COLUMN: Increasing the options

From Dave Crystal's "Crystal Clear," Fall '96 From Dave Crystal's "Crystal Clear," Fall '96The dominant parties of the AmericanFrom Dave Crystal's "Crystal Clear," Fall '96The dominant parties of the Americanpolitical system are no longer trulyFrom Dave Crystal's "Crystal Clear," Fall '96The dominant parties of the Americanpolitical system are no longer trulyrepresentative. The solution? Add two more. From Dave Crystal's "Crystal Clear," Fall '96The dominant parties of the Americanpolitical system are no longer trulyrepresentative. The solution? Add two more.Are you frustrated with the present political system? Do you need more choices? Well, don't open the Nynex Yellow Pages. Nine out of 10 politicians aren't even listed. The end result of such political simplification and conformity is the downplaying of "middle-of-the-road" politics and embarrassing and time-consuming stalemates like the one that preempted the recent federal government shutdown. In addition, political extremism increases the popularity of freelance demagogues, who have no qualms infringing upon the will of their party to politically profit from, and take advantage of, growing public distaste for the political reality. There are Republicans in Congress liberal enough to be considered Democrats and Democrats conservative enough to be considered Republicans, but because of the preeminence of the ideologies that shape their parties, these middle-of-the-road politicians have little pull in shaping party policy and image. Instead, the two parties are slowly but surely drifting toward the extremes of the political dichotomy, and in the process leaving conservative Democrats like me in the dust. With members of the extreme right such as Patrick "even Jewish Americans should have constitutional rights" Buchanan gaining popularity among Republicans, even Reagan Democrats have responded by flocking to the extreme left. For the level-headed and politically objective American, the prospect of voting this year is not necessarily one to look forward to. Although conservative Democrats comprise one of the fastest-growing movements in contemporary American politics, they have little effect on Capitol Hill because they do not represent the interests of a party. Hence my main conclusion -- we need more parties! I do not mean empty names on the ballot such as "Libertarian," "Conservative," or "Right-to-Life." I'm talking about legitimate, effective parties that can rival the Republican-Democrat bloc, and represent the interests and ideals of many a discontented American. I'm not advocating a plethora of parties, each representing a distinct interest group. The last thing we need is for Congress to resemble the Israeli knesset -- there's less name-calling on the Richard Bey Show. All I am requesting is two more parties -- one to represent the interests of conservative Democrats, and one to represent the Christian right. The creation of these parties will facilitate the separation of moderates from mainstream Democrats and of Nazis from mainstream Republicans. One might say that two parties are already in the making that would rival the Republican-Democrat bloc. One of them is the Taxpayers Party, which plans to endorse Pat Buchanan as its presidential candidate if he breaks with the GOP. I don't know much about the Taxpayers Party, but if this is the party that will come to represent the radical right, then I strongly support its legitimacy on Capitol Hill, which will only enhance the legitimacy of the Republican party as a non-extremist entity. If the David Dukes and Pat Buchanans of this world do indeed choose to make the Taxpayers Party the manifestation of their ideology, then they should change the name of this party immediately after they become affiliated with it. I am a taxpayer and I want nothing to do with Pat Buchanan. The other party in an embryonic state is Ross Perot's Reform Party. I do not consider this group viable or useful because it, and Perot himself, are definitively "anti-." By this I mean that the Reform Party has no set policy or goals, and can only mention what's wrong with the policies of the present government. I have heard a lot of rhetoric from Perot about reform, but not once have I heard him divulge how he plans to reform this country. Secondly, even if you can prove that the addition of the Reform Party to Congress is economically efficient, it still does nothing to represent the ideals of a large number of Americans who are followers of either Democratic conservatism or Irving Kristol's neo-conservative movement. Most neo-conservatives, for example, are anti-affirmative action, so one would think that they would vote Republican. However, most of them are also pro-choice and, like myself, shiver at the thought that people on Capitol Hill might have the power to tell a woman what to do with her womb. For this reason, they are also alienated by most Republicans. The only way a viable middle-of-the-road party can come to fruition is if present members of Congress, both Democrat and Republican who lean toward the center, join together under a new banner. One cannot demand that every American be either Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal. In today's political reality it does not make sense for such polarization to exist. It also does not make sense for small interests groups to have representatives in Congress, but I don't think the creation of two more dominant parties would create such a trend. The bottom line is that there are many Americans who are frustrated with the State of the Union, but can't find contentment with any of the choices come November. If certain members of Congress don't recognize this discontent soon, taking it upon themselves to forge a new future for America, then I fear we may lose the essence of democracy.