Centerfield

I tend to differ from the DLC on health care and I suspect the Education parts of the DLC's platform are a challenge for many in that it differs from many of the more well-defined approaches to the left and right (but don't let me dissuade another potential convert to the benefits of charter school districts!).

Regarding Health Care, I'm more inclined to follow the likes of erstwhile DLC/PPIer Jeff Lemieux who is now with AHIP (www.ahip.org). A decent, yet somewhat muddled read on their policies is available here:

http://www.ahip.org/content/default.aspx?bc=39|343

Another contributor on health care to take note of is Harvard Business Professor Michael Porter.

http://www.isc.hbs.edu/soci-healthcare.htm

He's got a good writeup in a summertime issue of HBR that is well worth the $6 download price. His book on health care competition should also be out soon.

Self-serving link on Porter's work:
http://www.gregsopinion.com/archives/004709.html

That said, I do stand rather strongly with my DLC roots on the issues of foreign policy, trade, education, economics, and environment in particular.

One thing I notice right away(admittedly at a glance) is that the wish lists are an awful lot like reading the menu at an expensive restaurant that doesn't list the prices, or has an expensive item that just says "market price."

That's the big difference, IMO. Centrists want to know the price, we want to look at the bill, and we check the bill, too. This reads like a manifesto for wish fulfillment , a fantasy for people who work in constituent services. They want to add guaranteed entitlements of expanded pre-school and guaranteed college financing, for example.

If there's one thing i want centrists to stand for, it's a focus on where the rubber meets the road. IMO, the democrats are enjoying one of the few luxuries of being the minority party. The GOP was supposed to be fiscally responsible when they got power, and they stuck it up our pipes. The democrats are pretending that Clinton wasn't dragged kicking and screaming to the balanced budget table, and that they'll be responible fiscal stewards if they regain power.

Fool me once, shame on the GOP....fool me twice? Not gonna happen. I'm not especially interested in dissecting the democrats perspectives and using them as a starting point. I think its MUCH better to continue a dialogue among centrists disaffected from both parties so that we genuinely integrate our viewpoints and truly understand the problems we face and come up with realistic solutions. If what we come up with turns out to match the DLC's views, maybe they can join US, a group beholden to neither fringe.

I might feel differently if the DLC came out and said "we need to stop pretending Social Security is no big deal" or "expanding education entitlements is off the table until the budget is balanced or at least growing slower than GDP."

Personally, I disagreed with their policy on Iraq (even while I worked there), but agree with them on National Security in general and their stance on the "war on terror" I agree with their support of redistricting reform, their efforts to make the tax code fairer and simplier, their support of welfare reform (to include more child support for example), and almost all of them except trade. Generally I am a free trader but i think these agreements should push towards more labor and environmental standards and working towards improving conditions. Generally, I think that is their position as well.

The DLC is filled with lots of smart and well meaning people, some of whom would love to make a BullMosse party that made up DLC democrats and Main Street Republicans. The idea is that a McCain -Lieberman type ticket would win overwhelming and that is where the country truly is, not super conservative and not super liberal.

OK here's another huge clue. I opened 5 links to position essays, and every one of them mentioned President Bush (4) or the Republicans in the first 2 sentences.

I don't want centrists to define ourselves in opposition to one party, I want us to define ourselves as interested in insights from both and skeptical of each side's overreaches. Everything I'm reading lately from democrats sounds like they want to co-opt centrism and paint the GOP as composed solely of extremists.

IMO our focus should be laser-like onthe relationship between two things: the extent and trends of the country's available resources, and the identity of the highest priority needs of average people.

Heres my command to both sides:

Explain to me as completely as possible your understanding of some perceived problem(points off for leaving out important parts of the overall problem);

tell me how you think it can be fixed, and how you'd deal with any new problems your "solution" might cause

tell me how much you think it will cost and how you arrived at your esitimate,

and tell me how you're going to pay for it. Remember that you can only spend each tax dollar once.

The DLC has the most credibility of anyboy in terms of balancing a budget, so I feel confident that any spending they advocate would be matched by revenues. No, they are not a no-new-taxes organization. Nor are centrists, I believe.

I would think that most centrists are opposed to the Republican agenda, which is set by their conservative majority. The Democrats are split and have no meaningful agenda, so there is really nothing to oppose at this point.

I opened 5 links to position essays, and every one of them mentioned President Bush (4) or the Republicans in the first 2 sentences.

I noticed the same thing. A turn off. Campaigning after the campaign is over BUT I expect that from a party-affiliated group. Is there a way to "check our parties at the door" then have a frank discussion?

I wanna join the Reality Party. When we gonna get one? :-)

I have never had a problem with the DLC agenda... They are great Republicans! My problem has always been that the DLC agenda is way more conservative than the Democratic base and that the DLC itself compromises and supports candidates that are more liberal than their agenda, like John Kerry, in order to play a significant roll in the party. Take all of the centrists running for Chair... There line is not that the Party should move right, or that they will attempt to do so if they are elected, it is rather that it needs to be more open to other opinions. IMO this will only mean that moderates will be silent watchers from the sidelines, like they are in the GOP.

Furthermore, DLC ideas are Republican ideas, read to "Renew America" by New Gingrich. These are all ideas that spawned from the 1994 "Contract with America" era in some way or form.

Part of the reason I still refer to myself as Republican mostly has to do with the fact that the ideas all come from Republicans, a point that MWS made in another comment... I still say that the best avenue for a centrist agenda in a two-party system is the GOP, although I have come to the point of view that Governor Whitman is right, if moderates don't get some teeth there existance in either party will be zippo. This means not automatically endorsing your party's nominee just because they are from your party, and running effective primary campaigns... It remains to be seen whether or not the centrist movement in either party has the gumption to do this.

I'm pretty happy steering clear of either party, and patiently waiting to see if we grow. Over time, centrists affiliated with either party may tire of being ignored and ridiculed.

I think the DLC is making the same mistake as many other Democrats. They want to move toward the center, not becuase they believe the answers to problems are there, but becuase they want to win elections. Which is fine, but I'd like to see some groups come up with solutions to national issues and then find where they fall on the political spectrum. I actually agree with many of their stances on issues, but I'm not sure what their motivations are for establishing them.

i.e. I've read speeches and policy papers on national security matters from Sen. Biden and I've agreed with what he's proposed and the way he's deduces the solutions. I'm not so sure what influences the DLC views.

Mathew, whether or not the Republican Party thought of these positions first or not is irrelevent simply because they haven't really taken these ideas and ran with them the way a Centrist party could.

I'm more of a free trade type of person as well and agree with DaveB on the type of free trade.

Wes,

I agree, but I am not convinced that a third centrist party is ever going to be a reality, if I did I might be as content as Brian waiting to see if we can make a movement out of this thing.

Matthew:

IMO this will only mean that moderates will be silent watchers from the sidelines, like they are in the GOP.

Then the issue is less about changing the parties and more about getting moderates to "speak up"!!

Furthermore, DLC ideas are Republican ideas,

So!? And improving education via national policy has been a democratic idea. We can't "yes, but" ideas based on site of origin. A good idea is a good idea whether it comes from Newt Gingrich or Barbara Boxer.