What constitutes a "centrist" position?

[Garrett78]

What constitutes a centrist or moderate position in the US? And what percentage would you say fall into that category?

I suppose they might be those who, leading up to elections, are undecided, which I always find dumbfounding. But why are they undecided? Are they centrists or just ignorant of how different the candidates are?

Before someone mentions so-called independents, let me point out what studies make clear, which is that most independents are very partisan and not centrists/moderates.

Anyway, terms like centrist, left, right, far left and far right get used a lot around here. But I wonder how many can define what they mean? And can a consensus be reached as to the definitions? If not, the use of those terms is problematic.

[OnDoutside]

1. Obviously a centrist would be able to agree on a consensus !

[Hortensis]

24. Right. The old sausage making consensuses between parties

and other interest groups, such as the AAA and Sierra Club, that overall worked well enough to enable widespread prosperity and stability. Centrist cooperation reflected majority power, what most people wanted. We older ones remember the days when almost all full-time jobs paid a living wage, and usually a lot more. Because we insisted.

Notably, centrist by its nature rejects destabilizing extremism that appeals to only small, zealous factions who can't cooperate and instead believe they should impose their views on the majority.

No coincidence that this era's very wealthy invested long and heavy in breaking our ruling center. They learned from lesson from the centrist coalition that defeated the wealthy before and made the New Deal reforms possible.

Also no coincidence that this era's very wealthy are promoting extremist factions on both right and left, such as the Sanders and Freedom Causus factions, which also attack the center for them and help keep us roiling and unable to come together.

[OnDoutside]

48. 100% with you on all of that. I've said it here before that centrists shouldn't be apologising for

their beliefs, they should become vocal about the positivity of working together.

[Hortensis]

50. The utlrawealthy purged the GOP caucuses of moderates

as part of restructuring the GOP to serve their hard-core conservative economics. They went hard right socially to bring in the religious right and social conservatives. The few left who might claim to be moderate on some positions have kept their jobs by voting hard right, that is, are as corrupted as any of the rest, people like Susan Collins and John McCain.

The MSM, btw, enable this by pretending it's all relative, so that the conservative extremists in the Freedom Caucus are being called "conservatives" and the ruling wing, who serve the ultrawealthy by institutionalizing business corruption and transferring our nation's wealth upwards are being called "moderates."

(Fwiw and btw, political psychologists say there is no such thing as a "moderate" political personality; moderates are either liberal or conservative at base, as are extremists.)

[DemoHack]

2. Great question...

Totally subjective?

It would seem I'm "centrist" on DU. In the USA as a whole though, I've always considered myself a mainstream LBJ liberal (LBJ is my guy).

Maybe, bucking the "liberal" position on an issue every now and then? But on how many issues? What percent?

We have a great candidate for the US House in IL-12 (it's a conservative-leaning district with GOP toadie Rep. Mike Bost) named Brendan Kelly who recently said, “I run into a lot of guys who love their union, support the Second Amendment and they want to be able to smoke weed whenever they want without having to worry about going to jail. Put that into a neat little political consultant diagram. I don’t know if you can do that.”

I dig his point-of-view.

[TimeSnowDemos]

5. That's a libertarian position

Which is essentially a right-wing position.

[mythology]

16. I don't associate libertarians with union support

In fact the official Libertarian party position is that they oppose paying dues to a union as a condition of government employment. In the private sector they oppose an employer being mandated to bargain with a union.

Also the Libertarian party opposes any limitation on owning any firearm. Just because somebody supports the 2nd Amendment doesn't mean signing on with no restrictions at all.

Life is more complex than the little box you want to put people in.

[Demsrule86]

21. I am sad to say that my son almost a socialist and UAW reports that some in his plant support the

GOP...hard to believe so I get what the poster is saying. He is right. Although LBJ was one of the greatest unappreciated liberals of our time with his war on poverty, civil rights legislation and of course Medicaid...he got more legislation through than even Roosevelt.

[TimeSnowDemos]

40. Maybe

Buy the vast majority of people that conflate freedom to own guns and use pot are.

Ron Paul, Rand Paul, etc. believe exactly this.

In fact ending the war on drugs is a central party platform.

https://www.lp.org/issues/war-on-drugs/

As is protecting the see second amendment

https://www.lp.org/why-guns-matter/

As for Brendan Kelly....IMO he seems pretty lousy, but he's from IL, so... Maybe that's the best IL can muster these days.

As for those terms, they aren't fixed, and are instead relative. Very liberal in Arkansas is different from very liberal in Vermont is different from very liberal in the Netherlands.

[TimeSnowDemos]

43. I do

of course...we all get to judge each other...

I will point out that it's a bit weird that he's a top recruit considering he openly talks about working with Trump on border security... is that the new DCCC position and I missed it?

In fact the only two priorities he lists on his site are both also Trump priorities (opioid crisis and infrastructure)... he also mentions the lousy biofuels garbage...

Maybe he means these things in a good way, in left way, but sense he has no real policies on his website, who knows.

I see he's also anti-Nancy Pelosi...

He also attacked being politically correct when it comes to the US Mexican Border, telling voters to "be scared" of people coming over the border.

Adding - about IL " We have too many districts that are blue, blue, blue – deep blue."

Not sure if the DCCC is happy with that??

Anyway... and like I said... maybe this is AS Democrat as someone can be in Souther IL. That wouldn't surprise me one bit.

[TimeSnowDemos]

46. Really

So now not supporting someone that's anti-Pelosi and who complains about district that are 'too blue' is trolling?

Very intereating standard you've got there.

[mcar]

53. That's not a libertarian position

[TimeSnowDemos]

54. It's literally

On the libertarian website. Legalize pot and protect the second amendment.

Rand Paul and Ron Paul take the same positions.

And of course the guy is anti-Pelosi and think the political strife in America is partially caused by areas that are 'too blue'.

Weird positions for a Democrat.... And reminds me of the Republicans that ran as Dems during the W years.

He also, for the record, said that Americans should be 'very scared' of people coming over the border illegally, despite immigrants committing few crimes than native born citizens.

I want Dems to win back the house and senate and white house, but I ALSO remember how conservative Dems frustrated real progress repeatedly under Obama.

Seems like a mistake to maybe avoid again if possible.

[GulfCoast66]

65. Protection of the 2nd amendment is also in our platform

Democrats support rational gun laws. But our platform expressly states the right to keep and own is enshrined in the constitution.

[TimeSnowDemos]

68. True but

You'll note that national marijuana legalization is NOT. Ironically Dems want a States Rights approach to decriminilization.

So someone that wants decriminalization AND is a gun carrying 2nd amendment promotor is much closer to the libertarian end of things than a Dem. Libtertarians have been pushing both of these FOR YEARS. Dems only added the marijuana thing to the platform in 2016.

And - let's just say that Democrats are WIDELY seen as paying lip service to the 2nd Amendment in places like IL, while the right is seen as basing entire campaigns around it. True or not, that's the general perception. If it was up to me the Dem platform would be about reforming the 2nd Amendment and removing the individual right to own guns as the de facto position, instead replacing it with a "you can have a gun if you can demonstrate a need for one" approach in most countries. But that's just an aside.

To make this clear though, here's the relevant bit of the Party platform:

"Preventing Gun Violence

With 33,000 Americans dying every year, Democrats believe that we must finally take sensible action to address gun violence. While responsible gun ownership is part of the fabric of many communities, too many families in America have suffered from gun violence. We can respect the rights of responsible gun owners while keeping our communities safe. To build on the success of the lifesaving Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, we will expand and strengthen background checks and close dangerous loopholes in our current laws; repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) to revoke the dangerous legal immunity protections gun makers and sellers now enjoy; and keep weapons of war—such as assault weapons and large capacity ammunition magazines (LCAM's)—off our streets. We will fight back against attempts to make it harder for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to revoke federal licenses from law breaking gun dealers, and ensure guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists, intimate partner abusers, other violent criminals, and those with severe mental health issues. There is insufficient research on effective gun prevention policies, which is why the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention must have the resources it needs to study gun violence as a public health issue."

Here's the Libertarian version:

"The right to self defense is one of our most fundamental rights. Few people will argue against that. However, some believe that people should not be allowed to arm themselves. Libertarians strongly disagree.

Imagine a small person, walking home after a late shift at work. Imagine that person is attacked by someone twice their size. The victim fights back but is unable to defend themselves against the much larger attacker.

Now imagine if the victim was armed. With the help of a gun, the victim has a chance at self defense against the much larger attacker.

Gun rights are important for everyone, but especially those that are physically weaker.

Banning guns would not curb violence or deaths…it will just change the nature of violence and deaths. It would result in violent criminals having more power to perpetrate violence against innocent people. Violent criminals will be emboldened if they know that average Americans are unable to defend themselves.

And banning guns would mean people who should be free to go about their business, for example traveling home from work after dark, will live in greater fear. It will mean that people who live in more dangerous areas (and who are typically poorer) have fewer options to defend themselves and their families.

Libertarians support people’s rights to defend themselves and to arm themselves. We see it as immoral for government to try to prevent someone from doing so."

Kelly, as State Attorney, supported concealed carry. HE makes vague noises about the second amendment, as noted, which ignore any notion of increased gun control AND has repeatedly dodged the "should semi-automatic weapons be banned" question. In fact his answer is something like, "they're ok if the person isn't crazy".

I have repeatedly said that this might be AS much of democrat as one can be in Southern IL and get elected, but... that, and his repeated public statement against Nancy Pelosi as leader AND his statement that part of the problem in American politics is that some districts are "too blue"...

Well... hardly seems like a very liberal guy. IMO.

[GulfCoast66]

69. My point still remains

The Democratic Party supports Americans right own firearms with reasonable restrictions. And a majority of Democrats share that view. That pretty much invalidates the idea that supporting firearms is a libertarian positions.

It is quite obvious you strongly believe that, but the facts do not support your position.

The main tenant of librtarians is very little government. The Democratic Party believes the opposite. Firearms and pot are not at the core of either parties philosophy. I grant you lots of libertarians are in it for the pot. But once the major parties accept pot their support will move to one of the major parties. Most to the republicans since many libertarians are really pot smoking conservatives.

[Demsrule86]

22. I hear you and you are right...many union guys believe the left betrayed them as well as the right

and not all especially in the rust belt vote Democratic these days. I love Johnson by the way...one of our greatest and least appreciated presidents.

[pnwmom]

3. It depends on the issue.

On abortion, for example, there is a wide range of opinion between all abortions are allowed for any reason for any length of time to all abortions are banned no matter what. That large area in the middle could be called "centrist."

[TimeSnowDemos]

4. Moderate political views

Instead of extreme political views.

The issue of course is that the left in the US is hardly extreme. So moderate tends towards right in the US, while extreme left doesn't really exist.

But this only becomes clear in a larger context, which most Americans are ignorant of.

A simple example would be guns.

Whats the moderate position?

The extreme position on the right is unfettered access. The extreme position on the left is what? Universal background checks, etc.?

In any other country the MAINSTREAM left position re guns would be confiscation and extremely limited access afterwards.

So a moderate US LEFT position re guns is right wing in every other country.

And the same is true of MANY things like taxes, education and Healthcare.

Th US is just so far right in so many ways that its left is center right in... So many ways.

If Americans weren't so insular and insulated - often by choice - from the rest of the world it they would realize this, but as it stands they don't. And won't any time soon.

[Demsrule86]

8. NO, a left left position is gun confiscation so a moderate position would be background checks and

gun registration.

[TimeSnowDemos]

11. NO

Because there's NO mainstream party or politician that represents gun confiscation in America. That is NOT what left in AMERICA means.

You've described - your moderate position - as what left means in America, but that is centre right or even hard right position in some European countries.

In Japan your moderate position would be EXTREME, because it has no party that represents the notion of access to guns in even a regulated way.

And things like open carry and concealed carry... those are insane nonsense that would be laughed out of the room in the entire rest of the civilised world... but in the US it's the policy of the ruling party in government.

At any rate, no, your position is not moderate in a larger sense. Only in America.

[Demsrule86]

12. True lefties advocate gun confiscation...so it is true...that is the left position and background

checks, registration is the consensus opinion which engenders much support...IE the centrist position.

[TimeSnowDemos]

14. It doesn't matter what

people not in power and not even represented by anyone or any party in power think... it's like saying you think gun owners should have access to nuclear weapons, so why can't we compromise on the moderate position of non-nuclear ballistic missiles...

The positions worth considering are those represented by politicians and parties. Fringe positions - outliers - aren't included in any equation about moderation by their very nature.

So in America, where one party holds a center-right position on guns, and one holds a lunatic fringe far right position on guns, moderate mean compromising between those positions.

Which is why NO moderates anywhere use things like confiscation as a bargaining chip, and why those on the right use it as as a fear tactic: it's the equivalent of a monster in a movie... scary and fictional.

So again, in America, moderate re: guns is somewhere between center-right and extreme-right, relative to the rest of the world. No one anywhere in power or in the media in America is advocating a position seen as even center-left in the rest of the world.

[TimeSnowDemos]

15. Real world example

In Ireland, often seen as one of the MOST conservative EU countries, this happens regularly:

"OVER THE LAST three years, hundreds of gun licences have been revoked in this country.

According to firearms legislation, a licence can be revoked for a number of reasons, including the person has ‘no good reason for requiring the firearm’..."

http://www.thejournal.ie/gun-licences-2584691-Feb2016/

That is NOT a hard left position in Europe. In America it would probably lead to armed standoffs between gun nuts and police.

Moderate is like an average between multiple sides, and when those sides are both on the right side of the political spectrum, moderate will by definition be on the right side of the political spectrum, which gun policy is in the US.

[Demsrule86]

20. I would add since I assume you meant to post this to me...that it really

doesn't matter what Europeans do or think, this is a uniquely American problem based on second amendment rights found in our constitution which I believe has been interpreted incorrectly but it is what it is.

[TimeSnowDemos]

25. It does of course

The OP asked what a centrist believes, etc., and without context the ACTUAL answer to that question varies.

Trying to excuse the extreme nature of the US position is also ridiculous. Why should US civilians have to die - 30,000 a year - to protect a document which can be changed and should be changed, if only the populous had the political will? Unless the argument is that that's just part of what makes America, America?

Because if it's NOT then fight for REAL moderation on guns, which obviously includes VAST confiscation.

Any policy which ends in 20K plus people a year dying unnecessarily is NOT a left wing position, anywhere but in America.

In context I stand by my original statement.

[Demsrule86]

26. Who cares about other countries...this is an AMerican problem due to

our constitution and it is not relevant.

[TimeSnowDemos]

30. you should

America is not the center of the world, AND - and this is the IMPORTANT bit - the rest fo the world has SOLVED this problem.... ignoring solutions... that sure SOUNDS typically American, but... should it be... I'd say no. Then again I wouldn't support a policy that results in 30K deaths a year.

[shanny]

47. +1

[Demsrule86]

18. We are not talking about people in power we are talking about different political factions...

Those who seek power to express their beliefs in concrete policies...you can't dismiss a sizeable faction because at the moment they have no power.

[TimeSnowDemos]

27. They've never had power

and likely never will, at least in our lifetime.

In fact, I challenge you to find a single US politician that has even floated the notion of a large scale gun confiscation, in the last 20 years.

You won't.

And so, again, fringe beliefs with no traction are meaningless. The party will NOT support it, and the MOST vocal active gun control groups don't even dare to mention it, except to repeatedly and loudly say that they aren't trying to take your guns.

[Demsrule86]

19. Gun control beliefs have confiscation on the far left spectrum, gun registration/gun control in the

middle and open carry with no rules whatsoever concerning guns on the far right. Europe has little to do with it.

[TimeSnowDemos]

28. Context

is of course meaningful.

Arguing to simplify an argument is not a serious position IMO.

[MountCleaners]

52. A lot of leftists support 2nd Amendment rights

A lot of avowed leftists support the right to keep and bear arms - check out the positions of any number of socialist groups. Gun confiscation is more of a radical liberal position, if there is such a thing. Many leftists feel people should own guns for self-defense.

[Garrett78]

35. The GOP's effective smear campaign aside, virtually nobody is advocating gun confiscation.

Certainly not among those with any power or influence. In spite of what Fox News might say.

[PETRUS]

42. What makes gun confiscation a "left" position?

I know quite a few people who are rather far to the left, and their views range from okay with to emphatically supportive of the right to keep and bear arms.

[OilemFirchen]

44. Your interlocutor picked an unfortunate example for his misguided analysis.

While it's true that in Western democracies, the modern "left" tends toward confiscation and bans, the most restrictive gun laws in the world are generally in the Far East.

One wonders if he would argue that China is more "leftist" than the U.S.

[OilemFirchen]

17. Switzerland has very liberal gun ownership laws.

You might do well to avoid accusing others of being "insular and insulated".

[TimeSnowDemos]

29. It does not

LOL

I love seeing this joke of an argument.

Switzerland does NOT allow guns and ammo to be stored together, which means all those militamen don't have access to bullets.

Then again Switzerland has mandatory military service. It trains everyone in the country to use a gun, because they are it's army. But even in that context, gun laws are extremely strict, guns are REGULARLY confiscated, and gun ownership has plummeted. Which is great, because Switzerland - as you'd expect - has the highest gun death rate in Europe. Guns = gun death.

PRIVATE guns for hunting are available, but can not be carried loaded, ever. And a special license is needed to transport them in public, even unloaded. Getting a concealed carry permit is ONLY possible if you need it for your job. A FEW people have them for protection, but those people are the extreme exception.

And that's just the very tip of the iceberg:

https://www.csgv.org/the-truth-about-guns-in-switzerland/

In short, no. Switzerland does NOT have very liberal gun laws, except in the context of Europe and Asia. Compared to the US Switzerland has EXTREMELY strict gun laws.

[OilemFirchen]

32. "Joke of an argument".

You're making quite an interesting first impression.

Much of what you've posted is simply untrue, but irrelevant. If you're going to compare the U.S. to Western Europe (a specious comparison for the purpose of discerning "centrist" politics), you have to include Switzerland, and you have to do so honestly. Switzerland's gun laws, including limitations, are very similar to those of several states here. Their political positions are similar as well, with the "left" arguing for bans, and the "right" arguing for unfettered access. Note, BTW, that the editorial which you've cited observes, correctly, that the populace, and, most notably, the vast majority of cantons rejected the nation's restrictive referendum.

Welcome to DU, BTW.

[Garrett78]

34. I'm glad to see someone make this point.

It's all relative. Much of what's dismissed as "far left" is, or should be, considered common sense. The Republican Party and mainstream media has done an incredible job of warping perspectives.

[TimeSnowDemos]

36. 100%

And I'm glad you feel that way too.

[Trust Buster]

6. A centrist has a level headed personality. As you move from the political center towards either

Political extremes, the level of narcissism increases significantly. Those with more extreme political views, purists if you will, make it all about their own emotions as opposed to the facts. A centrist has a more stable emotional personality IMO.

[Sailor65x1]

31. Well stated

I couldn't have described it better if I'd tried.

[Garrett78]

37. What does "centrist" mean in terms of policy positions? That's what I'm looking for.

Not vague platitudes. Is the Democratic Party platform left, centrist, right, some of each? Which policy positions fit each category?

[Demsrule86]

7. There are centrist in both parties still...some have become independents on the GOP side due to the

radical nature of the modern Republican Party. A centrist position is fix the ACA and get a public option as we have a better chance...I believe that so in this case, I hold this 'centrist' position. A left left position is to demand single payer right now (even if we have no real shot of getting it passed) , aminimum income and free college...it isn't hard. The left and the right battle it out but the centrist position is usually where we end up...the gerrymander in the house has stopped that and turned our Republic on its head.

[shanny]

49. ...

Centrists in the Republican Party? Name one in office. And I say in office because their votes/voices are the only ones that count.

[Demsrule86]

59. I said some have become independents...but the votes are still there.

And if we have no moderates than how do you propose to win the Senate without moderate candidates in Gop areas ...there is no other way if you look at the Senate.

[Garrett78]

60. As I mentioned in the OP, the vast majority of independents are highly partisan.

They aren't moderates. Numerous studies have confirmed this. Most independents just like referring to themselves as independent.

[Demsrule86]

64. Look the reality is we are going after moderate Republicans and independent votes in order to take

back the house in areas Trump won the presidency by few votes or not all...mostly GOP states.

[muriel_volestrangler]

9. In the survey analysis I think you are asking because of

it's people who picked 5 or 6 on a scale of 1 to 10 - which is 44.6% of the population in the European Values Survey: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fOGwtRUF-y-98IcDs-3YYrtREl8GbaoH/view

[aikoaiko]

10. I think their was a polisci article that described centrists

As being more complex than moderate.

Complex in the sense that they held some Right or some Left views while typically leaning in the other direction.

[Demsrule86]

13. Centrists hold different views on different issues.

And there is little my way or the highway talk from centrist...consider Jill Stein, Nina Turner and Susan Sarandon.

[Demsrule86]

23. I saw that article...interesting. But I don't think moderates hold GOP positions today as that

party has gone so far to the right...bordering on nutjobs.

[leftstreet]

33. They don't want much to change

They're comfortable with the way things are in their lives and aren't happy with many changes

They used to be referred to as 'conservatives,' but that label has been attached to right-leaning religious types

[treestar]

51. Agreeing to the ACA rather than holding out for single payer

is one. Everyone who agrees to the ACA on DU is in favor of single payer. But the ACA got through, so the "centrists" supported it and looked at it as progress.

I don't think centrists hold moderate positions so much as that they settle for something in between and believe it is progress and hope for more in the future. It is more of a strategy.

[Garrett78]

55. Few have defined centrist in specific terms. I should have clarified.

I'm wondering what everyone considers to be a centrist position on specific issues. Everything from health care to taxes to higher education to climate change and environmental protection in general to gun control to equal pay for women to wages in general to immigration to capital punishment to drug laws to defense spending to LGBTQ rights to all that which is in the platform of The Movement for Black Lives.

I suspect most who use terms like "centrist" or "far left" haven't thought critically or specifically about what those terms might mean.

[Kaleva]

56. Look at the extreme right and extreme left on any issue and split the differance.

Gun control is a good example. The far left may argue for a complete ban on guns while the far right may argue for no restrictions on gun ownership. Most people here at DU argue for some version of a centrist position.

[Garrett78]

61. I've not heard anyone who has power and influence call for the banning of all guns.

[Kaleva]

66. Read your own OP. It doesn't speak of people who have power and influence.

[Captain Stern]

57. Good question. I don't think it's easy to nail down an answer.

Is a Centrist a person that doesn't take a 'right' or 'left' position on any issues, or is it a person that takes a 'right position' on some and a 'left' position on others?

A simple example:

Person A: Opposes all abortion (even in cases of rape or incest) because they believe a fetus is a human being, and therefore abortion is murder. They also oppose all instances of the death penalty, because even executing someone guilty of horrific crimes is still murder.

Person B: Is ok with abortions because they support a woman's right to choose However, they think that once a fetus could live outside of the womb, aborting it should maybe be illegal because that would be murder. They think the death penalty is fine for really horrific crimes, because sometimes it's ok to kill people. Neither issue is that big a deal to them.

Are either of these follks Centrists? Are they both Centrists?

[Garrett78]

62. That's also a good question.

I was really hoping people would attempt to define a centrist position on many specific issues. See post #55.

But hardly anyone has. Mostly it's just empty platitudes. People toss around terms without ever thinking about what they might mean.

[Snotcicles]

58. Most of the people I know that call themselves Centrists are really noncommittal. nt

[Uncle Joe]

63. The "center" depends on what the U.S. is experiencing at a particular time in history

It shifts being pulled to the left or right as our culture or society evolves/devolves.

In many cases the media presentation of what constitutes the "center" lags behind actual popular opinion, in truth media presentation of the center is just another name for the status quo.

It usually takes a major crisis to occur before the status quo significantly changes or moves.

Thanks for the thread Garrett

[Gothmog]

67. I like the Democrat's positions

There is a great deal to like in the Democrats message https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/05/21/democrats-just-rolled-out-a-broad-reform-agenda-would-it-make-a-difference/?utm_term=.dea1079bbf74

Here are some of the substantive measures they propose:

Voting: Automatic voter registration, paper-verified votes, an end to felon disenfranchisement, steps to make it easier for voters with disabilities to cast ballots, same-day registration, expanded early voting, an end to partisan gerrymandering.
Ethics: New enforcement power for the Office of Government Ethics, tighter disclosure requirements for lobbyists.
Campaign finance: Tax-deductible donations for House candidates, 6-to-1 matching of contributions up to $150 to enhance value of small-dollar contributions, a constitutional amendment to repeal the Citizens United decision.

These kinds of plans are always presented as transformative, with the potential to at last bring about an age free of corruption and special-interest influence. Which perhaps isn’t surprising; you don’t expect politicians to say, “Here are some ideas that will have a marginally positive effect, even though the fundamental problems will remain.”

But in some ways, that’s the truth. It’s particularly true on ethics reform, which we hear more about whenever there’s some kind of scandal in Congress. And every president comes into office saying they’re going to eliminate the power of special interests and run an unusually ethical administration.