If you’re an upstart political movement hoping to draw attention to a fusion ticket and have trouble getting big name politicos to jump on board, what do you do? You can do what Unity08 has done and get celebrities to make the pitch.

Sam Waterston, the star of NBC’s Law and Order, has drafted a little note encouraging interest in the effort to elect a moderate ticket made of one Democrat and one Republican.

In the interest of full disclosure, I serve on the Rules Committee for Unity08. I offered to do so because I find this to be an interesting political experiment. Honestly, I’m not sure how relevant this is going to be now that we have a split government. I think moderation can be achieved in one of two ways. Unity08 was one of those, but the other is the tried and truth method of divided government.

Now that the Democrats have reclaimed the control of Congress, our government can go one of two directions – compromise and cooperation or total, chaotic gridlock. I hope for the former, but I suspect we’ll probably get the latter. Either may render the Unity effort mute moot (thanks to Divided We Stand United We Fall for cathing that one…).

If they’re able to get more celeb endorsements and encourage more people outside the political realm – but in the public sphere – to speak up, they may be able to get a lot of attention if Congress starts drifting toward inaction.

Back on May 23rd, I made some predictions about the choices for the convention sites. Now it looks like I, as usual, was right – at least 50% right so far… The Republicans have picked the twin cities of Minneapolis-St. Paul for their convention. The Democrats still have to pick Denver for me to be 2 for 2, but I have no doubt they’ll deliver for me regardless of what the Unions say.

The wall Street Journal yesterday carried an article about labor organizing around the coming election. In it, there was a significant fact. Union membership is down to 7.8% of the private sector employment. That means 92% of the private sector isn’t covered by a union. That becomes very significant very quickly. Keep reading.

Denver is making a bid to host the Democrat’s convention in 2008. They are on a short list of cities and will learn of their fate later this year. Back in May, I posted on the reasons I think they should win. Today there is an indication that I may have overestimated the Democrats desire to win.

The AP is reporting the Democrats might skip Denver because of union loyalty.

You see, the Minneapolis-St. Paul bid benefits from the fact that 13 out of the 96 hotels that would be used are union. Denver doesn’t have any union hotels. So despite the fact that 92% of private sector employees are not union, and the fact that only 13.5% of the Minnesota hotels are unionized, that is still reason to turn your back on the West.

It really is a stupid argument, but one I think might actually hold sway with the liberal party. The Democrats stand to gain so much more if they make a concerted push into the mountain West based on an agenda that pushes less institutional rigidity and more recognition of individual liberty. They’re likely, however, to cave to the unions because that’s what they do.

I still stand by my prediction that they’ll end up in Denver. The truth is the people pushing the lack of Union hotels are the people competing against Denver for the convention. The Democrats are, however, tied to their antiquated machinery. It would not surprise me if they pick a union friendly city rather than making a serious effort to appeal to the purple states of the Rocky Mountain region.

This one is a couple of weeks old, but was just brought to my attention. It seems the Wisconsin GOP passed a resolution at its state convention on the 20th of May that would bar the party from supporting moderate candidates. Resolution 25 reads:

2006-25 Conservative Direction: GOP

WHEREAS, the Republican Party of Wisconsin at the local, district, and state level at the Convention, has passed numerous resolutions of a conservative nature; favoring a smaller less intrusive government, a right to bear arms, and a directive to secure our borders, etc.; and

WHEREAS, these resolutions are the direction that the people of the party want their representatives to adhere to; and

WHEREAS, the people of the party recognize that while they cannot compel their representatives to vote in this manner, they can and do expect them to:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Republican Party of Wisconsin, in convention assembled, urge the Republican Party to withhold all promotional and financial support of those candidates that do not consistently subscribe to this overall conservative agenda, be they incumbent or new candidates, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Republican Party actively and vigorously seek candidates that will go in this conservative direction, and respect the wishes of party members.

While I don’t think any Republican (with the possible exception of those currently in control of Congress and the White House) would quibble with the concepts of small government, the right to bear arms, and protecting our borders, this resolution sets a dangerous path for the party because it doesn’t define “conservative”.

I’m as conservative as you’re going to get on fiscal matters, and the size of government, but most social conservatives would consider me moderate to liberal on a lot of social issues. Would I get the support of the party? My guess is no.

The Wisconsin GOP has set a dangerous precedent for other state parties to follow. A resolution like this can be used to keep anyone out of the process – which candidate is the most conservative? – but will likely be used to keep moderates from getting party support.

I stumbled upon a Libertarian blog’s reaction to Unity08. It took the tack I would expect it to take – that being you should not support U08, but join the Libertarians instead. In doing so, they really miss the point.

Their general theme seems to be that Unity 08 does not have a clear agenda. That largely stems from the fact that Unity08 is relying on the supporters to supply the agenda. It is an ambiguous agenda because the specifics have not yet been written. This will be the first ticket for President that is entirely derived from the people, rather than a controlling few.

I have seen firsthand the way the GOP manages their platform process at the federal and the state level. The platform is written by a very select few, rammed through a largely compliant platform committee with little chance that there will be significant changes, and presented as a grand vision to the supplicants who are told that it’s ok to disagree, as long as you keep pushing the button.

Like Skinner’s rats, we keep hoping to get the feed pellet, but it never happens. Instead, the party apparatchiks continue to be spun by a relative small number of people who rarely leave DC and wouldn’t recognize real America if it walked up and bit them on the ass.

That is no way to run a political party in a country that is by, for, and of the American people. Urging people to prostrate themselves before party leaders who know full well their only interest lies in keeping their job and lining their own pockets is no way to change the world for the better.

The promise of Unity08 is that the people control the agenda. The people control the ticket. The people can write the platform or shape the agenda through action, rather than through inaction.