In a two party system, the primary function of each party is to provide an alternative to the party in power. Power corrupts. Any party in power will inevitably become corrupt over a period of eight years. In order to assure that corruption is dealt with promptly, the party out of power should always be a viable alternative to the party in power -- standing by and ready to take over.

 

I think this means that neither party should promote an extreme ideology to such an extent that the public is reluctant to replace the corrupt party in power because of a fear of a radical ideology in the alternative party.

 

A further corollary is that "wedge issues" should be overcome as quickly as possible. Because, wedge issues distort the process and prevent the voters from focusing on corruption.

 

Abortion policy has become a huge wedge issue. I suspect that both parties believe that there is a benefit to maintaining this wedge issue for as long as possible. I suspect that neither party wants this issue to be resolved, because it has become critical to fund raising and base mobilization. This is not healthy for our Republic.

 

The way to resolve the abortion issue is to have a Constitutional Amendment that clearly describes what, if any, privacy rights will be recognized in our Constitutional Law. When a Supreme Court ruling doesn't meet the expectations of the people, the proper way to overrule it is to have a Constitutional Amendment. Instead of nibbling away at the ruling by subtle and indirect attempts to undermine it, the issue should be addressed directly.

 

David Brooks, for one, has said that Roe v. Wade deprived the public of a chance to work through the abortion issue in the same way that the Civil Rights struggle was worked out. I think this is a fair point.

 

There was never a real grassroots movement to recognize abortion rights. The ruling was dropped on the public out of the blue. Neither party was "at fault" for the ruling, because neither party had advocated abortion rights in its platform as of 1972. Yet, once the ruling came down, battle lines were quickly drawn. Those battle lines should end in a negotiated, compromise proposed Constitutional Amendment.

 

The Republican Party should draft its proposed Constitutional Amendment and should offer it up for debate. There should be a commitment on the part of the two parties to complete the debate and submit the Amendment for ratification by the states within two years. It should be on the ballot in 2010. This is a national issue and it requires a national solution.

 

Put Obama and his Democrat majority to the test.

 

Let's end this wedge issue game now.