America gets a taste of parliamentary government — and it’s not so great

Lost in the hand wringing and chuckling over internecine Republican warfare for Speaker is the fact that this kind of fight is normal in many, if not most democracies. And it’s got little to do with Congress or the particulars of the fight between Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and his detractors. When politics is fractured in the nation as a whole, that instability will be reflected in its legislature.

My doctoral work was primarily in the field of political science, and I can tell you definitively that most political science academics I encountered were contemptuous of the American federal system. They think a parliamentary system with proportional representation is superior — and I think most of the leftist media tend to agree, even if they don’t want to say so publicly.

It’s ironic that these people were smugly laughing and sneering at the Republicans’ battle. Ironic because this kind of battle is what happens regularly within their favorite form of government. Consider elections in the three largest European Union democracies since Obama was elected in 2008. Spain has had five national elections (American had three) and failed to form a government for 313 days in 2016. Italy held three national elections, during which one government fell and was replaced by a different coalition without an election. Germany held four elections at regular four-year intervals, but it has taken months to form coalitions, including over five months in 2017. Long negotiating periods are the norm, often taking months, not three days. For all three countries, the main party had to form coalitions, most often with at least two other parties.

From 2012 forward, no party in Spain or Italy received more than 33 percent of the popular vote. In three of the last four elections, no German party exceeded 40 percent. Currently, the prime ministers in Spain, Italy and Germany are from parties receiving 28 percent, 26 percent and under 26 percent, respectively.

Small countries are not immune to these problems, either. Israel has had eight elections since 2008 with no party exceeding 30 percent of the vote — and from eight to 13 different parties squabbling in the Knesset.

For all the kvetching over American democracy and representativeness, the last president to win with less than 40 percent of the popular vote was Abraham Lincoln — and McCarthy’s Republicans won a majority of the Congressional vote.

Each of these large European nations feature significant regional, ideological and ethnic divisions. They face struggling economies, difficulty with immigration, and intense social debates. Sound familiar? The result is fractured politics and instability.

Even with a very strong executive, Emmanuel Macron’s government in France is facing difficulties ramming through his agenda. Worth noting, the French got tired of unstable parliamentary politics and created the Fifth Republic, which is dominated by the president (France is batting just .200 at democracy).

When you remove political divisions, government becomes remarkably stable.

Consider Japan. The right-of-center Liberal Democratic Party has won 19 of 21 elections since 1955, rarely in coalition. Japan is a prosperous, ethnically and culturally homogenous country with no land borders, living under the American defense umbrella — and, unlike Europe, comfortable with that arrangement. That kind of internal stability is reflected in its politics.

A new normal for American politics?

As an ethnically and culturally diverse country with a problematic border and a highly individualistic ethos, America is not Japan.

With the Freedom Caucus now functioning as a de facto party within a party, fractious coalition politics may now be the norm — at least as long as majorities are narrow.

That said, McCarthy’s proponents and his opponents erred going into the vote. If McCarthy had gone into the vote a half dozen or so votes shy, that would be understandable. But entering the vote 20 short is inexcusable. That McCarthy was able to close the gap says most of the gap could have — and should have — been closed in the nearly two months leading into the vote.

As for McCarthy’s opponents, enforceability is questionable. Representation on the Rules Committee is not really a concession. Since the anti-McCarthy faction holds the balance for a majority, they could always sink anything they don’t like.

And yes, it was bad politics all around.

Making an internal fight public and extending it over days is not smart politics. Inevitably, public statements create bad blood in a way that private arguments do not. Unlike public policy fights, there was no accompanying debate to illuminate the public. Thus, there was no public benefit to counterbalance lingering bad will.

The fight was entertaining, and people who dislike McCarthy or think he stands for the (justifiably) despised Washington “swamp” certainly enjoyed his public roasting. But the real goal for Republicans and conservatives should be expanding their majority and pushing forward their issue goals. A public fight does neither and risks undoing both. Much of the fighting seemed like posturing to trend on Twitter.

There is nothing to prevent a group of GOP members to bolt the party on key votes and line up with Democrats. For example, McCarthy promised to propose capping discretionary spending, including defense spending. But if Democrats agree on hiking defense spending, all they need are a handful of Republican hawks to carve out that exemption.

Essentially, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. By setting a precedent that a faction of the Republican caucus can break with the majority and get concessions, that faction can hardly complain if another group does the same to defend their priorities and principles.

That said, forcing a 72-hour breathing space so that spending bills can be fully vetted and voting on each appropriation are reforms that the public should support; they will expose the abusive practice of jamming through monster spending bills packed full of hidden favors. Of course, the trick is to strip out the favors. It’s one thing to expose the “swamp,” but do Republicans have the fortitude to contain it?

House Republicans need to get behind an issue agenda that has broad public support. All the parliamentary machinations and committee membership musical chairs means nothing without a unified agenda. And this was the original mistake by McCarthy. He tried the Biden gambit of running on nothing, and it has cost him.

Now that he is Speaker, it’s time for McCarthy to stand up and put forward a real issue agenda. Leaders who refuse to lead never last.

Keith Naughton, Ph.D., is co-founder of Silent Majority Strategies, a public and regulatory affairs consulting firm. Naughton is a former Pennsylvania political campaign consultant. Follow him on Twitter @KNaughton711.