http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30896.html
Democratic Rep. Parker Griffith announced Tuesday that he's switching parties – saying he can no longer align himself “with a party that continues to pursue legislation that is bad for our country, hurts our economy and drives us further and further into debt.”
“Unfortunately there are those in the Democratic Leadership that continue to push an agenda focused on massive new spending, tax increases, bailouts and a health care bill that is bad for our healthcare system,” Griffith said in a statement. “I have always considered myself to be an independent voice and I have tried to be that voice in Congress – but after watching this agenda firsthand I now believe that the differences in the two parties could not be more clear and that for me to be true to my core beliefs and values I must align myself with the Republican party and speak out clearly on these issues.
And though the Democrats OFFICIALLY are saying that this is an isolated incident and doesn't matter, privately they're getting concerned.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30914.html
Still, privately Democrats acknowledged the announcement came as a serious blow to a party that, over the last several election cycles, had made significant inroads in conservative southern districts like Griffith’s, which delivered 61 percent of the vote to John McCain in 2008 but nevertheless managed to elect a Democrat to an open House seat.
The situation is compounded by the worrisome recent uptick in retirements in politically competitive districts—among them veteran Southern Democrats like Tennessee Reps. John Tanner and Bart Gordon—and comes amidst troubling polling data for various Democratic incumbents.
“There’s a real backlash in the conservative districts against Washington and the president,” said one senior Democratic operative. “In any right-leaning district…you’re going to see the incumbent looking at numbers they’ve never seen before.”
“I just think it really shows the moderates feel they don’t have a voice in the party, they don’t like where we are going as a party, and that should be troubling for Democrats,” said another senior Democratic strategist. “Less than a year into a Washington that is controlled by Democrats, they’ve lost hope, they feel disillusioned, and they don’t think there’s anything to stick around for.”
I don't think Griffith's switch alone will hurt the Democrats, but they may face one or two problems stemming from it. First, others may follow suit, creating an immediate shift in momentum from one party to the other. Second, the defection may be the outward expression of turmoil inside the party, and therefore fragment their ability to get things done.
And I want to repeat my distaste for growing a political party by accepting defectors from other parties. It's just not the best way to create a fiscally conservative party.
My biggest worry is that both Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi will stand up and announce they've had enough....and are going to become Republicans. At that point, we may have to force McCain to retreat and become a Democrat...just to have a real Democrat around to dislike.
ReplyDeleteThat was good for a chuckle, Ripley... thanks.
ReplyDeleteMy basic opposition to party switching is that a party-based ideology can't survive in a coherent form by accepting switchers who FORMERLY adhered to an opposte ideology. The ideology is diluted... the GOP no longer espouses SMALL government, for example, just smallER government.
A good example of what I'm talking about... we just witnessed. The Democrats ran "more conservative" candidates in order to win a majority. They in fact WON the majority, but when they started to pursue a liberal agenda, the moderates balked. You see my point? The party's philosophy was watered down and changed by the ideological shift.
In that case, it can be argued, it's a good thing... but if that's all you see then you missed my point. We NEED fiscally conservative lawmakers, so watering down the GOP to be "Democrats-lite" doesn't help us at all.