Zachary A. Goldfarb writes about increasing political polarization in Congress:
By one measure, the 110th Congress will have the fewest moderates since the 19th century. This finding is based on an analysis of voting records by Keith T. Poole, a political science professor at the University of California at San Diego, and Howard Rosenthal, a New York University politics professor.
For the purpose of the study, a moderate is defined as someone whose votes consistently fall near the middle of the political spectrum on both fiscal and social issues.
The decline in moderates has had a greater impact on Republicans than Democrats. According to Poole’s calculations, almost half of House Republicans were moderates 30 years ago, compared to well under 10 percent today. The professors argue that the decline of moderates in Congress has increased polarization.
To some moderate Republicans, the message of the Nov. 7 election was clear: The only path back to the majority is through the political center. With a small and shrinking membership, however, it is unclear whether the moderate wing will have much influence over the future direction of the GOP.
According to Goldfarb, eight of the twenty most moderate Republican congresspeople lost in the 2006 midterms. This will lead to a more conservative caucus, but it isn’t necessarily clear that it will lead to a more conservative attitude. Most Republican congresspeople have never been in the minority before, and they have very little incentive to toe the administration’s line. The absolute message discipline that developed with the emergence of right-wing radio and Fox News after the 1994 election is no longer possible. The Republicans can no longer define the limits and parameters of debate.
For all the talk about the Democrats being beholden to the same lobbying interests at the Republicans, the Democrats have a different style. Democrats like to engage in debate, not shout down the other side with accusations of weakness and disloyalty.
If the Republicans keep to their old tactics they will find themselves about as effective as Michael Moore (alternately howling in the wind and preaching to the choir) and they will quickly find that are out of step with all but the most rabid of their constituents. The GOP caucus may be more conservative than ever, but they will not behave anywhere near as conservatively as they have over the last six to twelve years.
We’ll see this much earlier and more clearly in the Senate (held by the Dems as recently as 2001-2002), which has always been the more collegial of the two houses and where many members remain for pre-1994. Senators Warner, Specter, Snowe, Collins, Lott, Graham, Enzi, Domenici, Stevens, and Grassley will all be happy to co-sponsor legislation and stick it to the President. Even hardliners like Coburn and DeMint will cross-over to assist on issues like wasteful spending and balanced budgets.
The House will have a harder time learning. But it won’t be enough to settle on a strategy and then implement it in the media. They will need go with hat in hand to Barney Frank or Charlie Rangel or Jack Murtha, if they want to do anything for their districts. Talking shit just won’t get it done.
So, yeah, the GOP is redder than ever. But they won’t be acting like it.