Doughnut Democrats

One more and them I'll get off the Opinion Journal. The Review and Outlook feature, really the editorial, describes the current Democratic party as "the Doughnut Democrats" (some might prefer "Donut", but not the WSJ.) The idea is that the party lacks a center. The article actually makes a better case that the Democrats have become the left edge of a general "doughnut politics" in America. The Democratic "Right" is just as endangered as the Democratic "Center"

The Democrats once displayed more variety of opinion on key issues, like Social Security reform.

Above all, there's the know-nothing-ism on Social Security. The Democrats in unison proclaim that Mr. Bush is advancing a risky right-wing scheme to destroy Social Security by creating private investment accounts for workers.

But wait. How dangerous can this idea really be? After all, only a few years ago there was a long and esteemed list of elected Democratic leaders who endorsed personal accounts. John Breaux. Chuck Robb. Bob Kerrey. Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Charles Stenholm. Tim Penny. Today in the entire United States Congress there is exactly one Democrat, Allen Boyd of Florida, who has endorsed personal accounts, and he has been shunned for his apostasy.

In 2000 Senator Moynihan declared that a personal thrift savings plan for Social Security would allow hourly wage earners to "retire not just with a pension but with wealth. And the doorman will have a half million dollars, not just the people in the duplexes." Share the wealth. What could be a more traditional Rooseveltian idea than that?

There are some who believe that unity of viewpoint is a sign of party strength. I strongly disagree. A healthy and strong party can confidently display its variety of opinions to voters, debate issues within the party and with the other party. find common ground, again both within the party and without, generate a reasonable compromise and then display party unity by voting through the compromise position. This is ultimately unsatisfying to the ideologists, but it is how things get done, and a sign of a party that can do things, rather than just complain.

The Republicans, finding the middle uncontested, are actually encouraged to move farther to the right, and dig-in heels on ideology. This too is a regretable development. I was very pleasantly surprised to see the Jounal also aware of this.

Many conservatives have watched the left's hostile takeover of the Democratic Party with great joy. We don't share that enthusiasm. The country would benefit from two vibrant parties competing on innovative freedom-enhancing initiatives. The problem is that the Democrats are running on empty when it comes to policy ideas other than big government, and this lack of competition has had deleterious effects on Republican behavior, as witnessed by their lack of any spending discipline.

There are other examples of deleterious effects, I could add, but that is not the point. Rather, the concern is the collapse and alienation of the Democratic center and the Republican disdain for their own center in response. I don't have any statistics at hand, but I do notice a lot more center-left folks showing up on the various "centrist" blogs looking for someone to talk to. In a short while it may be that the only valuable political debate and discussion will happen on centrist websites, where the rejected folks from the middle of the doughnut meet up.