Advertisement

Democrats Seek to Outmaneuver Republicans by Imitating Their Strategy

THE NATION | Ronald Brownstein / WASHINGTON OUTLOOK

February 14, 2005|Ronald Brownstein

For inspiration, Democrats these days appear to be looking more to Newt Gingrich than to Dick Gephardt, more to Bill Kristol than to Al From, and more to George W. Bush than Bill Clinton.

Democrats aren't taking ideological cues from these Republican leaders. It's their tactics and political strategy that's attracting Democrats.


Advertisement

Over roughly the last 15 years -- but especially since Bush's election in 2000 -- Republicans have imposed a level of order and unified direction on their party unmatched in recent history. Recovering from the drift and division that crippled George H.W. Bush's presidency, Republicans have molded themselves into a party with a common conservative ideology that largely follows central direction from the White House and congressional leadership and punishes dissent on its top priorities, like tax cuts.

The systems of control aren't absolute, as the congressional hesitation about Bush's proposal to restructure Social Security demonstrates. But the party has constructed powerful levers to encourage loyalty. The House leadership has discouraged defection by forcing competition for chairmanships and seats on prized committees. The conservative Club for Growth has reinforced that discipline by running primary campaigns against incumbent Republicans who wavered on Bush's proposals. Bush has provided more glue by restricting his agenda to ideas (with rare exceptions, such as immigration reform) broadly popular among Republicans.

All this has severely suppressed dissent. During Bush's first term, about 90% of House and Senate Republicans sided with the majority of their party on key votes, according to Congressional Quarterly. That far exceeds the level of loyalty displayed by congressional Democrats in Clinton's first years -- or even Republicans during President Reagan's first term.

Traditionally, U.S. political parties have operated as diffuse, disputatious confederacies. The GOP today more resembles the tightly regimented parties in a parliamentary system like Britain's.

"I think we're going to look back and say what we're seeing in the Republican Party today is a different kind of party -- something completely new," said Yale University political scientist Stephen Skowronek.

Democrats, traditionally as easy to discipline as cats, aren't nearly so close to such a synchronized system. But increasingly that appears their goal.

Los Angeles Times Articles
|