Socially Moderate/Liberal, Fiscally Conservative

Any reader of this blog will know of my general fondness for political subjects, and it should consequently come as no surprise that I frequently engage in conversation on such topics in my everyday interactions. And it seems that barely a day passes that I don't run into somebody who, when asked what their political affiliation is, will respond with something along the lines of "Well, I'm a social liberal (or moderate) and a fiscal conservative, but I generally vote [It's 50-50 Republican & Democrat]." Or I will have people tell me, "I'm really a libertarian, but I could never vote for the Libertarian Party."

These people describe to me their frustration with the political process (and with political officeholders), noting that they really do not have anybody to vote "for" and that they generally end up voting against somebody. The lesser of two evils, as the saying goes. My question is: why are we limited to only two evils? Couldn't we have two or three more? It would at least allow us to walk away feeling both good about our vote and our ability to be grammatically correct when saying "This year, I voted for the least evil of the candidates."

There are so many shades of ideology, almost as many as there are people, and the current two-party dichotomy is just not working out, especially since, as a matter of practical policy, life is little different under a Democratic Congress than it was under a Republican Congress. They all want to spend us into oblivion; they all want to demagogue the issues that rouse their base, and they rarely seem interested in good policy or good government. Oh, and did I mention that they are mostly crooks? Whether it is Dan Rostenkowski, the corrupt Democrat who epitomized the abject criminality of the Democrats' 40 year reign, or Jack Abramoff and Tom DeLay, who showed that like in George Orwell's ANIMAL FARM, the pigs quickly learned how to walk on two legs, There is something about being in the majority that brings about a total degradation of ethical standards for elected officeholders.

If there were multiple parties in Congress, say Democrats, Republicans, Greens, [Some replacement for the Libertarians], and then some minor, potentially single issue parties, and it were difficult (perhaps even impossible) for a single party to gain an outright majority, and as a result Congress had to operate on the basis of coalitions, then the plurality party would always have to be keeping its own accountable, and practicing the art of diplomacy in order to maintain the integrity of their coalitions.

There needs to be Constitutional reform to fully realize this sort of potential, but it is possible, in fact, to accomplish these ends under our present system. More on that later this afternoon.