Local control and partisan ideology

It's always interesting when partisan labels break down on a given issue. It's a simplistic dichotomy (as many leftists and libertarians would surely point out), but Democrats are typically cast as the party of "big government" and Republicans the party of "small government." Iowa's contentious "local control" issues throws a wrench in this (blithe) construction, with Democrats clamoring for decentralization and Republicans pining for centralized decision-making.

The issue has divided candidates in the Secretary of Agriculture race, with Democrat Francis Thicke stalwartly supporting giving local communities the power to decide where Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) can be built. The Republican incumbent, Farm Bureau-backed Bill Northey, opposes conferring such autonomy on localities.

In an interview with the Iowa Independent, Thicke correctly called local control "democracy in action." He went on to say:

Iowans know what works best in their communities, and politicians who favor taking away this right are serving corporate interests, not the citizens of Iowa. It is important to protect Iowa citizens from the impacts of CAFOs on neighbors’ quality of life, health, and property rights.

Thicke has pushed the David vs. Goliath storyline throughout his campaign. In his meeting with the DI Editorial Board, he told us, “You have to stand up to [big agribusiness]. I’m used to debating the lawyers from the Farm Bureau. I rather enjoy it, actually.”

It's an old, populist political tool. But in this case (unlike, say, the Democratic narrative in the healthcare debate or much of what Obama has done at the federal level) it has unalloyed validity.

So how does this intersect with my initial point about ideological shake-ups in parties (and philosophical labels for these parties)?

My brand of liberalism, animated by the ideas of democratic champions like Louis Brandeis and Ralph Nader, values citizen power over centralized paternalism. In my view, liberals often reflexively opt for centralized decision-making, content with constructing a purportedly benevolent government that provides for its citizens. Liberals should question concentrated power wherever it resides, however — in business, government, or any other sphere. Sure, conservatives and libertarians are wrong to regard government as an alien "other" to tear down and denigrate. But liberals should question the wisdom of erecting centralized bureaucracies that can engender a sclerotic citizenry.

When it comes to the local control issue, Iowa Democrats are on the right side. Aligned with principled groups like Citizens for Community Improvement, they're admirably pushing for a more robust vision of democracy — one that empowers citizens, instead of servilely acquiescing to entrenched interests.

Could this be the Democratic Party of the future? I sure hope so.