First published 1992 by Westview Press
Published 2019 by Routledge
52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
Copyright 1992 Taylor & Francis
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Notice:
Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
The Democrats must lead : the case for a progressive Democratic Party
/ edited by James MacGregor Burns [et al.].
p. cm.
includes index.
1. Democratic Party (U.S.). 2. United StatesPolitics and
government1989 . I. Burns, James MacGregor.
JK2317 1992c
324.2736dc20
92-11444
CIP
ISBN 13: 978-0-367-29121-1 (hbk)
This is an unusual book. It is a book with a message, and a liberal one at that. Our belief is that the time has come to offer a viable liberal alternative to the Republicans and the conservative excesses of the last quarter of a century. And the political party to do this is the Democratic party: The Democrats must lead.
This book represents the views of leading academicians and political figures. Though relatively brief, it is intended to be clear in focus and argument and outspokenly liberal in orientation. In these regards, it is not a typical academic treatisehighly qualified in argument, somewhat dull in presentation, and limited in its appeal to a mainly professional audience. On the contrary, this presentation is advocacy oriented, direct, and aimed at a broad audience.
Each contribution makes a self-contained argument, which in turn is based on the most relevant of contemporary data and analyses as well as on the personal experience and knowledge of the particular author. Taken together, the chapters reemphasize the basic theme of the book: that the Democrats can win by appealing to a liberal constituency with liberal issues. The country needs a vibrant political alternative. The only party that can provide this alternative is the Democratic party.
The indictment of Republican rule is massive: economic mismanagement, tax restructuring to benefit the wealthy, official corruption and exploitation of public office, a politics of racial division, environmental neglect, a disregard for civil rights and an intolerance for the concerns of minorities, recessions, joblessness, Savings and Loan bailouts, homelessness, an educational system in disarray, military build-ups, a series of undeclared wars, urban decay, out-of-control deficits, exploding medical costs in a limited-coverage health care system, and two constitutional crisesthe Watergate of Richard M. Nixon and the Irangate of Ronald Reagan and George Bush.
Conservatism is an ideology of privilege, exploitation, and excess. Its time has passed. The country is looking for an informed and compassionate leadership willing to address the nations fundamental needs and politically skilled enough to do something about them. The Democratic party can provide that alternative.
This book thus represents a call to arms by authors who share a commitment to a liberal political agenda and a rejuvenated, more combative Democratic party. It is a statement of the nations political and social needs. It is a call for the Democrats to lead and to represent those who need representation. A Democratic party that addresses the countrys real problems can win. This book is an effort to return the Democratic party to its roots. That is our purpose.
The chapters herein were developed under the auspices of the Political Scientists for a Progressive Democratic Party. The group was formed several years ago under the direction of James MacGregor Bums. Its intention, above all, is to offer policy alternatives and an ongoing source of ideas (representative of the liberal community in academics) to the political party most likely to act upon themthe Democratic party. But it hopes, as well, to provide options in a debate long dominated by conservatives and characterized by the sterility and class bias of a politics of privilege.
There are choices to be made. Liberals must reassert themselves; they must offer voters reasonable and attractive policy positions. The proposals contained within this book are meant to contribute to both these ends.
As editors, we are grateful to Jennifer Knerr and Amy Eisenberg of Westview Press, who have been supportive of and involved in this project since its inception; to Jane Raese, the books project editor; and to Chris Arden, its copyeditor. We wish to thank a number of people who have contributed to the final result: Joel Tabin at Northwestern University; Marianne Blair at Clemson University; the Faculty Secretarial Office at Williams College; and, especially, Vicki Koessl at Lawrence University, who assumed and discharged with skill the considerable responsibilities of producing the books final camera-ready typescript.
James MacGregor Burns
William Crotty
Lois Lovelace Duke
Lawrence D. Longley
1
The Democrats Must LeadBut How?
JAMES M AC GREGOR BURNS
What does it take to lead? Realistic grasp of party heritage and party potential. Political sense of concrete problems and realities. Above all, moral purpose and conviction. In sum, thoughtful, practical, and principled leadership on the part of men and women at every level of the Democratic party.
But first the Democrats must take psychological leadershipof themselves. Party debate during 1991 consisted mainly of pessimistic talk about Democratic changes in 1992, bleak poll results, abject failures of Democratic party leaders in Congress to carry the fight to President Bush, and divisive debates among Democrats as to the best strategy for 1992 and the rest of the 1990s.
It was not a Republican but a Democrat, for example, who most sharply castigated the party for its failings. The party, he said, was tom between the Twin Peaks of the American political psyche: greed and guilt. The Democratic party had lost the capacity to be morally indignant. It did not dare to lose, because losing was seen as a character flaw. These were the words not of a young Turk sitting on the sidelines but of the head of the Virginia Democratic party. One Democratic aspirant to the White House early in 1992, with fine impartiality, called the politics of both parties brain-dead.
