[lbo-talk] yakking about the right

[Carrol Cox]

I would assume that _actual_ differences between the party would be
determined solely by those occasions when a few votes could change the
results on major legislation (If the vote is dividing by a three to one
ration, then an individual's vote shows nothing). Ss before examining any
empirical data we have first to decide on what _are_ the major policy
decisions of the last couple decades. Then we have to see if the legislation
which established or approved of those policies passed by very slim
majorities. That would give at least some indication of party differences.
Whether the President is RP or DP has to be factored in as well: does that
make a difference in how members of the opposite party or of the president's
party vote?

Tentatively, I would say that the major issues are:

1. All legislation approving of and providing funds for the military
operations.

2. Legislation which established the elaborate repressive machinery now in
place (e.g. the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, or the
National Defense Authorization Act).)

3. NAFTA

We would then have to analyze the impact of purely partisan interests on
specific bills. Parties _do_ have to find ways to distinguish themselves
from the opposition, regardless of the extent of agreement or disagreement
on major issues of policy. Glen Ford suggests that the differences in
campaign rhetoric all deal with cultue, not government policy.

This is not a complete or adequate list but it indicates the general
procedure which would be required before deciding on differences between
parties. Clearly, the vast majority of congressional votes are irrelevant.
Deciding on the relevant votes is the heart of the question over party
differences.

Carrol