Thread: Border politics

I like this article!

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/specialgues ... r_politics

Border Politics

By Leigh Graham | bio
I have always maintained that I’m waiting for the revolution before running before political office. The nasty, costly midterm elections that wrapped up this week renew my faith that I’m witnessing a slow but radical overhaul of our antiquated and insular two-party political system. While the Democrats certainly have cause for celebration, there is a different trend emerging beneath this debilitating, once-a-decade, one-party sweep of Congress.


Like many Americans, I found the vicious tenor of this campaign season alarming, and indicative of our political polarization. Professor Shanto Iyengar of Stanford’s Political Communications Lab thinks that the real point of all this “sensational” advertising is to have Americans “withdraw” from politics. We’re witnessing the opposite effect. A steadfast implosion of our two-party system has vitriolic Democrats and Republicans going down swingin’. Moving in to occupy the vast space between extremist American political poles is a growing, diverse population of Independents and minority-party voters that illustrates the changing shape of the US political field.



From 2000-2004, Independents rose by 21% among the 25 states that count party numbers, compared to just over seven percent for Dems and 5.5% for the GOP. Arizona is witnessing the fastest rise in registered independent voters among those 25 states. A border state with a household population that is 60% white and 29% Hispanic, Arizona hosted one of several key Senate races this fall, as Democrat Jim Pederson challenged Republican incumbent Jon Kyl on issues of tax cuts, terrorism and immigration. Like those in Virginia and New Jersey, this Senate race unfolded across a racial and ethnic demographic terrain that is visibly different than that of the overall United States. For many of us, stark ideological positions on issues such as immigration or marriage equality (to highlight a key issue in New Jersey’s race) don’t reflect our nuanced experiences in our shifting socio-economic landscapes. While Republicans and Democrats scrabble over emerging cohorts of voters (e.g., “Western Democrats”), polls of the highly desirable Latino vote demonstrate that voter preferences are no longer so easily categorized.


Races in my home state of Massachusetts illustrate evolving demographic trends in current elections. Our primaries generated the highest turnout in sixteen years, with the greatest percentage of voters in formerly “written off” “immigrant- and minority-rich” neighborhoods. This “ongoing shift in demographics and politics” that defines Boston’s status as a minority-majority city is indicative of the nationwide churn that underpins much of the voter shift in our fossilized two-party system. As this week’s elections demonstrate, the changing face of politics reflects our country’s changing demographics.

Yet Massachusetts’s gubernatorial slate reveals perhaps the last lingering hold of our two-party system on American electoral politics: the role of (vast quantities of) money in politics. In the rainbow of four candidates (one African-American and one Greek-American man, and two white women – one a lesbian, no less!), three are millionaires. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, in 2005 35% of Congress were millionaires, compared to just one percent of the U.S. population. As economic inequality in the U.S. grows, the wealthiest Americans consolidate their grip on our political system. While U.S. citizens and immigrants alike face shrinking wages, job insecurity and disappearing or non-existent benefits, an insulated group of elites funds and runs our country, leading us astray into Iraq and simultaneously eroding the tax base that supports our troops and nation.

Unsurprisingly, the economy was of little direct use for either party this election season. But destabilized economies at home and worldwide due to 30 years of Western-led economic liberalization and globalization indirectly bring us to current electoral debates about immigration and terrorism. The rising trend in Independent affiliation demonstrates our rebellion against the binary policy options that got us here. Now if only we could afford to throw our own hats in the ring.

Now if only we could afford to throw our own hats in the ring.

There is a problem that we'll need to address somehow. I think the Founders couldn't foresee the enormous funds that running for office would require. There were three candidates running for mayor here. The independent guy didn't even get invited to debates and received no press. He was properly registered and a sane human being that could have brought something to discussions. How is that right?

There is control over the two-party system that seems insurmountable due to money, various groups and who knows what all. And yet, due to the internet, freer thoughts and ideas are available to citizens. So there just may be a movement yet to help change the status quo, hope so. I believe this country is ripe and eager for change.