See Disclaimer.
Open letter to Representatives Brian Fitzpatrick and Josh Gottheimer, Problem Solver Caucus co-chairs
Dear Representatives Fitzpatrick and Gottheimer,
I address you as an independent voter. I am motivated by the belief that our commonalities as Americans (still) exceed our differences—and that if we take the time to listen to each other, we will ultimately find near-consensus solutions to effectively address most challenges we face.
The House just had a third Speaker vote. For a third time, Mr. Jordan failed to be elected. This resulted in an internal GOP vote that terminated him as the GOP Speaker nominee. As it should, because Mr. Jordan’s election would have been an aberration. A Speaker needs, at a minimum, to support democracy and a functioning government, neither of which Mr. Jordan has shown commitment to.
Importantly, this third House Speaker vote was also another failed opportunity to find a solution that would keep our government functioning. That no such solution has yet emerged is unambiguously the primary responsibility of the GOP as majority party. But it is also increasingly the responsibility of Democrats.
How so? It is extremely unlikely that the Minority Leader, Mr. Jeffries, will be elected Speaker. In fact, short of a momentous happening, he shouldn’t. Elections have consequences, and the GOP does hold the majority. Democrats continuing to vote for Mr. Jeffries in block shows discipline and is arguably a short-term positive for the party. But it is not a solution for the country. It is time to put those 212 blue votes to more creative use.
The Problem Solvers Caucus could and should play a central role in that. In your own words (quoting https://problemsolverscaucus.house.gov/0): “We are all tired of the obstructionism in Washington where partisan politics is too often prioritized over governing and what is best for the country. This is why the Problem Solvers Caucus was formed, and why we are on a mission to change the culture of D.C. We are a bipartisan group of Members of Congress organized to get to ‘yes’ to help solve some of our country’s most pressing challenges.”
Assuming that these are more than just feel-good words, and that they are not hopelessly dated, your Caucus has a range of options to address the current crisis. Two are discussed below. One is (almost embarrassingly) obvious and pragmatic; the other is admittedly ‘out of the box.’
Starting with the obvious: A short-term solution would be for the Caucus to converge on the name of a Republican (within or outside the House’s current membership) that could garner a critical mass of votes from members of both parties. Democrats might want to impose some conditions for their support, but the only conditions that truly matter are a set of high-level values agreed upon as inviolable. Preserving democracy and a functioning, uninterrupted government would top that list, which should be kept short yet impactful.
Alternatively (and boldly), a critical mass of members of the Caucus (presumably Republicans) could become independent, in a move coordinated with the Democratic leadership and House moderates—Republicans and Democrats alike. One of the new independents would be elected Speaker, nominated by Democrats and with the support of GOP/independent moderates and Democrats.
This would amount to creating a (perhaps short lived but) profoundly transformative coalition. For the remainder of this legislative session, this coalition would pursue a streamlined agenda based on three pillars: preserving Democracy, keeping the government functioning, and creating legislative conditions for a multi-party system to emerge where minority parties can be viable both electorally and as partners in governance.
I realize that the third pillar is a tall order, conceptually and logistically. It is potentially fraught with challenges and risk. However, should it be engaged seriously and in good faith, it could enable the type of paradigm shift our country needs. And it could result in a political system better representing the nuanced views of all Americans. Your (and America’s) collective creativity and moral compass would be the limit.
One could easily envision ranked voting (at federal and ultimately state and local levels) being at the core of the new paradigm—in fact, likely a prerequisite to prevent extreme minorities from taking undeserved control. One could also envision the group of new House independents being the founding kernel of a third party, likely an ethical conservative counterpoint to today’s GOP. Such party would be viable as a power broker from the onset and could evolve to become a mainstream electoral alternative.
If this second suggested solution seems too bold and overwhelming, then please urgently adopt the first one. But, even in that case, please keep the seed of the bolder idea alive. A large percentage of Americans believes that the existing two-party system no longer works. You certainly recognize the legitimacy of that thinking, as do many of your colleagues.
Why would you forgo the opportunity, now or soon, to build an alternative that we can all be proud of?
Respectfully,
Antonio Baptista
Cc: Interim Speaker McHenry, Minority Leader Jeffrey, members of the Problem Solvers Caucus, Oregon Congressional Delegation, Senator Schumer, Senator McConnell, President Biden; open circulation in social media.
Outside the box 