What would you say?

What would you say when someone asks you, "what's the difference between a Republican and a Democrat?" Hillary is famous for flopping on the difference between a Democrat and a Socialist, but that's because the boundaries are much more blurred. This has been an interesting year in politics because even the Republicans are somewhat confused over what a Republican is. People who never disagreed are finding themselves in conflict over which Republican is the most Republican. Yet, we have more interest in politics than ever in my lifetime.

The good news is people are asking. The bad news is too many people don't know. In some ways it is simple, but in many ways it is not. First, there is a fundamental difference between the two parties regarding the size and role of government. This difference is as old as our country. Jefferson wanted the individuals to be the driving force of society and Hamilton thought power needed to be more consolidated. Second, the world is more complex. Issues exist in the economic, social moral, and global areas of society. So there are now dozens of variations in policy ideas within those two basic distinctions that people prioritize differently.  This is why a traditional conservative may chose one of 5 or 6 candidates as their top pick. It is also why there are areas Republicans disagree, but some agree with Democrats.

Recognizing that I could never map out all of these varying paths into specific policies like immigration, tax plans, health care, etc., I still believe people who vote should have some basic understanding of what each party believes. I have been asked the question about Republicans and Democrats from people ranging from 80 year old golfing buddies to a teen age grand daughter. I found when I explained this to college students, many clarified their positions and often switched parties because they had not understood what their political affiliation meant.

Let me walk you though this maze. Its really not that complicated. First, the political position of a party affects two areas: (1) Societal Needs and "Rights" and (2) Helping Society's Vulnerable. Democrats approach society's needs with the assumption that goods and services are best collected and distributed by some centrally devised plan that 'experts' can control. Note Hillary's statement that "successful people should pay more of what they earn." Republicans assume that society's needs are best met by resources that are collected and distributed by economic markets ("trickle down economics"). The debate usually focuses on the government's ability to more fairly get people what they deserve and the free markets ability to innovate and produce more and better goods and services. Democrats promise they will reduce people's pain. Republican's promise they will raise the standard of living. In either case, if they promise what the other offers, they are just pandering. Often "greed" found in economic markets is the reason Democrats believe the government must control how markets function. Republicans claim that government has just as much greed and are not creative and efficient because there are no profit constraints.   

To help the vulnerable of society, Democrats believe that the programs to provide the necessary "safety nets" are a moral obligation of society and therefore best delivered by government, who represents society's moral imperative. Republicans believe that the vulnerable in society should be the goal of private citizens, who band together through a morality of service. Families, religious institutions, and charities are Republicans instruments of choice to support the needs of those who cannot provide sufficiently for themselves. Republicans believe the original intent of The Constitution was to keep central government out of people's lives (Scalia) and the Democrats believe that central government is necessary in today's world to make things fair (Obama's statement that the next judge should "know how the world works today"). 

One last point, with the threat of over simplifying this, is how each side views "rights". Democrats basically view that citizens (and even non citizens for some) deserve or have a right to certain things, like education, health care, food, housing, childcare, and on and on. Note Obama's continual emphasis on "social justice". Democrats would believe that the government must make sure each person gets what they deserve. The issue is that the notion of deserve has nothing to do with what someone does or contributes. This is from whence "the entitlement state" has come. Republicans believe that those who cannot contribute and provide for themselves should be served by those who have been fortunate. Giving back to society is a major plank of Republicans. However, one BIG difference between the parties is around the meaning of "deserve." Republicans believe the original form of the word 'deserve', which is receiving something in balance or equilibrium with what has given or contributed. This is actually the definition of justice. So under the broad division of the two parties on the scope and role of government, a difference in what the little word "deserve" means is at the heart of the conflict. I think this issue, the meaning of "deserve", is now at the very soul of the USA's political divisions and yet it is never debated or discussed. In fact, over 90 % of people who vote, have no idea that this is the issue.

I am told Hamilton wanted citizens to pass a test to vote and Jefferson did not. Based on where we have arrived because of uninformed voters, its certainly worth a little time to ponder.... 

Footnote: When someone says, "I am economically conservative and socially liberal", then they basically are Republicans on the top half of the model and Democrats on the bottom. Their party affiliation will depend on their prioritization of the two. There could be an economically liberal and socially conservative person too, I suppose. I just am not sure I have met one personally.