Idaho’s two major political parties are failing, ruining political structure of the state
Idaho’s two major political parties are failing. Humans being what they are, political parties (tribes) are inevitable. But as Idaho’s parties fail, they are ruining the political structure of the state and might be the forerunner of national failure by the same means.
The founding generation, Washington, Madison and others, saw clearly the threat of the problems we now face. In Federalist Papers No. 10, Madison wrote: “Complaints are everywhere heard … that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties; and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice, and the rights of the minor party; but by the superior force of an interested and over-bearing majority.”
And that is what Idaho now confronts.
If you’re looking for moderation, stay out of state political party conventions. Whenever you hear talk of “satisfying the base” you are hearing a dose of the current political poison. Both parties are failing by succumbing to the same flaw of answering first to internal constituencies. They are just doing it in different ways.
The minority party occupies itself by continually reassuring each other of the rectitude of their political opinions and waiting, vainly, for the citizenry at large to come to their senses and recognize what’s good for them. Its platforms are responsive to the loudest wings within the party then presented as “popular” positions, effectively conceding political dominance to the other party.
By appearances, Democrats have lost the knack of communicating with persuadable voters. By running ideological candidates to “send a message” and satisfy internal constituencies they effectively concede outcomes. In its turn that forfeits opportunities to effect the changes they seek.
Over the last 30 years, Democrats have failed to field candidates in many legislative races. In three of the last 15 election cycles, there was no Democratic candidate for a majority of legislative seats, and only six times did Democratic participation reach 60%. In their best year of the last 30, Democrats contested 75% of general election legislative contests. In their worst year, Republicans contested 87%.
Yes, candidate recruitment is hard. It is perhaps the most difficult job in elective politics. But that difficulty doesn’t excuse a party from performing.
One excuse offered for Democratic underperformance is that “Idaho is a Republican state,” an observation Republicans happily echo. But a close examination of electoral results suggests another possibility.
In 1992, with a “credible” third party presidential candidate on the ballot, the Republican candidate received 42% of the vote in Idaho. This indicates strongly a substantial number of Idaho voters willing to vote other than Republican if presented with a palatable alternative.
Moving down the ticket, the Democratic candidate for governor in 1994 polled 44%. Not especially close, perhaps. But in that year, Democrats contested 49 of a possible 105 legislative seats, leaving 56 uncontested. In 2006, the Democratic gubernatorial candidate also polled 44%. Democrats ran in 63 of 105 legislative races. Republicans, however, contested 99 of 105, about 50% more than Democrats.
Down-ballot contests are critical to success at the top of the ticket. Those are races where local candidates drive voters to the polls. Their absence leaves a huge void in any statewide campaign. It is interesting to contemplate what the top of the ticket outcome might have been had Democrats not failed to field a full slate of candidates.
The observation here is simple and obvious: You can’t win if you don’t run.
This year, Democrats are contesting 44 legislative seats, their worst showing in 30 years. Clearly, things are not improving where it matters.
Meanwhile, when spokespeople for any party label members of the other party as “enemies,” as at least one such Republican spokesman has, and a party organ holds them unfit for public office as one Republican central committee has, we have reached the nadir of George Washington’s fears.
The majority party in Idaho is continually moved away from any consensus decisions by its most extreme, most vocal factions. It’s not necessary here to recite all the ways in which this has become destructive. The continuous criticisms of public institutions, the wholehearted embrace of weapons of violence, the incessant whining about having to pay for government, inferring that tax money goes into a black hole and produces no benefit to citizens, are not news to anyone reading this article. The secessionist streak among some in that party is obvious to anyone who cares to see it.
Perhaps most appalling, Republicans very nearly nominated as Idaho’s chief elections officer a candidate who stood ready to stop legally qualified citizens from voting.
The worst forecast based on these observations is that Idaho politics, and perhaps national politics, are in a sort of death spiral ending in terminal damage to the republic.
George Washington’s Farewell Address delivered a direct warning against the dangers of political faction. Factions, he said, would come to be controlled by small groups within the parties. They would substitute their will for the general will, refusing to be governed by “mutual interests.” (Parties) “are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the Power of the People, & to usurp for themselves the reins of Government; destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”
We all must hope and work for a different outcome.
George Moses, of Boise, has been active in politics for the better part of 50 years, including as a congressional aide, campaign manager and as a member of the 2011 Idaho redistricting commission. Beginning as a Democrat, he became unaffiliated four years ago. Some of his Democratic friends still speak to him.
