Will The Center Hold? The Moderate Party Wants To Find Out

SARA SIDNER, HOST: The divisive nature of U.S. politics is forcing the extremes into the mainstream and, in so doing, straining democracy as we know it. As the midterm elections fast approach, many American voters are feeling lost in the middle. U.S. House Representative Tom Malinowski raises the potential for a third political party in a guest essay for “The New York Times.” He talks to Walter Isaacson to explain fusion voting and the experimental moderate party.

(BEGIN VIDEO TAPE)

WALTER ISAACSON, CORRESPONDENT: Thank you very much. And, Congressman Tom Malinowski, welcome to the show.

REP. TOM MALINOWSKI (D-NJ): Thanks so much. Great to be here.

ISAACSON: You just accepted the Democratic nomination to run for reelection for your third term in Congress. And yet you have also accepted the Moderate Party nomination. Explain to me what the Moderate Party is.

MALINOWSKI: The Moderate Party in New Jersey is a new party that was created mostly by Republicans in my congressional district who are fed up with what they perceive to be the growing extremism and craziness within their own party. They’re not pro-Trump, obviously. But they’re not ready to be Democrats yet. And they’re looking for a home and a voice and some leverage over our politics to try to encourage both parties to come closer to the center.

ISAACSON: So you can run on both lines, and then the vote you get for either of those party lines rolls up into your totals? Is that how it works?

MALINOWSKI: That’s how we would like it to work. But here’s the interesting thing. What the Moderate Party is trying to do something that was very common in America, say, 100 years ago, in the 19th century, the idea of a third party that does not run its own candidates as spoilers, drawing votes away from one of the major party candidates, but instead uses its leverage to endorse one of the major party candidates. It, in fact, fuses with one of the major parties. This is a practice that was outlawed by almost every state in the country in the last 100 years, because it was seen as threatening to the two major machine parties. New Jersey outlawed it in the 1920s. So the Moderate Party in New Jersey went out gathered signatures to put me on the ballot as their candidate on a separate line. But it’s also having to challenge this old New Jersey law in court to enable them to do that by November.

ISAACSON: After Ralph Nader and Jill Stein sort of messed up for the Democrats elections in the past, Democrats have always been wary of third parties. Is fusion voting a way to get around that problem that a third-party candidate could have?

MALINOWSKI: Absolutely. Third parties in American politics are spoilers. They don’t do any good when they run their own candidates. In fact, usually, if you run your own candidate as a third party, you’re going to be drawing votes away from the major party that’s closest to your values. So this is an alternative, where voters in the middle can say, we’re going to use the validation of our endorsement, which would be very sought after, I think, by both major parties, to choose the candidate that is closest to our values. And if you think about how it would actually work, this is going to be a very close election in my district, because we’re one of those very swingy districts. And if I win by, say, 5,000 votes, and 8,000 of those votes come from supporters of the Moderate Party, I have got to take them very seriously, because next time they could endorse somebody else. So, a lot of these voters in the middle who feel like they just don’t have a voice right now, they have no power over elections in gerrymandered congressional districts, this actually would give them significant power. And the Republican Party, I think, in particular, given where it’s going under Trump, could use this kind of force bringing it back to sanity.

ISAACSON: New York and seven other States have fusion voting. How does that affect the government in New York State?

MALINOWSKI: So, New York has its own distinct history. In New York the so- called fusion parties tend to be at the wings of the political spectrum. It’s a conservative party which was started by Republican who thought that the, you know, Rockefeller Republican Party and was too liberal. There’s a Working Families Party, which is on the Left, started by Democrats who didn’t like the Albany Democratic machine. And it works perfectly well. The — it’s not confusing for voters in New York. Voters are very used to the system there. And those third party, fusion party endorsements are sought after by politicians on both sides. I think the insight here is that if these were available to people across America, in every State, the political force that would take advantage of it is not the Left, it’s not the Right. It’s the center. It would be particularly moderate Republicans like Adam Kinzinger and anti-Trump Republicans like Liz Cheney who are being kicked out of their party for standing up for principle. But they’re not ready to become Democrats yet.

ISAACSON: So, if you want a moderate movement in this country, why not go whole-hog and have a real moderate party, a real centrist party that would actually run its own candidates as well?

MALINOWSKI: I think if a moderate party in America run its own candidates, right now, that would draw votes away from the Democratic Party. And if Trump is the Republican candidate in 2024, that would help him. And imagine if Liz Cheney run for president on a third-party ticket, that would help Trump. And that’s the last thing I think she’d want to do. So, I think a much better idea, if there is a national moderate party would be for that party to operate as a fusion party. To say that both the Republicans and Democrats, look, we’ve got this line on the ballot. We’ve got this endorsement that would be very valuable to you because we speak to a lot of Americans who share our values but you got to promise us that you’re going to govern from the center. You’re going to be reasonable. You’re going to support the constitution. Respect the results of the election. I think right now it would be the Democratic Party that would check all those boxes. In the future, it might be somebody else. That’s the way, I think, to give those centrist voters as moderate voters the leverage that they’ve lost.

ISAACSON: So, what you’re saying now is if there were this system, say in Wyoming, the moderate party might endorse Liz Cheney. It could endorse Republicans and Democrats in equal numbers?

MALINOWSKI: It certainly could, yes.

ISAACSON: Tell me how the moderate party challenge is doing? Is it being heard in court? Is it actually going to be settled by the time we have an election in November with you?

MALINOWSKI: It still be for the secretary of State of New Jersey. So, the secretary of State official who runs elections in our State took these petitions that nominated me and initially rejected them, the moderate party, then appealed that decision and they’re waiting for the result of that appeal. If the State comes back and again and says, you can’t do this, there is a legal challenge that is prepared to be filed that day.

ISAACSON: You say that fusion voting might save our democracy from the polarization that is now facing. What is the cause of that polarization and would this really be something that could solve the root causes of our polarization?

MALINOWSKI: I guess there’s never one solution that ain’t a complicated problem, right? But I think the — there are several causes. One, is just a structural one in our political system. Gerrymandering has gotten so bad in America, in house elections in particular, that there are just very few Congressional districts left in our country that could go either way in November. Most Congressional races are settled in the party primary. Mine is probably one of 20 or 30, I think, this year that is drawn to be pretty equal between Republicans and Democrats. And when elections are settled in the primary, the — you know, that tends to be settled by the most partisan members of that party who come out and vote in those primaries. And that drives both parties to their respective extremes.

ISAACSON: Your State, New Jersey, has a history of a moderate Republican Party. And you say so many of them are fed up with their party’s denial of vaccines and QAnon theories and the Big Lie about the election being stolen. Yet they wouldn’t necessarily vote for you because you have a D next to your name. What does that say about the Democratic Party that you can attract voters like that?

MALINOWSKI: I think most voters are looking for Democrats to focus on practical issues, economic issues, to be willing to compromise to get things done. But at the same time, to be strong and uncompromising when it comes to defending our democracy, the fundamental principles of this country. I think the Democrats do both of those things. We’re going to do increasingly well in district-site mind (ph). I mean, I represent a district in Congress that was in Republican hands for decades. And I managed to win it by being that kind of Democrat. And, I think, give us a few more years here and we’re going to do better and better and better. In the meantime, you know, party affiliation, it’s like tribe. It’s like family for many Americans. It’s not easy if you’ve been a Republican all your life to pull the Democratic lever and vice versa. And so, fusion voting is a way to make that more comfortable for folks who just aren’t ready to change their identity overnight.

ISAACSON: You recently voted in Congress for a bill that would codify abortion rights decided in the decision of Roe V. Wade, which recently got overturned. How do you think abortion rights are going to play in this fall election? And do you think the best way to go is to have Congress passing a law, which then the Republicans, if they win the Congress, could, you know, reject?

MALINOWSKI: I actually think we’ll be better off if we finally do what Congress has never done. Since Roe was adopted and the 1970s, and that’s just to pass a law that says that that the government cannot make this decision for women across the country. That’s overwhelmingly popular in America. People have complicated use about abortion that the overwhelming majority of Americans do not believe that the government should force women to have a pregnancy. And I think if we are able to pass that kind of law, Republicans are going to vote against it because their party has become increasingly extreme on this issue. But I think it would be very hard for them to come back and repeal it, just as it turned out to be very hard for them to repeal the Affordable Care Act despite their promises to do so. So, this is a huge issue in this election. We’ve got Democrats, like me, who are making a very simple promise, if you give us the majority in the House and Senate, we’ll codify Roe V. Wade once and for all. And Republicans, like my opponent in my race here in New Jersey, who are against that, that’s a pretty simple choice and I think I know where most of my constituents are on that choice.

ISAACSON: Your opponent is Tom Kean, Jr., sort of part of a family that’s been part of the Republican establishment for a long time in New Jersey. And he says, in response to you that you’re no moderate, that you’ve been a progressive Democrat your whole life. Why do you have issues in which you identify yourself now as a moderate?

MALINOWSKI: I’ve — well, for example, I’m a member of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus in the House of Representatives, it’s the only functioning bipartisan group in the body. Helped to write and pass the bipartisan infrastructure bill, which only 13 Republicans ultimately voted for in the House of Representatives. Another example of how crazy that party has become. I’m a pro-national security Democrat. I — I’ve criticized Joe Biden for the withdrawal from Afghanistan, very vociferously, actually. So, I’m all about working with the other side and compromising on policy issues. But I’ll tell you something else. I will not compromise when it comes to protecting our democracy. When it comes to respecting the results of elections. When it comes to opposing violence in our country. And this guy, Tom Kean Jr., you’d think he would be with me on that, given what his family had stood for over the years. And yet, in his Republican primary, he ran by putting out mailers to every Republican voter in this district, saying Tom Kean Jr. stands with Trump. Tom Kean Jr. supports the Trump agenda. So, there’s no doubt in the minds of voters in my district who is the normal moderate in this race and who is running to the extremes. And I’m afraid my opponent is going to suffer a lot from that converse.

ISAACSON: You say your opponent, Tom Kean Jr., has made a big issue of his support for Trump. How have the January 6th hearings played out in New Jersey and how’s that affected your race?

MALINOWSKI: I think it’s smoothed people across the country. I think it’s a reminder not just of how horrible the January 6th attack was, but of this, these ongoing movements by the Trump wing of the Republican party, which is the dominant wing in the party right now to fix the next election. There’s a movement in State after State across the country to do by legislative means, what the writers on January 6 tried to do with baseball bats, and that’s to make it so the politicians and State legislatures pick the next president no matter how people across America actually vote. So, that idea is incredibly offensive and scary. I think to most voters, the most basic Democratic principle we have is the people vote, the people decide, the winner takes office, and the loser gracefully steps aside. And the Trump Republicans and my opponent is one of them, are basically saying we’re not going to live that way anymore. And I think that’s — I think it’s wrong. Most of my constituents think it’s wrong. And I think that’ll be another voting issue this November.

ISAACSON: This Thursday will mark what may be the last of the January 6th hearings. What would you have said — what would you have thought a few years ago if somebody said, the U. S. Capitol was going to come under attack by people who had been inflamed by the President of the United States to do so?

MALINOWSKI: I think more than inflamed. I think they were sent by the President of the United States to do so. You know, I was there in the house chamber while it was happening. And I had that thought in that moment. I’ve been to a lot of countries around the world as a diplomat representing the United States that were unstable. I was — I visited Libya in 2011 during the revolution there. I visited Syria during the uprising against Assad. And I had this feeling like, my God, I — I’m sitting here in the inner sanctum of American democracy. That the Capital building — and I feel the same way as I did in those countries. And that’s just preposterous that this could happen here. And I knew then only about a 10th of what I know now about the role that the President of the United States played in setting that mob on the Capitol to hang the vice president over, to overthrow a Democratic election. And I got to tell you, this is something we don’t — if we don’t bury this movement. If we don’t establish once and for all that you cannot do this in the United States of America, we are in very serious trouble.

ISAACSON: Congressman Tom Malinowski, thank you so much for joining us.

MALINOWSKI: Thank you.