Opinion: It’s time to reconsider strict party loyalty

”However (political parties) may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.” — George Washington, Farewell Address, Sept. 17, 1796

George Washington, our first president under the Constitution, remains our only president not formally affiliated with a political party.

While political parties can allow us to find like-minded people and create a platform that makes it easier to be heard, there are definite drawbacks. Especially in a situation where we have only two political parties that have moved beyond useful vehicles for debate and instead have adherents that treat politics more like sports.

As anyone who has seen me at a meeting knows, I have no problem calling out leaders in my own party when disappointed in their professed policies or actions. Plenty of others have no problem calling out their own party members when they feel the need, no matter their affiliation.

On a wider scale, though, strict adherence to party and the assumption that you must vote for your “team” no matter what is troubling. This politics-as-sports-teams mentality does little to advance good governance. In fact, some might argue that there are bad-faith actors not interested in governance at all. Judging by some of their actions, they’re more interested in a culture war that targets the most marginalized among us — while ignoring real issues like education, infrastructure, jobs, health care and myriad other issues that impact more of us on a daily basis.

The situation isn’t any better when a party starts trying desperately to control its members, instituting purity tests and demanding loyalty not to our country and fellow citizens but to individual leaders and the party — and their ideology. You’re not a “real” one unless you subscribe to the very narrow view put forth by whoever happens to be in charge of the party. You have to “register” a certain way or you’re not “true.”

Breaking down the hold of a single party on our state is step one of helping us move beyond our current issues. Step two is moving beyond the two-party system.

One thing that’s been great in Idaho is that our municipal offices and school boards are currently non-partisan. Rather than looking first for a letter behind a name, we, as citizens, must consider the person and their stated policies.

Thomas Jefferson advocated for an engaged and educated electorate. While parties can provide camaraderie and some cohesion, they aren’t the only answer. In fact, to some degree, they hinder us in a quest for an engaged and educated electorate since strict party adherence does little to encourage us to think carefully about issues and who we want to represent us.

Miranda Marquit, Master of Business Administration, is a nationally recognized financial expert, writer, podcaster and speaker. She is the chair of the Bonneville County Democratic Central Committee.