Thanks, Jim. Very insightful. It would be interesting to examine the ways that our electoral systems and lobbying practices contribute to the delegate mentality. For that matter, even our language reflects this problem, as we often call the struggle by our elected officials to find balance on issues "waffling" rather than deliberation.
Regarding the former, closed primaries! The delegate mentality becomes all the more damaging when tied to the minority of citizens who vote in a partisan primary.
I'm sure Jamie Herrera Beutler voted her conscience, and she explained her vote quite eloquently. But it helps that she comes from a state with a top two primary system. Ditto for Lisa Murkowski, the first Republican Senator to support impeachment -- since Alaska now has a top-four primary system. In my opinion, the most effective structural reforms to rebalance the trend toward the delegate model over the trustee model would be open, top two primaries and ranked choice voting.
As to lobbying practices, think of the effect of the pledges that organizations use to demand fealty to a particular policy, e.g. Grover Norquist's no-tax demands. There are examples on the left as well. Even the use of candidate questionnaires (some of which I drafted in the past) can be problematic if we overdo it by treating more and more issues as pass-fail, litmus test absolutes, to be used not only for endorsement purposes but for follow-on "accountability sessions" to enforce fealty to fixed positions.
If there is a balance to be found, I think it is appropriate to demand of candidates and elected officials a commitment to the principles of democracy and party, but not to try to attach more and more puppet strings to them in the guise of accountability.
Excellent article!!
Just spit-balling, but has there been any recent or popular TED Talk or similar that shares this continuum of Delegate/Trustee?
It is a helpful idea, that could use more discussion across many platforms.
Thanks, Jim. Very insightful. It would be interesting to examine the ways that our electoral systems and lobbying practices contribute to the delegate mentality. For that matter, even our language reflects this problem, as we often call the struggle by our elected officials to find balance on issues "waffling" rather than deliberation.
Regarding the former, closed primaries! The delegate mentality becomes all the more damaging when tied to the minority of citizens who vote in a partisan primary.
I'm sure Jamie Herrera Beutler voted her conscience, and she explained her vote quite eloquently. But it helps that she comes from a state with a top two primary system. Ditto for Lisa Murkowski, the first Republican Senator to support impeachment -- since Alaska now has a top-four primary system. In my opinion, the most effective structural reforms to rebalance the trend toward the delegate model over the trustee model would be open, top two primaries and ranked choice voting.
As to lobbying practices, think of the effect of the pledges that organizations use to demand fealty to a particular policy, e.g. Grover Norquist's no-tax demands. There are examples on the left as well. Even the use of candidate questionnaires (some of which I drafted in the past) can be problematic if we overdo it by treating more and more issues as pass-fail, litmus test absolutes, to be used not only for endorsement purposes but for follow-on "accountability sessions" to enforce fealty to fixed positions.
If there is a balance to be found, I think it is appropriate to demand of candidates and elected officials a commitment to the principles of democracy and party, but not to try to attach more and more puppet strings to them in the guise of accountability.