A major new third party is set to launch in New York in early December, according to a Wall Street Journal article of 11/24/10, "New grassroots group targets centrist voters".
The irony of the label "grassroots" attached to this new party, named "No Labels", is worth noting. According to WSJ reporter Monica Langley, the party was created by a "Democratic powerhouse fundraiser Nancy Jacobson and Republican strategist Mark McKinnon", who were introduced to each other by Kevin Sheekey, a political adviser of New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg. Medial moguls and industrialists put up the money to start the party.
A major new third party is set to launch in New York in early December, according to a Wall Street Journal article of 11/24/10, "New grassroots group targets centrist voters".
The irony of the label "grassroots" attached to this new party, named "No Labels", is worth noting. According to WSJ reporter Monica Langley, the party was created by a "Democratic powerhouse fundraiser Nancy Jacobson and Republican strategist Mark McKinnon", who were introduced to each other by Kevin Sheekey, a political adviser of New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg. Medial moguls and industrialists put up the money to start the party.
Bloomberg's disdain for the U.S. two party system is well known, as are his reported presidential aspirations. So those who believe that the first task of governmental reform is to overturn the duopoly may welcome the appearance of No Labels. By aiming at the 40% of the electorate who are registered as Independents or unaffiliated, and pulling away disaffected Democratic and Republicans, this new third party could actually put its presidential candidate in the White House in 2012 -- especially if that candidate has the kind of money to self-fund his campaign that Bloomberg does.
Yet closer examination of what is unfolding suggests that what U.S. voters need most are not new parties started from the top down by political and financial elites. They need to get total control of elections from the bottom up. And not just presidential elections, but Congressional elections as well. If the U.S. electorate does not get control of both, it is likely to end up with a billionaire president in 2012 and a Congress even more sold out to corporate special interests than it is now. If anyone has any doubts about what a fiscally conservative White House and Congress will do to the standard of living in the U.S., they should read Paul Krugman's recent New York Times article, Eating the Irish.
No Labels presents itself as "Not Left. Not Right. Forward". It says it is comprised of "Democrats, Republicans, and Independents who are united in the belief that we do not have to give up our labels, merely put them aside to do what's best for America". So far so good.
But then party documents go on to espouse a center-right platform with a conservative deficit reduction agenda right out of Pete Peterson's playbook. In fact, a party position paper, Deep Dive: The Federal Deficit, links directly to Peterson's foundation and the numerous projects he has funded to promote his fiscally conservative views. Adhering to Peterson's party line, the new "No Label" party advocates "a government that makes the necessary choices to rein in runaway deficits, secure Social Security and Medicare, and put our country on a viable, sound path going forward."
It then goes on to put words in the mouths of the electorate that directly contradict the results of numerous polls, when the party claims that "Americans support a government that works to spur employment and economic opportunity by encouraging free and open markets, tempered by sensible regulation."
This fiscally conservative free market agenda is far from reflecting what the large majority of Americans say they want, according to numerous polls. These Americans put deficit reduction at the bottom of their list of priorities, with top place going to government intervention to spur job-creating economic growth and reduced unemployment. They are not willing to bet their future on the private sector and "free and open markets" that have clearly demonstrated their inability to produce the living wage jobs that American workers need.
So the new No Label party, which claims it is going to build a strong citizen movement, launches itself on platform that contradicts what a majority of Americans have said they want. We've been here before, and it would be folly, if not actually insane, to expect that a new third party that follows in the footsteps of its major party predecessors, tells its supporters what to think, and manipulates them into embracing agendas set by political and financial elites, is going to do anything but elect more candidates who flout the popular will once they are in office.
The only way out of the political catch-22 that has allowed corporate special interests to take over the government is the Interactive Voter Choice System (IVCS), IMNSHO. When it is fully developed and deployed on the Re-Inventing Democracy website, it will enable U.S. voters to get control of political parties and all electoral processes related to agenda setting and candidate nomination, so they can decide who will run for office, who gets elected, and what policies will be enacted into law.
A quick overview of IVCS is available on Facebook.
I have written about IVCS in the following:
2012: The Game Changing Implications of the Interactive Voter Choice System (IVCS), Re-Inventing Democracy, November 19, 2010.
How Voters Can Unrig the 2012 Elections with Transpartisan Voting Blocs and Electoral Coalitions, Re-Inventing Democracy, November 11, 2010.
The "Missing Mandate" in the 2010 Election Results: Let This Be the Last Time, Re-Inventing Democracy, November 4, 2010.
Third Party Rising?, Re-Inventing Democracy, October 15, 2010.
2012: How U.S. Voters Can Wrest Control of Congress from Special Interests, Re-Inventing Democracy, September 12, 2010.