Would a Parliamentary System Work Here?
We are Witnessing a Breakup of the GOP Governing Coalition
Tuesday was unlike anything we have ever seen in American politics ever before. At an early afternoon caucus meeting, Tom Emmer emerged as the Speaker designee winning a majority of the Republican caucus. About an hour later, Donald Trump went onto Truth Social to essentially veto the choice, depicting him as a globalist RINO in league with Ilhan Omar.
Less that four hours after receiving the votes of a majority of his party, Emmer withdrew his name as Speaker-designee and announced he would not be running for Speaker. The Biden-Harris Threads post depicted it this way:
The Republican Party is no longer a governable party as it is. It’s essentially an amalgam of two or three various groups joined in a single coalition, and there is NOBODY who appeals to all of these groups. In fact, a group of nihilists (let’s call them the “Nihilist Party” since that’s what I called them here and here) led by Matt Gaetz and Jim Jordan seem to be in open warfare against the establishment Republicans, represented by McCarthy, Scalise and Emmer. The establishment candidates cater to the nihilists’ demands, but others in the establishment group don’t and with a slim majority there is no room for dissenters. When you look at who is out there wanting the job, none of these people seem to be able to appeal to the entirety of the Republican caucus. Since they’ll never vote for a Speaker Hakeem Jeffries, we are stuck in this Speakerless limbo.
Which got me thinking; what if this were not a two party system but a parliamentary system? What if instead of two rock solid groups, we had, say, ten, and they would still create a pretty consistent left/right coalition, but had a little more flexibility. What would that look like?
Well, you’d still have the extremes of each party as a part of their coalitions but they would be relegated to the sides; so the squad and the freedom caucus would still be within their typical coalitions, whining and defining what their parties’ activists should get riled up about. You’d also have some rock solid party people, call them the establishments of each group.
Then you would also have some specific issue oriented groups sprinkled in— say “Rural Democrats” and “Border Conservatives” and “Piedmont Purplish” that largely vote on single regional issues and otherwise are free do what they want. Likewise, you would have some more moderate possibiliites from the major groups which would represent the swing areas.
The main thing though, is that you could construct a governing coalition without having to appeal to the most extreme elements of EITHER party. Think about that. If establishment Republicans wanted to create a governing coalition, they could dump the MAGA Nihilists in exchange for some mix of moderate Dems to build a coalition. Likewise, if Hakeem Jeffries wanted to be Speaker, he could garner the votes by dumping the Squad and Justice Dems in favor for a more moderate governing coalition from the right.
You may be laughing— Yeah, that would never happen. Nothing unites these groups. That’s where you would be wrong. The people away from the fringes are less ideological and more practical when it comes to governance. And you know what one hot issue right now unites ALL OF THEM and angers all of the MAGA/Squad members? Israel-HAMAS. Right now, in a parliamentary system, you would be able to make a governing coalition by ditching he extremes and working from the inside outward. And the serious legislators right now want nothing more than to distance themselves from these very vocal bombthrowers.
To be sure, parliamentary systems are not ideal. What happened to McCarthy is akin to what happened to Truss in the United Kingdom. Netanyahu in Israel has made a career out of cobbling together various hard line factions for governing. Stagnation can paralyze governance as coalitions and built and rebuilt.
Nontheless, we’ve reached a point in our own system of governance which have tested the limts of the two party system, or more to the point, one party in the two party system. If Alexander Hamilton was right when he discussed political factions in the Federalist Papers, the ineptitude of the right should result in a broadening of support for the left in the next set of elections, or a new faction will emerge to replace the old one. In any event, the Republican’s governing coalition is falling apart, there are no issues uniting them, and there is no reason for any of the factions to back down.
The Republican Party is ungovernable and for all practical purposes dead.
PurpleAmerica’s Obscure Fact of the Day
Tom Emmer didn’t even last 1/50th of a Scaramucci.
PurpleAmerica’s Final Word on the Subject
Good thoughts, but I doubt it would work with the current political apparatuses. The EC would mean that essentially there would be 2 dominant parties, and the coalition would fail to unite.
Now, if we went from electing a president alongside the governing bodies and instead a consensus leader elevated on the votes of these coalitions. I *could* see this work. But I doubt that would ever get any traction.