Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
As we celebrate America’s 250th anniversary, we honor the most successful experiment in self-government the world has known. Yet concerns about America’s demise grow as polarization, tribalism and political violence rise.
The Sagamore Institute’s annual Indiana Conference on Citizenship is set to tackle these issues on Tuesday at the Indiana State Museum. The conference was designed to inspire and prepare Hoosiers to actively participate in our democracy and advocate for the well-being of our state and nation. This year’s edition will highlight citizen-led strategies that are building on our nation’s founding principles to improve our communities for the next quarter millennium.
I am excited to participate in this year’s conference and moderate a discussion with constitutional scholar and political scientist Yuval Levin. In his book “American Covenant: How the Constitution Unified Our Nation — And Could Again,” Levin outlines how the Founders carefully constructed our Constitution to, among other important purposes, promote national unity and cohesion among Americans. He posits that unity does not mean agreeing all the time — that is an impossibility in a diverse society of free individuals. Rather, he argues we have forgotten how to disagree as we no longer spend time in civil, active disagreement with others.
A starting point for regaining our ability to disagree civilly is a healthier legislative branch. Contrary to what many of us learned in school, Levin explains that our Founders did not envision three equal branches of government. Instead, James Madison wrote in Federalist 51: “In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates.”
Over time, Congress has cededresponsibilities, allowing the executive branch to expand. Levin argues that in a republic, it is imperative that the legislative branch work as intended. He writes: “Congress is the only one of our national governing institutions that operates by accommodation and bargaining, and if we want our politics to help us resolve differences through negotiated compromises, then we will need Congress to be functional.” In other words, we need our elected representatives to model civility, negotiate and compromise.
Today, there is little incentive to do so. Politicians who work across the aisle are often chastised publicly for working with the enemy. Social media encourages our elected officials to perform like actors voicing the grievances of their core (primary) voters rather than legislate by negotiating on their voters’ behalf.
Levin points out that more private places are needed for members of Congress to negotiate with one another. Cameras in every deliberative space discourage across-the-aisle collaboration. He also argues for increasing the size of the House of Representatives to better reflect our population today, which could increase the likelihood of more varied intraparty factions.
Our primary system is also at odds with a more civil society. Fringe elements of both parties are empowered by the small share of voters participating in primaries — often those least interested in bargaining and compromise. In fact, in many cases, candidates commit to not negotiate with the other party thus committing to not do the job their general-election voters elected them to do. Levin stipulates that ranked-choice voting in primary elections could incentivize candidates to build broader intraparty coalitions and adopt an accommodative mindset.
Celebrate America’s 250th year of independence by taking the time to engage civilly with those who might not agree with you. A hopeful starting point would be attending the Indiana Conference on Citizenship. Learn more at sagamoreinstitute.org.•
__________
Feltman is CEO of IBJ Media and publisher of the Indianapolis Business Journal.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.