A month or so ago, when I wrote that I was back on the fence, I was met with quite a range of reaction. For most folks, it seems, these choices are just obvious — but the more I’ve cogitated on this, the more complex the decision has become.
One of the most difficult internal hurdles I’ve encountered is my very strong belief in checks and balances… and my worries about one-party government have been magnified by the ongoing party purges of their moderates. I sent a WaPo story about this phenomenon in the Republican Party to TMV co-blogger Pete Abel yesterday, but it’s happening to the Democrats from the left, too.
Extreme polarization in the two parties is marginalizing — even silencing — more moderately-inclined American citizens, including those who have, in the past, affiliated with political parties.
This is a very ugly cycle in American politics, and it’s doubly problematic in the face of the many critical issues facing the nation.
Some of these problems are so very serious, in fact, that we cannot afford the gridlock that would result from the normal approaches to divided government. On the other hand, we cannot give free reign to any party platform — even if it had unanimous national support — because we cannot afford it.
So I’ve come off the fence, and in the process I’ve concluded that while we do, in fact, need checks and balances desperately, we need a non-partisan approach… because just now, the biggest deficit our country has is fiscal leadership.