme, most voters have not
changed their position on key issues in 40 years.[1]
Further, he found that most voters are not supportive of extreme policy
positions. For example, support for DACA
recipients polls into the 70 percentiles. Just last month, 77% of Americans
polled said Roe v Wade should not be overturned.[2] And, depending upon how it is phrased, 57% to
73% want something done to reduce gun-related violence.[3]
Of the 435 Congressional Districts, approximately 40 can be flipped
from one party to the other. Among those is Nebraska’s Second District. The
district is relatively easy to flip but increasingly difficult to hold onto.
Traditionally, in a Primary Election, candidate’s campaigned to a
small group of partisan voters who strongly identified with party ideology.
Then, in the General Election, candidates soften their stances to capture the
moderate middle. Due to low voter turnout, strong partisans represent a higher
share of Primary voters. Subsequently, candidates in the General Elections are
often more ideologically extreme.
“I got a feeling something ain’t right.”
Karl Rove is credited with
a modern campaign approach where candidates cater to heavy partisans in both
the Primary and General Elections. As candidates move away from the political
center, many moderates feel as though their party left them. Previously, partisanship
tended to blur in political middle among moderate Republicans or RINOs such as
John McCollister, and right-leaning Democrats or DINOs, such as Brad Ashford.
As moderates were ejected, party membership fell while Independents increased. A
2020 Gallup reports 25% of voters identified with the GOP, 31% with Democrats, and
40% were Independents.[4]
In Nebraska, the rift between extremists and centrists is
appearing in both parties. Democratic State Party Chair Jane Kleeb’s book, Harvest the Vote (2020), discusses
efforts to reach across partisan divides by appealing to rural and generally
Republican voters. Conversely, in 2018, 2d District Congressional candidate
Kara Eastman wrote, “We won because we showed
that Democrats do not have to "move to the middle" to get people to
vote. “ [5]
Among Republicans, accusations are being directed
against Governor Ricketts and his support for unicameral candidate Julie Slama.
Ricketts stated, “Janet Palmtag is not conservative and she is wrong on the
issues on a number of different things [including] gun control and providing
food stamp benefits for felons.” GOP State Party Chair Dan Welch distanced himself
from a questionable mail piece, which claimed, “Janet Palmtag sides with
Lincoln Liberals, Atheists & Radical extremists.” The split between
Ricketts and former Governors Kerrey (D) and Heinemann (R), Congressman
Fortenbury, and Hal Daub is indicative of a party divided over whether to
support candidates willing to work across party lines and those who are litmus
test conservatives.
Admittedly, my theory is premature and, frankly,
leans towards wishful thinking. But what is clear is that Nebraska’s form of
Prairie Politics has historically been moderate.
“And I’m wondering what it is I should do.”
Moderates,
you’re not alone. But you need to speak up. Like the song says, “It’s so hard
to keep this smile on my face. Losing control, I’m all over the place. Clowns
to the left of me, jokers to the right, here I am, stuck in the middle with
you. “
[1]
Unstable Majorities, Morris Fiorina, Hoover Press, 2017
[2] https://www.npr.org/2019/06/07/730758875/poll-shows-most-americans-support-abortion-rights-but-with-some-limitations
[3] https://www.npr.org/2019/08/10/749792493/americans-largely-support-gun-restrictions-to-do-something-about-gun-violence
[5]
Omaha World Herald, December 13, 2018
Appreciate the sensible Middle
ReplyDeleteGreat, sensible piece in the OWH editorial section Friday by Rick Galusha. I regret that it is increasingly difficult for voters distill any honesty or balance from many/most major news sources today. Cable news and online/social media on both sides are brainwashing the public and discouraging critical thought. Much media and political communication today tries to inspire anger and distrust in us voters. I do not usually make good decisions when I am angry — how about you?
Party litmus tests make it very difficult for moderate candidates to wage a well-funded campaign. A bit of critical thought by each of us would reveal that most of us, as pointed out by Mr. Galusha, live our lives in that important, sensible “Middle.” That “Middle” is what really makes great families, schools, neighborhoods, communities — and governments.
Dave Wimmer, West Point, Neb.
The value of nonpartisanship
As a former teacher of Nebraska politics and government, I read with interest Rick Galusha’s excellent commentary “Nebraska politics moving back toward the middle” (July 24). While I agree the parties both seem to be getting more extreme in their views, their danger to our republic doesn’t stop there. The appropriate role for political parties in a democratic republic is, as Mr. Galusha states, to form “a loose amalgamation of special interest groups” to develop their platform and to work to get their candidates elected to office. Unfortunately, political parties have colluded with each other to extend their power into governance as well.
The purpose of George W. Norris’s advocacy for the nonpartisan election of the Legislature was to limit the role of political parties to elections only and to deny political parties any role in governing. Unfortunately, we the people have stood idly by and allowed the parties to usurp the central role of the citizenry. The Democratic and Republican caucuses in Congress and in most other state legislatures work to effectively dilute the influence of citizens by imposing partisan discipline to pressure and control our elected representatives.
Candidates for the Nebraska Unicameral run on a nonpartisan ballot, but the party affiliation of each Nebraska state senator is usually common knowledge. Nevertheless, the strength of Nebraska’s system is that lawmakers cannot caucus by party. This relegates the party bosses to the lobby along with every other special interest group.
The view from the outside is that your governor and political parties are working hard to make Nebraska just like any other state. Caveat emptor!
Stan Sibley, Glenwood, Iowa
JIM BECHTEL Jul 24, 2020 7:46am
ReplyDeleteI thank Rick Galusha for this -and his other projects (I still have my Omaha Blues Project T-shirt).
When only a minority of Americans can even name the three branches of government, I have to wish everyone could have taken the wonderful political science courses I enjoyed from the late Orv Menard at UNO (but maybe you can take Rick's course at Bellevue).
In any case, I want to add two important factors shaping current politics:
1) Inequality. Extreme politics follows from extreme economic inequality. You can measure and chart partisanship and inequality. Over the past century the two correlate closely in a U-shaped curve. Lowest inequality during the half century of progress from FDR to Reagan, when politicians worked together, the safety net was strong, and the middle class prospered. Then the curves bend upward; progressive policies were undermined, and both inequality & partisanship have returned to highs we hadn't seen for a century. You can see the curves for yourself here: https://www.businessinsider.com/polarization-and-income-inequality-correlation-2014-6 Economic exploitation brings political instability.
2. Misinformation, a form of propaganda: "The 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: The growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy" -sociologist. Alex Carey. David Brock, a former right-wing propagandist himself, had an attack of conscience and wrote an excellent insider account covering the past few decades: "The Republican Noise Machine: Right-wing media and how it corrupts democracy." The outrageous propaganda spewed 24/7 on Fox is so voluminous it takes a full-time staff of fact-checkers at Media Matters to keep track of it all: https://www.mediamatters.org/
Mainstream ideas
ReplyDeleteI agree with the premise of Rick Galusha’s column “Signs of Nebraska politics moving back toward the middle.” Most voters are “moderates” and don’t care for extremes. However, since Mr. Galusha’s piece referred to a quote from me that, out of context, suggested otherwise, I wanted to add what I believe was left out of his discussion.
Quite often in the political arena, politicians get accused of being “extreme” when in actuality, their positions are mainstream and popular with a majority of Americans. To illustrate:
89% of Americans favor expanded background checks for gun purchasers.
84% of Americans approve of paid maternity leave.
77% of Americans want to uphold Roe v. Wade.
74% of Americans support granting legal status to DACA recipients.
69% of Americans support single-payer health care.
67% of Americans favor raising the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour.
67% of registered voters believe in a wealth tax targeting billionaires.
Yet quite regularly, politicians who espouse these popular ideas are called “extreme.” If a majority of the country is behind these ideas, can we really call them “extreme?”
Kara Eastman, Omaha