March 9, 2010 06:40 AM

Webber: Why Bipartisanship is Rare

The partisan aftermath of the health care summit between President Obama and leaders of Congress maintains citizens’ dislike for politics and renews cries for more bipartisanship. While politics has apparently always sounded mean there is evidence that partisanship in Congress has increased. Congressional Quarterly calculates that in 2009 both House and Senate Democrats voted with their party 91 percent of the time on votes where the two parties were at odds. This is at, or near, record levels of unity for both chambers. House and Senate Republicans were nearly as unified. Times have changed since 1968, when only 51 percent of Senate Democrats backed their party on so-called party unity votes, or in 1970, when only 56 percent of Senate Republicans voted with their party position.

Hyper and omnipresent partisanship is now institutionalized in legislatures and ingrained in present-day politicians. Partisanship makes for good television and attracts school yard bullies but it turns normal people off to politics—and that is something we do not need. In “Stealth Democracy,” University of Nebraska political scientists John Hibbing and Elizabeth Theiss-Morse show that citizens deeply dislike politics as usual. The more bickering and petty posturing they see, the more they dislike it. Most citizens don’t like arguing and don’t like watching people who do.

There are many reasons politics is less civil, more combative and less bipartisan then it was just a generation ago. Here are my top ten:

Redistricting has eliminated moderates. While gerrymandering has been around for two centuries, user friendly computer technology with better marketing information has perfected this political art. It is like the difference between 3x5” index cards and high density DVDs. The result is that successful candidates are more extreme than the typical voter. Even with court-directed redistricting this is a tough hole to fill. Some possible reforms include alternative voting methods such as “instant runoff voting” or “approval voting” but they don’t appear to be politically feasible. Electing legislators at-large with proportional representation is discussed by academicians but not likely to come to pass.
The perpetual campaign keeps the pot bubbling. Once upon a time, the fall campaign was over by the next spring so lawmakers could get to work. Elections are a zero sum game, but policy-making was viewed as a “win-win.” Full-year campaigning prevents a cooling-off period when politicians can talk about real policy issues like health care reform, the foundation formula or prison costs for non-violent offenders.
Baby boomers kinda like trouble. Most of us born after World War II admire “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” and “The Greatest Generation” but we really enjoyed “Animal House.” Our parents tried to teach us to play nicely with others but we each had our own ball and sometimes took it and went home.
Television was made for arguing. It is the medium that shapes politicians’ dress, decisions and thoughts. Can you imagine CNN saying “we want to break away for this traffic pileup to show you Senator Left and Senator Right conferring about Table 37 of the new Congressional Budget Office report?” The “Meet the Press” of today is not the “Meet the Press” of the 1960s. Railing against government to like-minded activists makes for better TV than explaining how the new highway bridge is safer than the old one and that it was funded by county, state and national officials all working together.
Issues are more complex. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is rather clear; the impact of the North America Free Trade Agreement of 1993 is still hard to figure out. Financial regulation proved too complicated for Alan Greenspan, who focused on it full-time. When humans get over-loaded we over-simplify and speak in slogans.
The rise of special interests and the decline of more general political parties. Around the 1970s, agriculture, environmental, crime issues, drunk driving all activated citizens with narrower policy interests. Combined with hired professional marketers and lobbyists the result is plenty of people who can block policy action but no one who can move it. Stronger political parties are proposed by many academicians but about 40 percent of the electorate no long identify with a particular party.
Individual-centered campaigns. Political parties no longer propose a platform and adopt it because individual candidates and elected officials have their own contributors and supporters. The pendulum has swung from party bosses to special interest dominance.
Campaign consultants and campaign schools. Once upon a time, candidates invited their neighbors over and they each addressed some post cards a few weeks before the election. Now, candidates buy a mailing list and professional brochures that have been theme-tested in other races. Candidates go to school to learn to “appeal to their base” and “to be non-committal.” Hey, it works for McDonalds’ and Hardees.
Term limits and short-term thinking. At its best the two year election cycle shortens lawmakers planning cycle compared to that of corporations and most non-profit organizations. Legislative term limits have further shortened legislative thinking. Elected officials need to deliver, or at least sound like they are delivering, a pet project today.
Instant communication means having reactions ready before the summit. A standard news story, especially for TV, is the instant reaction of the opposing party after the “State of the State” or “The State of the Union” speeches or after a high level pow-wow. These sound bites need to be prepared by staffers before the meeting actually takes place.

Of the ten factors above, which are the most likely? Human nature, the conflict-seeking media, and the complexity of issues are not going to change. This leaves reforming the redistricting process and improving voting methods. Those may be tough, but there has to be an improvement here someplace.

David Webber is Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Missouri, Columbia specializing in American public policy, federalism and state legislatures. His column appears every Tuesday.

Hyper and omnipresent partisanship is now institutionalized in legislatures and ingrained in present-day politicians. Partisanship makes for good television and attracts school yard bullies but it turns normal people off to politics