By Bill Burch
Republican Candidate for Texas State Representative District 93
Published: 05-01-08
The purpose of this article is to show the differences between partisan and non-partisan politics. I will also discuss how non-partisan politics affects partisan politics and how adherence to party principles can lead to bi-partisan results acceptable to most voters.
Partisan politics is essentially politics of the group. By this I mean that in Partisan politics the purpose of all activities is to get the issues of the group addressed (the Party Platform). For those issues not specifically articulated by the group the basis for deciding how to address an issue will be the party preamble.
(Republican: http://www.texasgop.org/site/DocServer/2006_Plat_with_TOC_2.pdf?docID=2022 ) (Democrat: http://www.txdemocrats.org/issues/party_platform/ ). These preambles and platforms are written by committees of party activist (Platform Committee) during the State Party Convention and receive input from testimony given by Convention Delegates and elected Office Holders as well as Senatorial Convention Resolutions. All Office Holders activist and voters of a party agree with most though not all of the issues outlined in their parties platform. This is based on the assumption that they have read their parties platform.
Unfortunately all of these groups base their allegiance to a party on what their assumption is that the party stands for. There can be quite a lot of difference between these assumptions and the reality.
A candidate running for a partisan office will run on three to five issues. These are usually issues selected from their parties’ platform or issues that conform to the preamble of their parties’ platform and are important to the voters within their District. The opposing candidate is restricted to opposing these issues based upon their Parties platform unless they are willing to run the risk of alienating their Parties voters (also known as the parties “base” voters).
Therefore to win a candidate needs to have a strong base that has not been alienated and attract enough Independent voters by their priority issues to receive a plurality of the votes in the General Election. As for proof of how this works you can go to almost any scorecard produced by any organization and you will see that all the Republicans vote on one side of a line and all the Democrats vote on the other side of the line.
The most liberal Republican is more conservative that the most conservative Democrat. This means that whereas there are differences between the different office holders of a party there really isn’t any such thing as a RINO or a DINO. Also you will find that if some one changes party the way they vote shifts to the other side of the line.
Non-partisan politics is essentially politics of the individual. Rather than having a large group of people come together to formalize issues and principle by which to decide issues a non-partisan candidate for elective office and a non-partisan activist must rely solely on their own beliefs and those of their advisors. They generally have a so called conservative or liberal leaning in there positions and voting records.
I say so called because there is no universally accepted definition of conservative or liberal it’s more “I know it when I see it”. The down side of non-partisan politics is that there is no built in base of supports to draw upon. Each candidate must attract supporters based solely on their own issues. In an effort to ease this situation many non-partisan candidates try to align themselves with the more prominent party in their area. There are also local issues clubs who attempt to fill in the void created by the absence of a party structure. The problem is that they do not have the structure of a political party and hence do not have the influence or ability to hold the non-partisan office holder’s feet to the fire.
There is a difference in the way people campaign for partisan offices and non-partisan offices. When two people of the same party are vying for the same office they run in a primary to see who will be the best to carry the party issues into the General Election. Since there is usually someone representing the issues of the opposite party also running it is considered bad taste to launch personal or untruthful attacks against your opponent. And then after the Primary it is customary for the losing candidate and their supporters to join with the winner in an effort to have their parties issues advanced over those of the opposing party. If an activist fails to comply then they run the risk of being ostracized by members of their own party.
The same cannot be said for Non-partisan politics. There is no need to come together after the election because there is no Primary and there is no Party structure to hold their feet to the fire. It is because of this that there is a greater possibility that untruths will be told against an opponent grudges may be held and civility will be thrown out the window. Most Non-Partisan candidates and activist do not engage in this type of politics frequently known as the politics of personal destruction.
A major problem we find is when a person who has spent most of their time engaged in non-partisan politics moves into partisan politics. It is hard to change from the politics of the individual to politics of the group. You will find that most of those who were the type to hold grudges in the past in non-partisan politics have difficulty in applying the principles of partisan politics to their partisan efforts.
I have personally seen people who have run for partisan offices (both elective offices and party positions) who have been unable to transcend the differences and relied on spreading untruths in an effort to win. The result in two cases that come to mind was that the office holder was terrible and didn’t truly represent their constituents and the person who ran for a party office made a mockery of their position layered with many damaging mistakes.
In conclusion I believe that party politics when properly followed gives us the best and most honest form of government. Both parties’ preambles are close enough to allow bi-partisan compromises in most areas. Non-partisan politics can produce a good training ground for partisan participation but we must be careful in not moving up those who believe in a scorched earth policy when it come to how they treat other people.
Everyone elected to office or who participate as activist should strive to represent the issues and ideas of the people above even your own. If a person’s goal is the aggrandizement of themselves over that of the people then that person needs to remove themselves or be removed from the political scene. If the Office Holders were to concentrate first on those areas where the two Political Parties agree then much would be accomplished without compromising.
