The Republicans now have a historic win and a supposedly clear mandate from the one-third of Americans that bothered to vote. They will soon control both houses, but not the White House. So far. The 2016 presidential race should be theirs to loose. Still, they have excellent aim in shooting themselves in the foot and their obsession with a complete victory over Obamacare may well provide the bullet to accomplish that.

During her campaign for reelection, Senator Susan Collins expressed a certain conservative mindset very clearly. Her problem with Obamacare is that there are those who liked things as they were and now their insurance has been changed due to government overreach. “That isn’t fair.”

“Fair” is fine depending on which end of the stick you find yourself. Some people having medical coverage they can afford have been unfavorably put upon in order that those that had none, or poor, or unaffordable coverage might have far better health-care provision. Collins’ position is that all boats should rise, but only if those already riding high are spared any turbulence. So, sorry, come back with another plan that does that. In the meantime, let’s return to what was also imperfect, but agreeable to those that are economically favored. Why should those that have, whether bootstrapped or silver spooned, have to accommodate those that have not?

The answer is democracy. Democracy, when functioning best, is all about accommodation towards consensus. Reaching across the aisle, however, is great only if the gesture brings about what is best for the greater good, rather than, foremost, conserving what has been great for a minority already well off.

I am as conservative as it gets in so many things. Always have been. Conserve what is good. But, keeping things the way they’ve been when that doesn’t benefit all Americans is agreeing to deny the fundamental premise of the entire American political exercise.

In 1976, a bicentennial exhibit at Boston’s Museum of Science offered a political questionnaire to visitors celebrating 200 post-revolutionary years. The survey revealed that the majority of those asked to choose sides on pre-revolutionary issues opted for staying with British rule. Though Jimmy Carter would win election that year, conservatism was especially vocal in 1976. Conservatism is not really a kindred spirit to revolution.

Obstructionism against progressive change is not revolutionary behavior, no matter how much one wants to co-op that branding. Our present-day Tea Party’s anti-taxation and anti-government revolt is seemingly a protest against governance altogether. Rather than supporting self-governance, it is fundamentally anti-democracy. It champions personal sovereignty over any other. Its desired order is to have less laws and more freedom. Admittedly, laws are the compromise of unrestrained freedom, but they still provide the best security against unrestrained tyranny or the total freedom of anarchy. “Obamacare” is a perfect example of an imperfect compromise and its imperfection needs to be changed. Changed, not rescinded.

Dems made an enormous compromise by accepting an Affordable Care Act pro-business orchestrated by Republicans who, brilliantly, renamed its flawed provisions using the the surname of their adversary. Criticizing what ended up a greatly thwarted attempt at universal health coverage, so private insurers can still pursue profiteering, provides scant change towards solving a social inequity that remains a fundamental impediment to economic growth. Now, 238 years later, America’s promise of freedom and justice for all is still being incrementally implemented. Hopefully, it won’t take as long to achieve truly affordable health care for all.

Harkening back to when a crew cut mentality anointed “welfare queens” as what plagues America, the code word now is “immigration,” fanning fears of an America with “others” in a majority. It’s hard to imagine that the new Republican majority, accomplished largely by an unrelenting attack on “BlackPresidentCare,” will not be utilized to continue a partisan siege of the White House’s racially offensive occupant. Even if race was removed from the equation, and, regrettably, Obama has tried to do that from the get-go, opposition to hope and change for social equity can still be counted on from some quarters, on both sides of the aisle. Liberal chickens have finally come home to roost from an Obama favored Wall St., only to find Main St. looking elsewhere for a champion.

The politics of alienation must end. We love to talk up “freedom” but continue to suffer our own peculiar socio-economic caste system, struggling along, obliging those at the top as long as there is someone worse off to feel superior to, and fixate anger on. Too many Americans simply can’t abide one another enough to collectively better themselves.

The melting pot needs a good stir. What is remarkably hopeful is that conservative firebrand Rand Paul is going around talking about how one out of three Black men can’t vote, ‘cause they have a prison record, and how that should end, all felons regaining the vote when time is served. Hopeful, because he is a Republican way out ahead of what should be Hillary’s domain. The Democrats need to play some serious catch-up, starting with a new lineup.

———

Gary Anderson lives in Bath.