Re: WaPo story
 
Unretouched photo of
Billy falling off chair
 

 
 
 
 
 
The promise of  transpartisanship

 
 
 



 
By _K_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/katrina-vanden-heuvel/2011/02/24/ABMj4XN_page.html)
 atrina vanden Heuvel, Published: January 27,  2014


 
 
< 
On Tuesday, Americans will tune in  to watch President Obama’s fifth State 
of the Union Address. The annual ritual,  with its pomp and circumstance, 
has become an almost grotesque visual of a  gridlocked Washington. The 
president’s party will cheer. The opposition will  jeer. A Supreme Court 
justice 
might sneer. Since President Obama took office,  the partisan rancor has only 
intensified, reaching its ugliest point in 2009,  when Rep. Joe Wilson 
(R-S.C.) shouted at the president, “You lie!”  
Things have gotten so distasteful that some members have taken to symbolic  
gestures, _including crossing the aisle to sit together_ 
(http://www.npr.org/2011/01/16/132975246/Crossing-The-Aisle-Literally-For-The-State-Of-The-Unio
n)  or _wearing orange lapel _ 
(http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/12/news/la-pn-new-traditions-state-of-the-union-20130212)
 pins as part of the 
bipartisan  so-called _“Problem Solvers Caucus,”_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/turning-congress-from-partisanship-to-problem-solving/2013/01/13/3
0e547ba-5db0-11e2-9940-6fc488f3fecd_story.html)  sponsored by the nonprofit 
group  No Labels



 
 
But if lawmakers really want to reassure cynical Americans, _whose disdain 
for Congress is well documented_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/11/12/congresss-approval-rating-hits-new-low-9-percent/)
 , 
they could  highlight the genuine cooperation among them. This collaboration 
is happening  across a number of issues, but it’s not bipartisanship; it’s  
“transpartisanship.” Unlike bipartisanship, which often takes two existing 
 viewpoints and, effectively, splits the difference, transpartisanship 
encourages  solutions that can align with many viewpoints. 
On critical issues, politicians of all stripes are finding common ground 
not  by discarding their differences but rather by overcoming the ideological 
and  political pressure that would typically prevent them from working 
together, even  on areas of agreement. 
Consider how both Republicans and Democrats have come out against the  
National Security Administration’s Orwellian domestic surveillance program. Two 
 
Michigan representatives, tea party Republican Justin Amash and one of the  
House’s most liberal members, John Conyers Jr., came together _to introduce 
the LIBERT-E Act, which aims to rein in the  NSA._ 
(http://amash.house.gov/press-release/nsa-surveillance-amash-conyers-introduce-major-bill)
   
Or look at Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) — a progressive crusader against 
 Wall Street excess — and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) — a vocal opponent of 
the  Dodd-Frank banking reforms — _who teamed up to introduce a bill_ 
(http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-11/warren-joins-mccain-to-push-new-glass-st
eagall-bill-for-banks.html) , similar to the  Glass-Steagall Act, that 
would separate commercial and investment banking. 
It’s hard to imagine stranger Senate bedfellows than David Vitter (R-La.) 
and  Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio). But both strongly oppose government bailouts for 
 enormous, “too big to fail” banks. Together, they persuaded the 
government to  study _whether big banks get more favorable debt pricing_ 
(http://www.vitter.senate.gov/newsroom/press/vitter-gao-report-highlights-taxpayer-funded
-subsides-for-too-big-to-fail-wall-street-megabanks)  . They  also advocate 
_greater capital requirements for banks_ 
(http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/05/01/in-brown-vitter-bill-a-banking-overhaul-with-possible-teeth/)
 . And 
while my Post  colleague George F. Will and I rarely agree, _we both support_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-will-break-up-the-big-banks/20
13/02/08/2379498a-714e-11e2-8b8d-e0b59a1b8e2a_story.html)  the 
_Vitter-Brown effort_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2013/02/11/stop-coddling-the-big-banks/)
 . Even with slightly different  arguments — 
conservatives oppose government bailouts and liberals fear the  corrupting 
influence of banks — we arrive at the same conclusion. 
Both Republicans and Democrats have introduced _legislation to help protect 
medical marijuana users._ 
(http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/238597-house-dems-gop-propose-new-legal-defense-for-possession-of-medical-marijua
na)  A  broad coalition, from Rep. Barbara Lee of California on the left to 
Rep. Scott  Rigell of Virginia on the right, _publicly opposed the use of 
military force in Syria_ (http://voteview.com/blog/?p=869) . And  _another 
transpartisan coalition_ 
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/12/trans-pacific-partnership-house_n_4263174.html)
  may soon defeat President  Obama’s 
proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership. 
Even outside the halls of Congress, we’re seeing unlikely alliances.  
Conservative businessman Ron Unz plans to fund a ballot measure that _would 
raise 
California’s minimum wage to $12 an hour_ 
(http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/26/us/conservative-leads-effort-to-raise-minimum-wage-in-california.html)
 . 
And  although congressional Republicans rejected a federal minimum wage 
increase, _58 percent of Americans who identify as Republicans support a  
higher 
minimum_ 
(http://www.gallup.com/poll/165794/americans-raising-minimum-wage.aspx)  . 
_Even Bill O’Reilly thinks it’s a good idea!_ 
(http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bill-oreilly-backs-10-minimum-wage)   
When citizens and leaders from across the political spectrum come together  
based on common values or policy goals, they have the potential to build  
movements for change. 
Of course, Vitter and Brown won’t be forming a coalition on reproductive  
rights anytime soon. Yet rather than sacrifice their beliefs on the altar of  
bipartisanship for the sake of bipartisanship, they’ve accomplished more by 
 pursuing their shared beliefs. 
At a time of paralyzing political polarization, partisanship has naturally  
gotten a bad rap. But a reactionary shift toward bipartisanship — toward an 
 anodyne centrism — isn’t the solution. Passion, deftly deployed, is 
actually an  effective political tool with which to advance good ideas. That’s 
the promise of  transpartisanship. 
Beyond the red/blue camps on display tonight, there are people who are  
crossing traditional boundaries and forging alliances for change. If you’re  
playing a State of the Union drinking game, raise a glass to  that.

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

<<inline: Untitled.jpg>>

Reply via email to