The New Opposition: Republicans Take Minority Role in Two-Party System

The Republicans have taken on the role of the opposition party, and they’ve already shown that they’re not planning on taking prisoners. Where the Democrats have a tendency to try to seem bipartisan and for the most part let their rival administrations appoint the Cabinet members and federal judges they want, the Republicans work hard to force Democrat administrations to go with their second or third choice because of tax evasion and nanny problems. I’m not saying it’s OK to have illegal immigrant nannies, but my point is that if the Democrats would have done their job when they were the opposition party, maybe some of the rancid fish working under Bush would have been thrown back into the pond.

I’m proud to say, by the way, that I got this video up a couple of days ago, which means I beat out the networks; the story of the strong Republican opposition to the stimulus plan was all over CNN yesterday. Plus I totally caught Anderson Cooper in a really yellow move, before a commercial break the teaser was: What really caused the plane to crash in the Hudson River? A new report reveals blah blah blah… And after the commercial, the story is: Bird parts were found in the plane engines. OK, so what Really caused the plane crash was what we’ve been told all along? They’re using this thing to get people to sit through the commercial break now. It’s good news that everyone survived, but otherwise it’s not that interesting a news story. Can we move on to something else?

Being the minority party allows the Republicans to take on the facade of being against the direction in which things are currently moving in Washington, and have been since they were in the majority. The Democrats have gotten in trouble for being too bipartisan in the horrible legislation passed under the Bush administration, but the Republicans are successfully distancing themselves from bailout legislation today, even though their opposition is based on the failed concept of job creation through tax cuts and their attempts to break the United Auto Workers union.

When they are in the minority, both parties use their position, although they do use what little power they have to actually make legislative change, to attempt to define themselves. The Democrats try to define themselves as the party willing to compromise to get things accomplished, and the Republicans are taking on the stronger position of a real opposition, rather than cooperation, party. They’re shutting out the new administration’s legislation, and putting together the talking points to change public opinion. The Democrats don’t have the luxury of being able to really convince people that they were opposed to what the Republican majority was doing because they were voting Yea, and they have to depend on the talking points put forward by the progressives who would really rather be voting third party anyway.

The war of words is coming on strong. The media has already been using terms like “terrorists’ rights” to define Obama’s shutting down Guantanamo, and Dick Cheney has taken it a step further, claiming that Obama will give the terrorists the opportunity they need to attack us with nuclear weapons. He fails to point out that the terrorists have had U.S. soldiers conveniently shipped over to them in droves for the last five years in Iraq, so they’ve been able to kill Americans without having to falsify passports or pay for airline tickets. Now, the headlines are all saying “Maximum Wage” and then in little tiny letters (for corporations accepting bailout money). Obama set the limit at $100,000 above his own salary, when some of us would be willing to kill for $50,000 a year (or at least work for a corporation that systematically kills people). I think there’s nothing to complain about here, although it is legally questionable to impose these limits and even morally questionable to add these limits to the deal after giving away the bailouts.

The corporations receiving bailouts, however, are giving big bonuses for a reason. What bad performance? The corporations have an excuse to do all the downsizing they want with no nagging naysayers because “everyone has to tighten their belts”, and they’ve successfully convinced the government to give them billions of dollars in free money. That’s 100% profit. I’d say it’s time for big bonuses all around, and pop open that champagne. Even if a limit is imposed this year, these executives will be rewarded later for this performance unless some kind of permanent limit is placed. I’m not even in favor of putting a permanent limit to executive pay. Instead, we should be demanding that the corporations pay their workers a real living wage, regardless of where they outsource the work, and installing the kinds of good business practices and regulations our government has been working hard on phasing out over the years, and whatever they have left over after that, let them enjoy it as they please.

New Project to Organize Potential Third-Party Voters

This is a new site dedicated to solving the problem of voting for third parties without wasting what little influence you have in the two-party system.

In the United States, many people would like to vote for third parties, and are not satisfied with the two parties which almost exclusively control the political process. Many of us feel like the two parties have very few differences, and given the fact that there are only two parties with any real chance of winning important elections, they don’t need to differentiate themselves. Rather than representing the people, whose votes they have a 50-50 chance of getting anyway, they prefer to represent the interests of the sources of funding for their campaigns and the business interests of their wealthy friends. It’s a government by the wealthy, of the wealthy, and for the wealthy.

The only thing keeping many Americans from voting for third party candidates is the fear of throwing their vote away, and not being able to elect the lesser of two evils. I contend that they have a point; while the differences between the two major parties may be few, they have shown themselves to be important enough to fight for.

This doesn’t mean that we can’t find creative ways to influence the policy of the nation we live in. The simple threat of voting for a third party forces candidates to address issues they would otherwise ignore. I’m looking for a way to make it possible to actually get these candidates in office, as well.

Here is my proposal: If we, the voters who are tired of voting for the two major parties but are unwilling to give up our right to vote strategically for the less harmful candidate, create an organization, we can create a database, keep track of how many members of our organization are in each district, and start to make a difference. If we have the numbers to win an election, on a local, state, or national level, we will agree on a candidate and the members of our organization in the constituents involved will pledge to vote together and take the election. Failing to reach an agreement, without having enough pledged votes to really make a difference in an election, you can simply vote for your favorite candidate among those available, be they third-party candidates or the lesser of two evils.

It’s about organizing intelligently for change. The success of this concept depends on active participation, so please leave a comment, join the forum, email me at capitalocracy@gmail.com, join our community, write for this blog, and help create a real, effective movement for change.

Get your neighbors involved, because the best way for this movement to grow would be to start winning elections on a local and state level. We can make real change on a local level, and a show of force in the national political arena. Local politics are important. Remember, you don’t have just one vote, you have many, not just for the president, but for your representative, your Senator, your state representatives, your city council, your judges, in some cases, and your school board. There tends to be an information vacuum in local politics, and in many places, there is no opposition to the main party in power. If that’s the case where you live, join our organization, ask your neighbors to join you, and create an opposition party in your hometown.

If you’re interested in the idea, or if you have any questions, email me or comment here. Tell us what you think. Write articles on your political opinions and what kind of changes you’d like to see that the major parties aren’t offering and send them in, and I may post them here. Spread the word. If you take part, we can put together a movement which will really make change, without taking away the influence you already have in the two-party system.