Value Over Replacement Party: A call to Caucus

Are there any absolute differences between the Republicans and the Democrats anymore? Obviously the recent vote against opening debate on the whole non-binding resolution that has dominated political news for the past week. But, when you look beyond party line roll call votes you see that there are a lot of poorly understood but vital distinctions. Susan Collins is a classic example. Part of a dying breed of moderate Northeastern Republicans, she voted to debate the non-binding resolutions. But she fits in poorly with several established Republican stereotypes. Likewise there are many Democrats like Bob Casey Jr. who could easily fit a more Republican mold given his pro-gun pro-life stances. There are undoubtedly many Democrats who would prefer Susan Collins to Bob Casey and vice versa for Republicans. Why aren't these differences better understood? Right now Collins is lumped in the same party as John Cornyn (who is very conservative across the board) and Bob Casey is sitting next to John Kerry. The only solution to this: the caucus.

The best models currently available for the new face of politics are the Blue Dog Democrats and modern discussion of baseball players (which I'll discuss further down). Essentially socially conservative Democrats, you can count on the Blue Dogs to be mostly pro-life pro-gun but anti-big business. Sure they're Democrats and they helped elect Nancy Pelosi as the Speaker of the House, but I doubt they agree with her very often. Other notables include the Black and Hispanic caucuses whose major issues are fairly apparent. But the caucus system can do so much more. Particularly liberal Democrats, could form a Green caucus. This would not only allow candidates to burnish their pro-environment credentials but it would also serve as a valuable way to bring Green party voters back into the fold. Likewise Republicans who value their roots as the party of small government at all times could form a Libertarian caucus. Other caucuses could come in and out of existence based on the issues of the day. Russ Feingold could lead an Anti-War caucus and likewise John McCain, for Pro-War.

Caucuses could split the difference between the long standing American tradition of two parties, and voters' desire to better understand what, if anything, their politicians stand for. I think I follow politics very closely but if you give me the name of a relatively unknown Democrat or Republican I'd have to guess and play the averages on whether he supports a wide variety of policies. But tell me I've got a Blue Dog Democrat and a Neo-con Republican. Now I can really tell what they stand for. We need more of this in American politics if you ask me.

You're probably wondering how this relates to baseball. Think about your average baseball player. There are a lot of basic distinctions that help us understand how a given player fits into the game: pitcher/fielder, infield/outfield, AL/NL, position etc. These are kind of like your political parties. You can tell a lot about the player knowing just those categories. But we're all baseball fans here and we want to know more. This is baseball. This matters. Fantasy pride is on the line. Now you can start getting into stats and look at batting average, slugging, ERA, strikeouts, home runs etc. but that can take a lot of time and there are an ever evolving set of new statistical measures to figure out how you should rate a player. OPS, WHIP, VORP all come to mind. If you're a fan, these stats are your friends. But if you need to explain a player quickly to someone that thinks VORP is an alien and WHIP is something out of Indiana Jones or Castlevania, go with the tools. Hitting for power, hitting for average, fielding, and running speed. These are the caucuses of the baseball hitter. They immediately let me know what he's bringing to the field. Pitchers system is more nebulous but the plus system lets me know if he has the right stuff. Telling someone a shortstop hits for average, plays solid D and is fast sums him up a lot faster than a discussion of stats (the political equivalent of his voting record).

Baseball did itself a huge service when it came up with a lot of new statisical categories to help out the serious fans, but you can't underestimate the importance of maintaining simple ways to keep the casual fan up to date about how a player is performing. Politics, never the most popular pursuit in America, really needs to follow baseball's lead and make sure doesn't cater exclusively to the hardcore political junkies but also gives the average American a better way to follow the game.