We Need Reform, But Do We Need a Reform Party?
Anybody out there know what happened to the Reform Party (RP)? They've sort of fallen off the radar.
If ever we needed reform in the U.
S.
government, it would be now.
But it seems this motley crew just couldn't get (or keep) it together.
The party's last hurrah was in the 1996 election, when Ross ("The Boss") Perot managed 8.
5% of the popular vote, less than half the "hurrah" of 1992 when he pulled over 19% of the vote.
The RP platform for 2000, a banner carried by Pat Buchanan of all people, trumpeted tax cuts and universal health care - and, if it had been up to one RP latecomer, the highest-rated daytime TV talk show.
Trump/Winfrey 2000? That was Donald Trump's formulation, anyway.
Does anyone even remember that "The Donald" toyed with the idea of a run at the White House in 2000? And, astonishingly, for about a minute Oprah Winfrey was touted as Trump's dream running mate.
Now, he never did supply too many old-fashioned declarative sentences about his political beliefs, but he apparently dreamed of giving both tax cuts and an open-ended, unlimited entitlement to medical care.
But was there any support at all for this ticket, or this thinking, in the ranks of the RP? In America at large? In creation as we know it? Apparently not.
And now the RP is down the memory hole, never to be retrieved, apparently.
Too bad! Now the name can't be used successfully, since "reform" is defined in today's political dictionary as "that silliness Ross Perot got into after he bumped his head.
" Anyway, "change" is the word of the moment, and of the movement, while "reform" sounds hopelessly dated.
But what about these so-called Perotistas? What happened to them? RP founder Ross Perot is widely believed to have several different screws loose, while such low-wattage intellects as Jesse Ventura and Warren Beatty tried for years to shoo away Pat Buchanan in a political two-step set to the theme from "Jaws" (yep, that scary two-note thing).
Paperback intrigues and pre-teen-type posturing characterized the RP conferences and nominating process in 2000, solidifying the impression of the party as being heavily populated with UFO-spotters wearing camouflage fatigues, the bottom tier of political hacks, disgruntled actors and wrestlers.
A long goodbye Of course, the RP managed to elect a governor in Minnesota, probably so their secret clubhouse could be right in the middle of the country.
And don't even try getting into the Twin Cities without your Governor Jesse code ring! All kidding aside (well, some kidding aside), the RP may seem a strange combination of no-nonsense jocks and pencil-necked geeks, but they apparently buried the hatchet after high school and found out how much more they could accomplish working together instead of fighting.
There are still RP operatives and campaigns here and there, and there are enough sharp, sneaky, imaginative and aggressive party faithful ready to get things going the RP direction - which is what, exactly? Who knows? There are two factions, at least, fighting for control and use of the party moniker.
It has brought the RP to the brink of extinction.
Here's your proof: Perot 1992, 19.
7 million votes; Reform Party presidential votes 2008, 470 votes.
Ouch.
Looking back to see ahead Still, the run-up to the 2000 election, with Donald Trump and Oprah Winfrey in the RP mix, was the peak of RP zaniness, if not vote totals.
Now the whole concept of political reform carries the weight of this oddball party and its strange assortment of tinfoil-hatted leaders.
They are either too strange, or not strange enough, to get elected in the USA today.
And yet, reform is something American government seems always to need, in one area or another.
Nowadays, it seems to need it in every area, period.
Will reform come from a third party - Independent, Libertarian, Green, Constitution, Peace & Freedom - or from reformers, real or imagined, in the ranks of the major parties? Can institutional change ever come from the parties that are, themselves, institutions? Change starts at home It is likely that "change" will be defined differently by everyone, which is actually a good thing.
It just depends on what you are trying to change.
If you are trying to reform or change "the world," you will face daunting opposition and entrenched interests from here to Timbuktu.
However, if you keep your focus on "your world" - your family, your job, your company, your neighborhood, your personal life - you just might see some positive changes and reforms.
Perhaps if people started their reform movements with a hard look in the mirror, we could actually see some improvement as a nation as the changes worked their way out through the concentric circles of our lives, from home to neighborhood to town to county to state - you get the picture.
Start at home and see what happens.
It's worth a try, right? Right!
If ever we needed reform in the U.
S.
government, it would be now.
But it seems this motley crew just couldn't get (or keep) it together.
The party's last hurrah was in the 1996 election, when Ross ("The Boss") Perot managed 8.
5% of the popular vote, less than half the "hurrah" of 1992 when he pulled over 19% of the vote.
The RP platform for 2000, a banner carried by Pat Buchanan of all people, trumpeted tax cuts and universal health care - and, if it had been up to one RP latecomer, the highest-rated daytime TV talk show.
Trump/Winfrey 2000? That was Donald Trump's formulation, anyway.
Does anyone even remember that "The Donald" toyed with the idea of a run at the White House in 2000? And, astonishingly, for about a minute Oprah Winfrey was touted as Trump's dream running mate.
Now, he never did supply too many old-fashioned declarative sentences about his political beliefs, but he apparently dreamed of giving both tax cuts and an open-ended, unlimited entitlement to medical care.
But was there any support at all for this ticket, or this thinking, in the ranks of the RP? In America at large? In creation as we know it? Apparently not.
And now the RP is down the memory hole, never to be retrieved, apparently.
Too bad! Now the name can't be used successfully, since "reform" is defined in today's political dictionary as "that silliness Ross Perot got into after he bumped his head.
" Anyway, "change" is the word of the moment, and of the movement, while "reform" sounds hopelessly dated.
But what about these so-called Perotistas? What happened to them? RP founder Ross Perot is widely believed to have several different screws loose, while such low-wattage intellects as Jesse Ventura and Warren Beatty tried for years to shoo away Pat Buchanan in a political two-step set to the theme from "Jaws" (yep, that scary two-note thing).
Paperback intrigues and pre-teen-type posturing characterized the RP conferences and nominating process in 2000, solidifying the impression of the party as being heavily populated with UFO-spotters wearing camouflage fatigues, the bottom tier of political hacks, disgruntled actors and wrestlers.
A long goodbye Of course, the RP managed to elect a governor in Minnesota, probably so their secret clubhouse could be right in the middle of the country.
And don't even try getting into the Twin Cities without your Governor Jesse code ring! All kidding aside (well, some kidding aside), the RP may seem a strange combination of no-nonsense jocks and pencil-necked geeks, but they apparently buried the hatchet after high school and found out how much more they could accomplish working together instead of fighting.
There are still RP operatives and campaigns here and there, and there are enough sharp, sneaky, imaginative and aggressive party faithful ready to get things going the RP direction - which is what, exactly? Who knows? There are two factions, at least, fighting for control and use of the party moniker.
It has brought the RP to the brink of extinction.
Here's your proof: Perot 1992, 19.
7 million votes; Reform Party presidential votes 2008, 470 votes.
Ouch.
Looking back to see ahead Still, the run-up to the 2000 election, with Donald Trump and Oprah Winfrey in the RP mix, was the peak of RP zaniness, if not vote totals.
Now the whole concept of political reform carries the weight of this oddball party and its strange assortment of tinfoil-hatted leaders.
They are either too strange, or not strange enough, to get elected in the USA today.
And yet, reform is something American government seems always to need, in one area or another.
Nowadays, it seems to need it in every area, period.
Will reform come from a third party - Independent, Libertarian, Green, Constitution, Peace & Freedom - or from reformers, real or imagined, in the ranks of the major parties? Can institutional change ever come from the parties that are, themselves, institutions? Change starts at home It is likely that "change" will be defined differently by everyone, which is actually a good thing.
It just depends on what you are trying to change.
If you are trying to reform or change "the world," you will face daunting opposition and entrenched interests from here to Timbuktu.
However, if you keep your focus on "your world" - your family, your job, your company, your neighborhood, your personal life - you just might see some positive changes and reforms.
Perhaps if people started their reform movements with a hard look in the mirror, we could actually see some improvement as a nation as the changes worked their way out through the concentric circles of our lives, from home to neighborhood to town to county to state - you get the picture.
Start at home and see what happens.
It's worth a try, right? Right!
