Herron: Partisanship isn’t a bad thing

‘ ‘ ‘ The promises of bipartisanship are enticing. Barack Obama’s candidacy promised a… ‘ ‘ ‘ The promises of bipartisanship are enticing. Barack Obama’s candidacy promised a post-partisan, post-ideological United States. If we were to believe the myths propagated by the more credulous block of his supporters, it would seem that with a snap of the fingers the heavens would open while luminous rays descended, snuffing partisan pestilence from the hallowed corridors of our Capitol. ‘ ‘ ‘ The notion that this country might find the most effective solutions to its most debilitating problems with support from all sides is illusory. The unfortunate myth of this era is one which promotes compromise as a panacea. ‘ ‘ ‘ Virtues of partisanship are found in the vision of the Founding Fathers. Free speech, by design, is inalienably granted not only for its moral necessity, but also through a belief that unabridged, unsuppressed speech was the best means to create progress in society. In ‘On Liberty,’ John Stuart Mill elucidated, ‘The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it.’ ‘ ‘ ‘ Bipartisanship and bipartisan legislation silences the minority opinion ‘mdash; a necessary component to democracy. Bipartisanship’s consequential centrism also brings a much more tangible evil: Bipartisan agreements are burdened with compromise and pork-barrel spending. Each side must make concessions in order to promote mere fragments of their beliefs and pursuits. Back-room deals and insubstantial legislation are the offspring of political compromise. ‘ ‘ ‘ Compromise squeezes out peripheral viewpoints. The public often cries out for the emergence of third parties and alternative choices. Bipartisanship merely silences any fringe minorities while strengthening the two-party system as the center swells. ‘ ‘ ‘ Efforts labeled as bipartisan during their creation often gain harsh disapproval.’ The immediate bipartisan triumphs eventually dissolve into allegations of unaccountability and hollow inquisition. The invasion of Iraq, the Military Commissions Act, the Patriot Act, No Child Left Behind and the FISA amendments are all tabbed as bipartisan efforts, and all are deemed to be scourges of the last decade. On the other hand, the Emancipation Proclamation and Civil Rights Act were divisive yet critical. ‘ ‘ ‘ Most Americans see gridlock in our Congress as stubbornness. Each side is characterized as unwilling to waver from dogmatic beliefs at the cost of grand lingering problems. This is often what occurs, and it is good. Gridlock is a feature, not a bug. If the problems are as momentous as portrayed, should not those in charge ensure that solutions are the correct ones? Remember, those who belong to a certain ideological spectrum do so because they believe it to be correct. ‘ ‘ ‘ Bipartisanship is also falsely equated with expeditiousness. The assumption is that if done without partisanship, problems may be solved quickly and efficiently. This quick process, however, foregoes necessary debate. For example, there are numerous clamors for a solution to health care. ‘ ‘ ‘ The belief that health care can be fixed by the government is a partisan viewpoint. Many feel government cannot or should not provide a solution. Bipartisanship in solving the health care crisis through government would stifle the latter viewpoint. ‘ ‘ ‘ Nonetheless, slanderous and ad hominem squabbling should be eradicated. It does not add to the public discourse, and it is destructive rather than productive. There are opportunities for personal attacks, but only if done substantially. Politicians should not let personal grudges interfere with the public forum. ‘ ‘ ‘ Our goal, and the goal of our representatives, should be to listen to all sides, consider all opinions, and question all assertions. These practices, once implemented, may appear as mere bickering or nit-picking. However, a much greater purpose is constructed. If we pursue these ideals rationally we shall ensure the policies we implement have undergone the necessary scrutiny and consideration. ‘ ‘ ‘ Our political system was built in a way which provides the best means to achieve progress through truth. All Americans share the goal of a better life for us and for our children. We all pursue the shining city upon a hill ‘mdash; we just disagree over the best route. E-mail Mason at mph20@pitt.edu.