Nosecohn
Feb
18

Bipartisan vs. nonpartisan

Not that I think it does any good (beyond making me feel a little better), but I sent this email to the White House a few days ago:

The goal should be NON-partisan, not bipartisan.

I’m getting really tired of the White House touting all of their “bipartisan” efforts. Why should partisanship have anything to do with good policy? I understand that there are political realities in getting legislation passed, but if you’re appointing a commission to study an issue and offer solutions, it should be nonpartisan, not bipartisan.

The persistent idea that all policy issues come down to a conflict between two predetermined sides is akin to saying there are two kinds of music, country and western, and we’re going to appoint a commission whose members are fans of each to determine which style we’ll play in our nation. Just as there are dozens of popular music styles, there are many good policy ideas which don’t currently fall under the Republican or Democratic banners. Why limit ourselves to only the ones that do?

The Washington political cyclone seems to have blotted out the reality that roughly one third of voters do not identify themselves as either Republican or Democrat, so it’s no wonder they feel the government doesn’t represent them. Please open up the process.

There I go, tilting at windmills again.

Share and Enjoy:
  • blinkbits
  • BlinkList
  • blogmarks
  • co.mments
  • connotea
  • del.icio.us
  • De.lirio.us
  • digg
  • Fark
  • feedmelinks
  • Furl
  • LinkaGoGo
  • Ma.gnolia
  • NewsVine
  • Netvouz
  • RawSugar
  • Reddit
  • description
  • Shadows
  • Simpy
  • Smarking
  • Spurl
  • TailRank
  • Wists
  • YahooMyWeb

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Leave a Comment

Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.