Voters say they want a new political party. Will Forward be it?

|
Stan Sholik/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom
Andrew Yang, co-founder of the Forward Party, made a surprise appearance at the 2022 Orange County Asian American Bar Association Installation Dinner, where he introduced himself and his party on July 28, 2022.
  • Quick Read
  • Deep Read ( 4 Min. )

Is it time for a new national party? And haven’t we seen this movie before? 

According to Gallup, 62% of voters say neither of the two major parties adequately represent the American people, and more voters now identify as independents than as Democrats or Republicans. 

Why We Wrote This

The U.S. electoral system is strongly stacked against third parties. But a new party can still have a big political impact – particularly if it forces the two major parties to adapt.

The latest aspirant to try to fill that void is the Forward Party. Launched last month, the party is being led by Andrew Yang, a former Democratic presidential hopeful, and Christine Todd Whitman, former GOP governor of New Jersey. Its pitch is that most voters want pragmatism, and the current two-party system isn’t up to the task. For now, it offers no prescription for social or economic policy – saying that its members will decide on a national platform. 

History shows that new parties can shake up the status quo, says Bernard Tamas, an associate professor of politics at Valdosta State University. But such parties also tend to vanish after they force a course correction by larger parties. 

One set of issues the Forward Party does advocate is ranked choice voting, open primaries, and other reforms to “give Americans more choices in elections.” Experts say if it makes headway on that front, those electoral reforms could outlive whatever else the new party does. 

Like Coke and Pepsi, the Democratic and Republican parties bestride the U.S. political marketplace. But their customers – the voting public – aren’t exactly thrilled at their choices. According to Gallup, 62% of voters say neither of the two major parties adequately represent the American people. More voters now identify as independents than as Democrats or Republicans. 

Meanwhile, a surge in political extremism, particularly on the right, has alarmed scholars of democracy who warn that politicians are pandering to partisans and abandoning the center. In part that’s because so few districts are competitive anymore, and most elections are decided by primaries, where moderation is rarely rewarded. 

Is it time for a new national party? And haven’t we seen this movie before? 

Why We Wrote This

The U.S. electoral system is strongly stacked against third parties. But a new party can still have a big political impact – particularly if it forces the two major parties to adapt.

The latest aspirant is the Forward Party. Launched last month, the party is being led by Andrew Yang, a former Democratic presidential hopeful, and Christine Todd Whitman, former Republican governor of New Jersey. Its pitch is that most voters want pragmatism not partisanship and that the current duopoly isn’t up to the task.

“There’s a tremendous amount of common ground” in policymaking, says Joel Searby, the party’s national director. “But it’s not advanced because the extremes grab the conversations.” 

Skeptics say the electoral system – single-member districts won by a plurality – is stacked against third parties, which is why they barely register at election time. Nor does voters’ stated independence translate into a winnable bloc since most in fact have a partisan lean, even if they don’t identify as Republicans or Democrats. The major parties also enjoy a huge head start in organizing and fundraising. In some states, simply getting on the ballot is a challenge. 

Then there’s the problem of spoilers in presidential elections. Minor candidates are more likely to siphon support from one side and hand victory to the other, thus installing a minority vote-getter. 

History shows that new parties can emerge and shake up the status quo, says Bernard Tamas, an associate professor of politics at Valdosta State University in Georgia. It happened before and could happen again, particularly in an era of polarization and dysfunction. “Third parties have the capacity to throw a monkey wrench in the system,” he says. 

But such parties also tend to “sting and die” like bees after their electoral victories force a course correction by larger parties, says Professor Tamas, author of “The Demise and Rebirth of American Third Parties.” This is how the Republicans and Democrats absorbed the challenge from Progressive candidates in the early 20th century. 

The Forward Party says it seeks to “cut out the extreme partisanship, reintroduce a competition of ideas, and work together in good faith.” But it offers no prescription for social or economic policy, nor any vision of America’s role in the world. 

Mr. Searby says that’s intentional – and that its members will get to decide on a national platform. Party leaders will hold an official launch in Houston in September followed by a national convention in 2023. The goal is to get candidates on the ballot in all 50 states by 2024. 

Whatever platform is adopted will be flexible, as policies that work in some states or cities won’t work in others. “It’s a new kind of politics and policymaking,” says Mr. Searby. “We’re building this party from the ground up.” 

That flexible approach doesn’t convince everyone. Matthew Shugart, a political scientist at the University of California, Davis, says that parties typically organize around a social or economic interest. But Mr. Yang “has asked us to ‘imagine’ a political party with no ideology and no special interest ties. ... That’s just not how successful political parties are built,” he says via email.  

Where the Forward Party fits on the left-right political continuum is unclear. Mr. Searby says he’s heard from both alienated Republicans and Democrats in search of middle ground, though he argues that extremism on the right presents a greater danger to democracy.

Most voters associate third-party candidates with presidential runs: Ross Perot in 1992 and Ralph Nader in 2000. In 2016, Mr. Searby was an adviser to Evan McMullin, an independent who ran as a Never-Trump candidate; Mr. McMullin is running this year for the U.S. Senate in Utah. 

By contrast, the Forward Party is initially focused on finding and supporting candidates for local and state elected positions, not a presidential run. “We’re not going to show up in 2024 and compete with the two main parties,” says Mr. Searby. 

In recent years, billionaires such as Howard Schultz and Michael Bloomberg have flirted with independent presidential runs; Mr. Bloomberg, a former New York mayor, wound up seeking the Democratic nomination. Both presented themselves as problem-solving pragmatists who leaned right on fiscal matters and left on cultural issues, broadly in tune with their social peers. 

But that probably isn’t the best combination for a viable third party, says Jack Santucci, a political scientist at Drexel University in Philadelphia. “Most Americans are left on economics and right on social issues,” he says. 

One set of issues the Forward Party does advocate is ranked choice voting, open primaries, and other reforms to “give Americans more choices in elections,” its website says. These innovations are already happening in states like Alaska and Maine and are popular with young voters, says Professor Santucci. And these electoral reforms could outlive whatever else the new party does, in terms of shaking up the duopoly that is the two-party system. 

“The Forward Party is more likely to succeed at popularizing anti-party reform than at electing its own candidates,” he says. 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Voters say they want a new political party. Will Forward be it?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2022/0830/Voters-say-they-want-a-new-political-party.-Will-Forward-be-it
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe