To respond to the points raised by Mr. Waltenbaugh:
We are in agreement in many of the issues that you raise. I do believe in
the importance of more than two parties. The example you site is an
excellent one of people identifying with a stance of fiscally
conservative/socially liberal and it seems to me that there is a large group
of voters there that someone could organize into a potent force in this
country.
The place where you an diverge is whether or not one individual can
represent more than one philosophy. Whether or not that compromise position
between two philosophies can be embodied in one individual. That is the
assertion that others have made and that is the position that I question. I
am not sure that one person can serve both parties adequately if the
philosophies of the two parties are sufficiently different.
Your question of giving Nader the Secretary of State position is an
interesting one. In this scenario, folks usually assume that Nader's views
would have been similar enough to those of a Gore agenda that Nader could
achieve many of the things he would have wanted to even though he did not
win the presidency. Let's change one thing in this scenario. Let's make it
a Bush White House. Could Nader have been Secretary of State and been happy
working within the agenda that Bush would have supported? Bush needed the
votes Nader could have brought just as much as Gore but to me, the
philosophies were too different to bridge.
I agree with you that the job of government is to hammer together these
philosophies into some sort of compromise. This can be done by persons
among more than one party, either in the compromise situations that occur in
our system or through the coalition governments that exist in other
countries. I am just not sure how effectively this coalition can exist
within one individual. I think it is easier on single issues than it is on
a broad range of issues because commonality can often be found on one issue.
But I think it is very difficult on a broad agenda.
I think in Minneapolis, there are serious questions about whether the DFL
and certain other parties are really different enough to have separate
parties. I spoke with a delegate this weekend who identified himself as
Green DFL but admitted the distinctions between the Green Party and being
Green DFL were blurred for him. I am not in party leadership but I would
think this would be an issue that party leaders would have to discuss.
Merging parties has occurred before (D-FL) and it could happen again.
Carol Becker
Longfellow
----- Original Message -----
From: Kurt Waltenbaugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Carol Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2001 8:00 AM
Subject: RE: [Mpls] cross-endorsement/Response to Mr. Martinez
> Carol,
>
> The system you are describing makes sense in a monopoly/duopoly setting
> where there are only one or two sides to an issue. If you expand your
> research a bit and look around the globe, you'll find successful coalition
> governments, made up of different parties who come together to represent
> their collective constituents. Cross-endorsement, as you call it, happens
> all the time, as there are no "true majorities". Look how many people
today
> refuse to call themselves Democratic or Republican, and instead say "I'm
> socially liberal, but fiscally responsible", or something else.
>
> Just think - in a non-two party system the Greens and the Democratic Party
> could have joined forces during the latter part of the election and won.
> Nader could have been given, say the Sec'y of the Interior post, and life
> would be good.
>
> I am concerned about voters who believe that only two parties can exist -
> "if you disagree with me, you must be in that other party". Life is too
> complicated - we have live in a full spectrum of Techni-color!
>
> KtW>
> -----------------------------------
> Kurt Waltenbaugh
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ECCO, Ward 10
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Carol Becker
> Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2001 10:21 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Mpls] cross-endorsement/Response to Mr. Martinez
>
> > Carol,
> >
> > You are a thoughtful person, so consider the following:
> > The people of New York and several other states have had the opportunity
> to
> > nominate fusion candidates for years. Progressive candidates like Gov.
> Como
> > benefited from being on both the Liberal Party and Democratic Party
> lines -
> > the combined total was more than a single party line would have
generated.
>
> > Are people in New York REALLY so much smarter than people in Minnesota?
> > Isn't it possible that people here could understand fusion just fine?
It
> > would be an expansion of democracy and possibly increase participation
for
> > two parties to be able to nominate the same candidate in the same race
if
> > that candidate is mutually acceptable. Why is the DFL so opposed to
> fusion?
>
> > The DFL should be less concerned with insisting upon a monopoly when it
> > comes to nominating a good candidate and more concerned with increasing
> > turnout and actually electing candidates. There may be some people in
the
> > DFL who would rather lose with a single party endorsement than win with
a
> > fusion ticket.
>
> For me, this issue goes back to my beliefs about what a political party
is.
> I have argued in the past that a political party is a group of people with
a
> common set of values and from that comes a common set of approaches to
> societal issues. This group of individuals then endorses the person or
> persons that they feel best supports their approaches to issues. The
> commitment I make to my community as a delegate is that I will examine the
> candidates and recommend to the community the one that will best represent
> the DFL values.
>
> Let me explain this in a different way. If you saw a candidate endorsed
by
> the Nazi Party, you would have a pretty clear guess what values that
person
> would bring to a job. Could this person also be endorsed by the DFL
party?
> It would be my hope that the values which make up the DFL party would be
in
> conflict with the Nazi party to the point where it would not be possible
for
> someone to receive both endorsements. The individual could not represent
> both philosophies. From your example, does Mr. Cuomo represent the
Liberal
> Party philosophy or the Democratic philosophy? Or are the Liberal and
> Democratic philosophies so similar that Mr. Cuomo can represent both? In
> that case I would argue that the two parties should merge.
>
> I cannot speak for the DFL but it seems to me that when you cross-endorse,
> you lose the purpose for the endorsement. The larger community does not
> know what values the candidate represents. In my example, would the
> candidate act more along the value lines of the Nazi or DFL party? In
your
> example, is Mr. Cuomo representing the Liberal or Democratic approaches?
> Cross endorsement means that the community doesn't know.
>
> I disagree with your statement that the DFL has a monopoly on nominating
> good candidates. I think other parties also nominate good candidates. We
> have seen candidates from a wide variety of parties run and some of them
> have won. We have even seen candidates with no party affiliation win.
>
> I think the struggle for non-DFL candidates, however, is that the DFL
values
> and approaches do a fairly good job of representing the values and desired
> approaches of the citizens of the City of Minneapolis. Overall, the
values
> of other parties do not seem to fit our citizens as well. I think this is
> frustrating for people from other parties because they see this as a
> monopoly. I don't see it as a monopoly at all but as a natural outcome
of
> citizens "shopping" in the supermarket of political philosophies and
> selecting the one that most fits their beliefs.
>
> I would also say that I give Minneapolis voters great amounts of respect.
> They listen to the candidates and really do make a decision about
candidates
> regardless of party endorsement. I do not believe that Minneapolis
citizens
> blindly vote for whatever the DFL serves up.
>
> To quote the Bible, no man can serve two masters. And no candidate can
> serve two the philosophies of two parties.
>
> Carol Becker
> Longfellow
>
> _______________________________________________
> Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
> Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
> http://e-democracy.org/mpls
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
