Race to the Middle?

 

A former state GOP chair and a former Democrat lawmaker in Washington State are coming together with a few others to form Washington Independents. The stated goal is to:

reshape and reform our political system by electing independents to office in Washington State. We will support and encourage centrist, thoughtful candidates who will put our country and state ahead of any political faction in order to solve problems.

Sure, it sounds a little like the “no labels” movement of a few years ago, except that being aligned with the Centrist Project involves some actual principles. I normally think those in the middle haven’t made up their minds and don’t know what they stand for, but this movement states things like “We are committed to putting the nation on a sound fiscal path. We recognize that this will require a combination of revenue increases, spending cuts and reforms to our major entitlement programs.” I appreciate that such a statement recognizes both the input and output problems we face.

However, there are some warning flags to this sort of movement. Being centrist and moderate, the program does look to government as perhaps more than just a necessary evil.

Government should be pragmatic [I loathe this word] and solve problems. Rather than a rigid ideology, governance should be a process where we come together and ask: What is the problem we’re trying to address? Why isn’t the market fixing it? What policy would produce a better outcome? And what are the tradeoffs to implementing this new policy? After weighing these considerations, the government should then take appropriate action that makes us collectively better off than we are today.

On the other hand, since it is not just leftists masquerading as moderates, the movement also advocates for things conservatives can support as real compromise.

We believe the role of government is to create an environment in which the private sector can thrive; to provide a meaningful safety net; and to ensure that every American has an opportunity to achieve his or her economic potential.

We have to modernize our programs for the twenty-first century economy. We need to invest in human capital (early childhood education, quality K-12, and modern workforce skills). And, we need a safety net that is finely targeted; benefits should go to those who really need them.

The left and the right have been in a race to the outer extremes of late. This push for moderation is not perfect, but perhaps it can throw a little sand in the gears of the crazy. I know this can’t solve our political problems, but I can maybe live with it if it curtails the worst of the partisanship we’re suffering under now. We’ll never truly realize a conservative or libertarian Utopia, so maybe this is the best we can hope for.

Here’s a video of the two mouthpieces for the Washington State version of this nascent movement.

.

Published in Politics
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 31 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Songwriter Inactive
    Songwriter
    @user_19450

    The King Prawn (View Comment):

    Songwriter (View Comment):

    OkieSailor (View Comment):

    RushBabe49 (View Comment):
    And just what do they mean by “Quality K-12”? The Seattle Supreme Court now runs the state schools, and even when half the total state budget goes for more leftist indoctrination, it’s still not enough. I’m betting that they still mean “better funded”, when the state schools are already over-funded and wasting billions of dollars of taxpayer money every day. And student graduation rates are abysmal.

    They (Supreme Court) voted 9-0 that there is still more to be done, especially regarding a “compliant salary model.” What???

    No socialist program of any kind can ever be ‘fully funded’. No matter what the level of funding is there is always room for more since the standard is perfection which is unattainable in the real world. This phrase is just a red herring used (successfully) to muddy the waters. (sorry about the mixed metaphors)

    Also there is the problem of no real fiscal accountability. When spending other peoples money the sky isn’t even the limit, there is no limit. If you bought my groceries I’d have Kobe steak every morning, why not?

    Thomas Sowell was the first author I read to reveal that Progressives have no limiting principles. This is a crucial point to understand: With Progressives, there is never “enough.” There is only “more.” And that alone is reason to oppose Progressivism.

    This is not about progressivism vs. conservatism. It’s about extremism vs. normalcy.

    I appreciate the distinction. That said, inside every “normal” Progressive beats the heart of an extremist – for the simple reason they have no limiting principles.  Once they get whatever it is they are seeking today, however normal it may seem, tomorrow they will ask for more.

    BTW – I don’t mean to imply that working with moderate Progressives is a bad thing. Better them than the likes of Elizabeth Warren. I’m just observing that for every inch you give a Progressive, they always come back for a mile. There is no “enough” in the Progressive dictionary.

    • #31
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.