Consensus Is Needed More Than Inflexible Ideology

America today is more devoid of national policy than at any time in my memory. We have no national consensus on fiscal policy, on trade policy, on energy, on banking, on agriculture, on the environment or on national defense. If we are to survive, as we must, it is imperative that we once again learn how our democratic republic should work. We must realize that we govern a great democracy through consensus, not inflexible ideology. We must break down the polarized barriers that have divided us for three decades and, together, formulate national policy that can guide us through the next century and speak to all of our country’s needs--whether social, economic or defense.

Since becoming politically active in the 1960s I have tried to sort out in my own mind why we sometimes can’t seem to make the system work. Obviously the reasons are many. We seem to believe that ours is the only generation with greatly diverse opinion, yet that is not at all true. We have always had enormous diversity of opinion, ever since the founding of the nation. We have had our greatest moments when we had the leadership to use that diversity to our advantage, and our greatest peril when the diversity fractured our ability to govern.

During the last three decades we have struggled through the civil-rights movement, through Vietnam, through Watergate. Our trust has been weakened, and modern technology has accentuated that polarization. Television is the demagogue’s delight, and we are fed a constant barrage of 30-second blurbs on enormously complex issues. There are hundreds of computers in Washington, totally dedicated to one-issue fund-raising, that can release an avalanche of millions of letters overnight molding public opinion and generally spreading intentionally biased information--more often than not, erroneous information.

In spite of all the reasons, and the obvious difficulty, those of us charged with governing must learn to govern. Though it may be only a glimmer at this point, Democrats in the House of Representatives are well on the way toward that necessary goal. My own personal situation today is striking evidence of that reality, and it began two years ago with another just as unlikely event.

In 1984 Bill Gray, a black liberal from Philadelphia, was elected chairman of the House Budget Committee with the strong, almost unanimous, support of all the party’s white Southern conservatives. He has led us toward fiscal responsibility. Next week I, Marvin Leath, a Texas conservative, have an excellent chance to be elected chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, with the unlikely support of blacks and liberals throughout the nation. Why? Because in the last two years a small group of liberals and conservatives, who have chosen to be intellectually honest with each other, have suddenly learned that they can reach agreement on difficult issues, and that when they learn to trust they can in fact begin to understand one another’s concerns as real and meaningful. The net result is a maturity that helps conservatives to better understand arms control, the need to feed hungry children and the strife of the homeless. It makes liberals better understand the need for an adequate defense, for fiscal responsibility and for a strong business climate.

The implication that such a beginning can have on the Democratic Party, the nation and the world is enormous. It is exciting, and it is indeed achievable.

For almost a generation now, we have not talked to each other--we have shouted at each other. In the area of national defense, conservatives have held the strong and uncompromising view that we should buy every weapon that the Pentagon wants. Liberals, on the other hand, have been so concerned about nuclear holocaust that many have espoused unilateral disarmament. The real truth is somewhere in between. We must get conservatives to recognize the threat of nuclear weapons, and get liberals to understand the need to adequately defend the country. Liberals say that there is great waste in the Pentagon; conservatives must acknowledge that indeed there is, and then together we can formulate real, workable policy, not just knee-jerk reaction.

There really is no contradiction in these goals, but we cannot reach either without reasoned, honest effort. We won’t do it all today, but gradually, surely, as trust is built. After all, 20% of something is always better than 100% of nothing.

When we weed out the demagogues on both sides, then the rest of us who will be intellectually honest and politically realistic can in fact achieve strong policy, whether it be in defense or the many other grave issues. It is a beginning, and it is absolutely necessary to our future.