Politico has a pretty decent article at Democratic South finally falls.
First let me say I am always wary of the (insert political group/party/faction) is going extinct stories. Even in the case of the Southern Democrat party it was too early to say that. In fact even though I am a strong supporter of the Republican party I believe in the need of the two party system. So I am not exactly cheering all this.
The pieces biggest failing is again the elephant in the room that no one can talk about. That is how certain parts of the 1964 Voting Rights acts is killing the Democrat party. That is the pre clearance provision. That provision allows the State to create election districts that are a composed of a majority of ethnic minority voters. These provisions for the most part apply just to the Southern States. These districts though racially gerrymandered often are seen basically as a remedy for the South's past political sins.
Practically every Southern Congressman (including GOP) vote for this when it comes up for extension.
The result is often at the Local, State and Federal level every black person that is able is put into one of the districts. The result is the other districts become whiter. While in the short term you might get more black faces that are democrats the overall democrat power wanes. We shall see this again occur in such States as Mississippi next year. In Louisiana we are seeing early signs of this dynamic play out as republicans, conservatives ,and largely black democrats go about their every decade redistricting alliance. I am willing to guess that many people that have switched to the GOP have an idea how their districts might be withdrawn .
This to say the least this is very bad civics. Coalition voting goes out the window as to both racial groups. In fact I think it has increased racial political tensions without need over the years.
The article is right that races have become very NATIONALIZED. Louisiana congressman Charlie Melancon is interviewed for this piece and he gives his two cents about that! He also also talks about how technology has changed things for the democrats in the South. That is it is much more difficult to say "I am a different kind of Democrat".
Now while technology might make that claim harder to prove it is not the cause. Every since the Catholic bosses and Southern conservatives (The Hale Boggs Faction) lost the party Convention rules and delegate fight.
When in 1980 the Democrat feminists got a gender equality act the die was really cast. Now by party rules certain amounts of Democrat Party Convention delegates must be "X" race and "X" gender. Certain racial and gender political groups of a more political bent have been able to take advantage of this to basically rule the national party. Their grip has not not weaken. Mark Stricherz has done a wonderful job showing this in his book.
Mark gives a very good interview where he talks about critical points in the late 60's and in 1980 that occurred within the Democrat party:
DH: When people talk about the changes in the Democratic Party on life issues and religion, they usually point to the 1992 convention that nominated Bill Clinton and the refusal to let Gov. Bob Casey speak there. That's 20 years between 1972 and 1992. Weren't there other important watershed events that led to the Casey moment?
MS: Yes. The key event was really the McGovern Commission in 1969, adding implied quotas for female delegates. The percentage of female delegates went from 13 percent in 1968 to 43 percent by 1972. The second big event happened in 1980, when feminists succeeded in getting a measure that required half of all delegates to be female. So if you were running as a delegate from your county or congressional district, one out of two of you had to be female. This was not done in the interests of equality; this was done because the feminists had an agenda. They wanted abortion on demand; they wanted to get the Equal Rights Amendment passed; they wanted to control the platform.
DH: So the women who came in were ideologically aligned and didn't necessarily represent the women of the party, much less the women of the United States. After that, what were some of the other watershed events that manifested the changes inside the party?
MS: Well, they're not changes so much as results of the 1969 and 1980 requirements. In 1984, for example, feminists demanded and got a woman on the national ticket, Geraldine Ferraro. In 1992, feminists were basically exercising a veto power over anyone trying to reach the national stage, in that case Bob Casey. They exercised veto power over the platform; there was no dissent at all.
I'm not a Republican, but by contrast, pro-choicers in the Republican Party are treated quite well; they run for president in 1996 and 2008, and Giuliani has a shot at winning it (though I don't think he will). There's no counterpart in the Democratic Party where a social conservative is going to do that.
At some point in the South trying to say you are a "different" type of democrat will not work because well you might be "different" but are powerless. The Democrat party for all effective purpose have made it impossible for a conservative (especially on some some social issues) Presidential nominee to ever win the nomination. Thus when the Democrats control the executive branch there is very little to moderate liberal direction or viewpoint of it.
This has played a role in the slow steady trend to the Republican party. Further we are seeing a great explosion in feelings toward federalism, or what some people call state rights. This is becoming a much more GOP ID movement in reality. This is natural. When one Party has made it impossible for a more Federalist friendly person to take office the opposition will be filled on the local and state level by the opposition party. Thus I think we see another reason for GOP takeovers of State legislatures.
The article correctly points out that migration into the South might allow continued opportunities for democrats in the BURBS. Well this might be true. However this migration has been occurring for many decades. It does not seem overall to be helping mitigate the GOP trend in the South or indeed the burbs. There might be a election cycle or two where it is helpful but then it appears the normal trend continues.
No comments:
Post a Comment