In recent weeks Chris Cilizza and Dan Balz have posted their Congressional Countdown. What is shocking to me about these numbers is that in recent days, when I expected some of the talk of a Democratic sweep to give way to what I assumed to be a more realistic asssessment of the Republican capacity to rally, the Countdown has consistently shown that the few seemingly safe GOP seats in contested races have been slipping into the toss-up column.
Next week before the election I am going to try to write something reasonably extensive about the Congressional race, but one of my chief concerns is the "now what?" factor for Democrats. This seems like the classic example of a case in which the party that wins could easily confuse the race with the ultimate goal, which should be to govern, to govern better, and to govern well. What the next two years ought not to be about is recriminations and witch hunts, though there will be a need for investigations in some areas, but that should not be the totality of Democratic strategy.
In sum, one of my concerns in recent weeks has come down to one question: Where is the Democratic party's Contract With America? I happen to believe (and I think history has vindicated my views) that the Contract With America was both largely symbolic, largely ineffectual, and largely bad for America. But at least Newt Gingrich understood that ideas have power and that part of the point of politics is to develop ideas and to implement them, however inperfectly, as policy. I wish that my party showed some sense of intellectual and policy direction beyond oppositionalism, though the party out of power of necessity has to rally behind the principle of opposition. November 7 should have been an essential part of the plan, but not the end point. A more important date, really, should be January 2007. What then?
No comments:
Post a Comment