Coalition Politics in America - Essay Example

Coalition Politics in America After nearly two years of intense debate in the halls of the United s congress, President Barack Obama signed thecontroversial the health care reform bill in March 23, 2010. Although the congressional debates ultimately led into the enactment of the bill into law, it basically represented the political division that continues to haunt American society. Prior to its signing the arguments and counter-arguments were not only presented through parliamentary processes. The socially aware citizens in the country were themselves asserting their opinions in whatever way appropriate and whenever and wherever possible. The political divisions, however, were far from being permanent or fixed. In fact, there were many instances when alliances shift from one political camp to another, a time when coalitions reshape in the most drastic manner. The debate only proved how volatile American politics is. The most effective method of determining such precariousness is by observing and analyzing how the political balance of forces increase and decrease according to the growth and break-up of coalitions and alliances. The health care reform issue is definitely an issue that does not involve only the dominant political parties. It is an issue that divides society depending on the individual citizen’s point of view when it comes to the right of a person to health care services. Most health care service providers in the US are owned by private business entities. Aside from this, the health insurance system is also largely controlled by private companies too although a few state-operated health insurance programs also exist. Under such circumstance, when both health care service and insurance business are profit-oriented, it is natural for a big number of people to not have the ability to avail of such services. There is about 15 percent of the population that is not insured, while 21 percent are underinsured and are, therefore, incapable of paying for the bills in medical services. (Families USA) Consequently, thousands of people do not have access to necessary medical attention for the treatment of various diseases. A statistical report admitted that “lack of health insurance causes roughly 18,000 unnecessary deaths every year in the United States." (IOM) The irony, which the report pointed out, is that this is a problem that exists in one of the world’s richest and most industrialized nations. There is seemingly a consensus among the public and even among the legislators and the executive department of the federal government on the necessity of solving the problem. However, the dispute is grounded not just on then merits and demerits of the health care reform program of the Obama administration. It is also being made complicated because of partisan politics, which proves that the wounds incurred during the 2008 presidential elections have not yet healed and that new wounds are being created under the Obama administration. Although health care reform has been an issue that has bugged the nation for many years, it is only during the Obama administration that this was taken seriously discussed and, eventually, made into law. Those who are in favor of it insist that due to the big number of people who do not have health insurance, the cost of their medical services is a burden carried by all and that, by making the insurance coverage broader, the health care quality will improve and become less expensive at the same time. On the other hand, those who oppose it believe that individual rights are violated when people are required to have health insurance. They assert that with government subsidizing the health care and insurance of those who cannot afford to acquire it from the private providers, a significant portion of the taxes collected will only be channeled to those who may not be even taxes. Because of this, they propose that other methods of cutting the costs in health care must be improved. However, there are signs that the discussions on the pros and cons of the issue continues to be affected by the persistent power struggle between the two dominant political parties the country. Both the Democrats and the Republicans have tried to make the issue as a means of gathering support for their political ends. The Democrats, being in power and being its main promoter, are defending its validity and practicality. The Republicans, being the opposition to the administration, are criticizing it and, since the health care reform program is already up for implementation, are waiting for any weakness or sign of failure that will bolster their arguments against it. Coalition politics, which was very prominent during the 2008 elections, is being employed once again. However, the parties needed coalitions not just to reinforce their arguments for or against the health care reform program. The issue may no longer be as debatable as it was, considering that it is already a law but it can be an agenda for the coming elections. Because of this, coalitions are once again formed not just depending on the basis of unity regarding the health care reform program but in preparation for the next round of electoral battle between the Democrats and the Republicans. Although there are only two major political parties in the US, smaller parties, social movement organizations, special interest and lobby groups also compose the broad political spectrum. These organizations that have their respective bases in the grassroots have political beliefs and or tendencies ranging from the conservatives to the liberals. Both the conservatives and the liberals can still be subdivided into small categories. However, when it comes to the manner that they deal with national and local policies, they can be divided according to their stand, whether it is conservative or liberal. Only those activist organizations, particularly those upholding the radical Marxist-Leninist line, are typically reluctant of being involved in such political division. The reason for this is that they consider the conservatives and the liberals as reflections of the Republicans and the Democrats respectively, which they deem as both representatives of the big capitalist class. To some extent, their notion may be true. Such groups have the numbers and the influence that both the Democrats and the Republicans have always wanted to tap for their desire to clinch power. However, these organizations, especially those with a nationwide scope, have not gone into alliances or coalitions with the dominant parties because they truly believe in the Democratic or Republican ideologies. They take sides in the electoral struggles for the purpose of advancing their own causes. If a candidate’s platform has items that affect them in a positive way, they may consider voting and gathering support for him even if they do not entirely agree with the rest. In the 2008 elections, Obama may have the wider array of forces allied to him but this does not mean that the people were really supportive of the Democratic Party. The motivation of those of those organizations and alliances for supporting Obama was simply that they were greatly discontented with the George W. Bush administration. Senator John McCain, the Republican’s presidential candidate was seen as just another copy of Bush. The US economy was ailing, companies were closing down, unemployment was rising, the military was bogged down in the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the threat of environmental disasters due to global warming were. The Obama administration may yet have to prove if it can solve the country’s problems. However, it cannot be denied that during the elections, it provided the alternative route, a departure from the Bush national and international policies that caused the troubles. Because of this, Obama even attracted elements from the Republican Party. (RFO) The coalition or the alliances formed during the 2008 electoral campaign were loose in nature. The political alignment during that particular instance was not permanent. While there were common views on the state of the country under Bush that led to bases of unity, these were not formal and these do not have hierarchical relationships with other organizations and the Democratic Party. The organizations composing the political coalition set aside their political and ideological differences though in order to achieve their common aspiration. This aspiration was not even on what an Obama administration can offer but on the necessity of getting rid of Bush and his clones in the White House. Because of this, the question of whether the pro-Obama conservatives signify a new and permanent political balance of forces (The Economist) can only get an improbable answer. Nevertheless, the alliances were necessary in order to defeat the forces that had been perceived as bearing the hallmarks of the Bush leadership. The unions, despite their fierce rivalry even had to unite temporarily to put Obama in office and provide the opportunity of pushing legislation in favor of labor. Both the AFL-CIO and Change to Win began a campaign “to get the new president and Congress to pass legislation that would make it easier for workers to unionize.” (Greenhouse) The now-defunct Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, a nationwide organization that has been known to be left-leaning also supported Obama although it was never known for going out into the open with its endorsement for a presidential candidate. (Strom) The Republicans have also been using coalitions in order to push legislation which they think will be blocked by the Democrats. Although this party has been known to have better cohesion than its counterparts, it is actually composed of several factions that have different political persuasions. However, these factions may be divided into two camps; the conservatives and the moderates. The conservatives are comprised of those who represent the interests of Wall Street businesses, those who uphold national security policies above any other agenda, as well the religious right. The moderates, on the other hand, are those who do not totally subscribe to the party’s viewpoint and standpoint on certain issues and policies. The moderates were particularly instrumental in the nomination of McCain to become the party’s standard bearer in the 2008 elections. With Bush administration becoming very unpopular, the moderates knew that nominating conservative would only worsen the chances in the elections. McCain was subjected to criticisms by the conservatives and was called ‘Republican in Name Only.’ (Conservative Dialysis) Nevertheless, he became the Republicans’ standard bearer, a sign that the moderates within the party have become more influential. Currently, the Republicans have drawn additional strength from the Tea Party Movement. This is now the country’s most vocal grassroots-based movement that is highly critical of the Obama administration’s most controversial programs. Although the movement does not want to be identified to any party, it basically carries a libertarian conservative stance, making it closer to the Republicans in politics. The Republicans, however, would want the Tea Party movement to remove from its ranks of what they consider as undesirable elements, which may just tarnish its image and the party as well. (Gaynor) The American political system may be dominated by Democratic and the Republican parties. However, as an increasing number of the citizens have become more aware socially and politically, the grassroots movements can grow to a point of shifting the balance between the two parties. The 2008 elections and the current debates on certain key programs of the Obama administration have been largely influenced by social movements and other community and non-state entities. Obama and the Democrats need to rely on the same forces that were in instrumental in their electoral victories if they wish to see that their programs are implemented successfully. The Republicans, on the other hand, need to tap the growing Tea Party Movement in order to strengthen its grassroots support, which can be transformed into an electoral base in the 2010 elections. Both parties are conscious that ignoring the possibility of coalitions and alliances is detrimental to their chances in gaining the edge in the country’s political structure. Works Cited Conservative Dialysis. "John McCain: RINO." January 15, 2010. 31 March, 2010. Families USA. "New Report Finds 86.7 Million Americans Were Uninsured at Some Point in 2007-2008." Press Release March 4, 2009. 31 April, 2010. Gaynor, Tim. "Brewing Tensions between the Tea Party and GOP." Reuters US Edition. 29 March, 2010. . Greenhouse, Steven. "After Push for Obama, Unions Seek New Rules." The New York Times November 8, 2008. 30 March, 2010. Institute of Medicine of the National Academies. Insuring Americas Health: Principles and Recommendations. Report January 13, 2004. 3o March, 2010. Republicans for Obama. "Why Obama?" RFO Website. 29 March, 2010. Strom, Stephanie . "On Obama, Acorn and Voter Registration". New York Times October 8, 2009 The Economist. "The Rise of the Obamacons." Lexington October 23, 2008. 29 March, 2010. Read More