I know plenty of folks who are appalled by what we see happening to our country (and the world) these days. There’s plenty of reason to be scared and angry, but for most people I know (fortunately) the risks and problems arise at the level of principle and at some distance from our day-to-day lives. For those who wish to change the nature and tone of our government now is the time for cool consideration of our options and to do so in three contexts: 1) the 2026 elections, 2) the posture of those elected this year, and 3) the stance of those who wish for further change in 2028.
Ethics are important, but we’re usually not given the choice between simple black and white. Life, as they say, is filled with trade-offs. My general approach is to maintain my ethical and political views in favor of social justice and compassion, domestic and international order, and assessing policies with a due respect for a long-term perspective. At the same time, the current situation is so dire as to demand that we ensure our social and political foundations before we try to (in order) repair the damage or enact policies that try to broadly improve society.
I have long bemoaned the state of the Democratic Party and I have no illusions about the likelihood that it will be a useful vehicle for necessary social change. Still, we might hope that the ongoing example of the Republicans will impress on both voters and elected officials the need to swallow our grand visions and just get stuff done. The first step is to minimize further inroads by MAGA-ites and get sensible people (even moderates or other boring folks) into positions to minimize further damage.
The current California Governor’s race is a great example. As we went into the primary a few weeks ago, there were three Democrats and two Republicans with a significant chance of getting through the open primary and into the final election in November. Both the Republicans illustrate the range of MAGA/Republicans but the prospect that they would both have gotten into the run-off, shutting out the Dems, seemed real. As among the leading Dems—Becerra, Porter, and Steyer—there are notable differences in personality, experience, and demeanor, as well as policy priorities. Nonetheless, any one of them is so far superior to Hilton or Bianco, that I really didn’t care which Dem gets elected. Indeed, I wish the primary ballot had an option that read: “Whichever Democrat comes first among those who vote for one of them.” I suspect such a ballot entry would swamp the tally for any of the named individuals.
Here in San Francisco, we will elect a successor to Nancy Pelosi. I quite liked Chakrabarti as an innovative policy thinker. Scott Weiner and Connie Chan (the eventual finalists for the November election) are both also thoughtful and they are likely to vote the same on a vast majority of actual legislative proposals. Again, it’s too bad time and money will have been spent between those two (and a few others). Flip a coin and let’s move on.
What then of those who win this fall? In Congress, where the Dems are a good shot to win back the House and have a slight chance to win the Senate, it will be a time of great temptation. Performative politics beckons and many will fall into the trap, wasting time, money, and energy better spent on a small number of priorities. There will be innumerable calls for investigations into the malfeasance and incompetence of the current Administration. There will be hundreds of bills introduced to right the current litany of wrongs, trying to constrain or reverse the Executive or Judiciary. Almost all of this will be a waste of time.
Dems need to demonstrate that they are thoughtful and prudent guardians of the interests of the entire nation. Even if bills get passed by the House (or, in some minor miracle both the House and Senate), there is no chance anything of substantive merit would become law with our current orange-haired leader. So, all this performative energy needs to be targeted at a focused set of policies that will engender support at the 2028 election: health care, jobs, economic growth, voting rights, taxes on the top 10%. The parade of those demanding a wide range of changes that have only a bare majority of support—however much they might meet important political or moral goals—need to be held in abeyance. In addition, the Dems need to show that they can govern responsibly and effectively. That means actually passing bills without the dramatics, futility, and waste that has exemplified current GOP legislators (especially in the House).
Finally, in the two years between elections, those folks who want change need to model responsible citizenship and demonstrate that we have a clear understanding of the difference between idealized policy goals and the views of the bulk of the country. This means that valid arguments and goals will need to be sidelined. Taking pot-shots at elected officials who are less than perfect (measured on whatever scale) is self-destructive. If the damage wrought in the past 16 months (that’s right, we’re only 1/3 through the 2d term of HWSNBN) has taught us anything, it is that most of the fine print in policies isn’t so important.
If we are lucky, a leader with charisma and vision will emerge for 2028. More likely, it will be someone with only a bit of both. No matter. We will be fortunate to arrive in January 2029 with some semblance of a country and a world still intact. As I noted this past winter (A Poisoned Chalice 020626), even then, we shouldn’t expect too much. The road back is far too long to be walked in anger.
Ethics are important, but we’re usually not given the choice between simple black and white. Life, as they say, is filled with trade-offs. My general approach is to maintain my ethical and political views in favor of social justice and compassion, domestic and international order, and assessing policies with a due respect for a long-term perspective. At the same time, the current situation is so dire as to demand that we ensure our social and political foundations before we try to (in order) repair the damage or enact policies that try to broadly improve society.
I have long bemoaned the state of the Democratic Party and I have no illusions about the likelihood that it will be a useful vehicle for necessary social change. Still, we might hope that the ongoing example of the Republicans will impress on both voters and elected officials the need to swallow our grand visions and just get stuff done. The first step is to minimize further inroads by MAGA-ites and get sensible people (even moderates or other boring folks) into positions to minimize further damage.
The current California Governor’s race is a great example. As we went into the primary a few weeks ago, there were three Democrats and two Republicans with a significant chance of getting through the open primary and into the final election in November. Both the Republicans illustrate the range of MAGA/Republicans but the prospect that they would both have gotten into the run-off, shutting out the Dems, seemed real. As among the leading Dems—Becerra, Porter, and Steyer—there are notable differences in personality, experience, and demeanor, as well as policy priorities. Nonetheless, any one of them is so far superior to Hilton or Bianco, that I really didn’t care which Dem gets elected. Indeed, I wish the primary ballot had an option that read: “Whichever Democrat comes first among those who vote for one of them.” I suspect such a ballot entry would swamp the tally for any of the named individuals.
Here in San Francisco, we will elect a successor to Nancy Pelosi. I quite liked Chakrabarti as an innovative policy thinker. Scott Weiner and Connie Chan (the eventual finalists for the November election) are both also thoughtful and they are likely to vote the same on a vast majority of actual legislative proposals. Again, it’s too bad time and money will have been spent between those two (and a few others). Flip a coin and let’s move on.
What then of those who win this fall? In Congress, where the Dems are a good shot to win back the House and have a slight chance to win the Senate, it will be a time of great temptation. Performative politics beckons and many will fall into the trap, wasting time, money, and energy better spent on a small number of priorities. There will be innumerable calls for investigations into the malfeasance and incompetence of the current Administration. There will be hundreds of bills introduced to right the current litany of wrongs, trying to constrain or reverse the Executive or Judiciary. Almost all of this will be a waste of time.
Dems need to demonstrate that they are thoughtful and prudent guardians of the interests of the entire nation. Even if bills get passed by the House (or, in some minor miracle both the House and Senate), there is no chance anything of substantive merit would become law with our current orange-haired leader. So, all this performative energy needs to be targeted at a focused set of policies that will engender support at the 2028 election: health care, jobs, economic growth, voting rights, taxes on the top 10%. The parade of those demanding a wide range of changes that have only a bare majority of support—however much they might meet important political or moral goals—need to be held in abeyance. In addition, the Dems need to show that they can govern responsibly and effectively. That means actually passing bills without the dramatics, futility, and waste that has exemplified current GOP legislators (especially in the House).
Finally, in the two years between elections, those folks who want change need to model responsible citizenship and demonstrate that we have a clear understanding of the difference between idealized policy goals and the views of the bulk of the country. This means that valid arguments and goals will need to be sidelined. Taking pot-shots at elected officials who are less than perfect (measured on whatever scale) is self-destructive. If the damage wrought in the past 16 months (that’s right, we’re only 1/3 through the 2d term of HWSNBN) has taught us anything, it is that most of the fine print in policies isn’t so important.
If we are lucky, a leader with charisma and vision will emerge for 2028. More likely, it will be someone with only a bit of both. No matter. We will be fortunate to arrive in January 2029 with some semblance of a country and a world still intact. As I noted this past winter (A Poisoned Chalice 020626), even then, we shouldn’t expect too much. The road back is far too long to be walked in anger.
RSS Feed