Monday, January 30, 2006
People are being polarized along party lines, poll-takers said.
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR
WASHINGTON -- Ray Graham of Parkville, Ala., knows whom to blame for this year's disappointing deer season: President Bush.
"Since he has been blamed for the tsunami, Hurricane Katrina, all the thousands Saddam murdered, and anything else the Democrats can think of, I might as well join the crowd," he wrote in a letter Jan. 23 to the Montgomery Advertiser.
Graham's tongue is planted firmly in cheek, but his point is serious: Politicization has permeated life to an unprecedented degree, from the entertainment and news Americans consume to what they tell pollsters about the economy.
In its annual January poll gauging public priorities, the Pew Research Center highlighted the yawning gap between how Republicans and Democrats view the economy under Bush -- currently, 33 percentage points but as high as 44 points in February 2004. Bush is expected to address the economy and other key issues during his State of the Union address Tuesday night.
Even under President Clinton, a polarizing figure in his own right, views on the economy were roughly the same across party lines.
The five years of George W. Bush's presidency have been a time of tumult -- the 9/11 attacks, the Afghan and Iraq wars, massive natural disasters, gas and oil shocks -- some of his own doing and some a result of outside forces. Americans have grown more isolationist and concerned about immigration.
Five years ago, there was no gay marriage or iPods or "American Idol." But of all the changes over which President Bush has presided, the biggest is probably the "hopelessly polarized country we live in today," said independent pollster John Zogby.
Next, he said, comes the degree to which the nation hasn't changed. "Though Americans expect the next terror attack and nothing is left to the imagination, it's amazing the degree to which we carry on with our lives."
'9/11 effect'
Elements of the "9/11 effect" -- the sense of national unity, including near universal support for Bush, willingness to put civil liberties aside in the name of security, trust in government and the media -- lasted maybe five or six months.
By the middle of 2002, pollsters reported that America was "back to normal" when various social indicators had fallen to pre-9/11 levels, such as trust along racial lines and the numbers of people who said they were troubled by government eavesdropping and reading of e-mail.
Scandals involving Enron Corp. and the Catholic Church brought back old suspicions toward large institutions.
Over a longer time, the growing partisan gap in Bush's job approval that marked the start of his presidency -- spurred by his controversial election and conservative agenda -- and disappeared after 9/11, came back.
The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003, followed by a protracted and costly occupation, sealed the return of intense polarization. By October 2004, on the eve of Bush's re-election, 94 percent of Republicans approved of the president's job performance, while 11 percent of Democrats did.
That 83-point difference smashed all modern records. (The highest previous record was held by President Reagan, whose Gallup numbers showed a 70-point gap twice, according to Gary Jacobson, a political scientist at the University of California at San Diego.)
It's enough to make one wonder if a sort of "polarization fatigue" might set in with the public. In fact, say pollsters, polarization is a big-picture phenomenon that "normal people" don't pay much attention to.
To some observers, the entire phenomenon is misunderstood: It's politics that are polarized, not the American people. They point to polling on even the toughest social issues that shows that most Americans are, in fact, pragmatists.
The political parties and the media have painted a distorted picture of a nation riven by extremes -- a tendency that's fed by the extreme partisans who often emerge from primaries, denying the general electorate the centrist choices they would prefer, said Morris Fiorina, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University.
"Voters can only choose between the alternatives they're offered, and so if they're offered more extreme alternatives, you'll see more extreme choices," said Fiorina, author of the book "Culture War: The Myth of a Polarized America."
What makes a difference
Given different alternatives for president -- such as, say, John McCain of Arizona, a Republican senator with a maverick streak, and former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner, a centrist Democrat -- voters might not be so polarized, Fiorina said.
Fiorina also noted that the parties themselves have become more homogeneous, which affects the polls. "A generation ago, there were lots of conservatives in the Democratic Party and lots of liberals in the Republican Party," he said. "There are fewer now. People have found their ideological homes."
No matter how one views the polls, what is certain is that "there's a good deal of discontent with how much bickering goes on in Washington," said Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center in Washington.
And he sees little hope of improvement anytime soon: "I don't think Republicans are willing to say, 'Well, Bush is wrong,' or Democrats are willing to say, "Well, maybe we were wrong about him."
For Bush, the strategy of playing to his political base and giving little quarter to Democrats won him re-election and continuing Republican majorities in Congress. For Democrats, recent White House suggestions that the president is reaching out more to them produces derisive laughter.
If there is a genuine desire to bring the country together over policy issues, said Kohut, the more productive avenue would come via the rise of a third party or strong, independent political figure. But "that only happens in presidential [election] times," he said. "We're a good deal ahead of that discussion."
Youths more involved
Robert Putnam, author of "Bowling Alone," the 2000 book that documented a generation-long decline of social connectedness in America, sees something of a silver lining from 9/11: signs of an upturn in civic engagement among young adults.
A variety of surveys show that Americans who were between ages 18 and 25 on Sept. 11, 2001, are increasingly discussing politics, voting and volunteering.
Putnam said that for this age group in particular, 9/11 took place at an impressionable time in their lives, just as the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 instantly ended America's inter-war isolationism and inspired that era's 18-to-25-year-olds to serve a national cause. Thus was born the so-called Greatest Generation.
Said Putnam, director of the Saguaro Seminar: Civic Engagement in America, at Harvard University: "9/11 was an incredibly vivid moment of Irish firemen and Jewish bankers and undocumented Salvadoran waiters and so on, all in this together. It was the kind of moment for potential national renewal that comes along to a country once or twice a century."