Health insurance reform and the middle vote

[Oregone]

Essentially, economic and political theory holds that public policy outcomes will tend to the centre. The most famous version of this is the Median Voter Theory, first articulated by Duncan Black and then expanded on by Anthony Downs.

This theory is typically applied to elections, rather than legislative votes, but both are derived from public choice, an important school of political theory. In short, for majority elections where there are two parties and the issue menu is arrayed along a single dimension, politicians maximize their number of votes by committing to the policy position of the median voter.

However, the Democrats were smarter this time that in the 1990’s. Those on the left saw that defeating “health care reform” would set their cause back. For instance, Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich – who would probably line up as a moderate New Democrat in Canadian politics, and is probably the most left-wing member of Congress – threatened to vote against the bill because it didn’t include a public option. He didn’t in the end, and his vote was crucial to passage.

In the end, the Democratic Party left held, the leadership was able to drive to the centre, deals were made to appease pro-life Democrats and a bill was passed.

After a year of searching for the middle voter in Congress, the Democrats may be better positioned to find the middle voter in the election to come.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/andrew-steele/health-insurance-reform-and-the-middle-vote/article1508166/

-------------------

I find this to be a decent, objective analysis of the reform debate. Agree of disagree with the premise in this particular instance, do you feel that driving to the middle (while being effective at winning elections) is guaranteed to produce a result that is effective and beneficial in the long term for Americans?

What are the consequences for tailoring policy that will always appeal to the most--mostly those in the center of the political spectrum--rather than seeking more traditional liberal or even socialist ideas?

And do you find any problem with working within the confines of the existing political spectrum (which has vastly shifted to the right since the early 80s), rather than trying to realign it with policy and debate from the left (as Reagan did from the right, for example)?

[FrenchieCat]

1. Politics is the art of the Possible......

Not the art of the great for the impossible.

[Oregone]

2. But what you ignore is that what was possible for Reagan was not possible for Carter

Its is possible to shift the political spectrum instead of working in the confines of the existing one. If anyone could do this, it would be Obama.


Bush also realigned the political spectrum from where it was when he was first elected, though it came through a combination of blunt propaganda and his trifecta (rather than any real political skill). Doing such--combined with its failures--had a bit of a 'rubber band' effect


"The possible" is a dynamic arbitrary measurement that can be changed. It serves as an ill excuse for not trying.

[ProSense]

4. Reagan's success was

built on triangulating Democrats looking for any excuse to bolster the Republican agenda (tax cuts, etc.).

Unfortunately, there is no equivalent for Obama. If he chooses to move the country slightly to the left, he encounters opposition within his own party (Lincoln and Nelson just to name two). There are no Republicans ready to defect to promote a strictly Democratic agenda.

[Oregone]

6. So you say that the Reagan Admin bears no credit for shifting the political spectrum to the right?

And do you reject my assertion that a President has the power & tools to shift the political spectrum?

[DJ13]

3. do you feel that driving to the middle is guaranteed to produce a result that is effective

Not when the starting point has been skewed so far to the right by 20 years of GOP administrations (+8 years of DLC'er Clinton).

What currently represents the middle is now more conservative than Nixon was.

We need a hard shift to the left in order to reset the pendulum to a true center if were to save our country.

[Oregone]

5. "to reset the pendulum to a true center"

I agree.

If the Democrats drive to the new center when in power and the Republicans continue to pull toward the right, where does that leave the country after so many election cycles?

[DJ13]

7. Off the road to the right and over a cliff