Death of the Moderate

Photo via Yahoo

***

The United States Senate has always been rich with diversity in opinion. After all, variety in perspective is what makes the Senate a core pillar of American governance. However, the Senate has changed in the wake of America’s Trump era. In today’s polarized America, we see congressional leaders emulate their constituents’ feelings, which increasingly reflect heightened anger and partisanship. In an era of increased American vexation, moderate members of both parties are becoming increasingly rare and unpopular. Look no further than Pennsylvania’s Democratic Senator John Fetterman, who, since Donald J. Trump’s 2024 election win, has been one of the most prominent Democrats to adopt a more centrist tone, breaking from party orthodoxy on issues like immigration and foreign policy. Fetterman’s willingness to criticize his own party, as indicated by his poll numbers, has drawn sharp backlash. His approval among Democrats plummeted from 80–10 percent approval in January to 54–33 percent disapproval.

Republicans are just as vulnerable to America’s souring view of moderates. Senator Susan Collins of Maine has been a member of the Senate since 1997, and has remained a consistent swing vote, with conservatives frustrated by her occasional breaks from party lines and Democrats skeptical of her bipartisan image. Collins has been able to sway concerns, winning elections as a senator in a state that reliably votes for the opposing party in presidential elections. Yet, as Donald Trump pushes his agenda, Collins’ moderate approach proves to be alienating voters. According to a recent Quinnipiac University poll, only 38 percent of Maine voters currently approve of the way Susan Collins is handling her job, while a majority, 54 percent, disapprove. The steep decline explains why Democratic candidates Graham Platner and current governor Janet Mills are both polling ahead of Collins as she vies for her sixth term in office. 

Neither Collins nor Fetterman’s declining support is an isolated phenomenon but is rather emblematic of a larger political shift. The shrinking space for moderates in Washington reflects a deep structural polarization in Congress itself. In fact, overall polarization indicates that the average ideological gap between members has steadily grown. From the 91st to the 117th Congress, that partisanship gap has increased by about 57%. This trend is not just a contemporary political problem; it is precisely the kind of factionalism George Washington warned about in his Farewell Address.

Washington’s warnings centered around the fear that parties would seek unconditional uniformity, caging every individual senator’s capacity to serve their constituents. Senate rules enhance this partisan behavior. The Majority Leader, out of one hundred people in the Senate, is the only one who can bring a bill to the floor. This is precisely the kind of party hegemony that Washington feared: A Washington, D.C., where the ambitions of a few outweigh the judgment of the many, with the legislative process bending to partisan control rather than public service.

The Senate was designed as a space for open discussion, a Roman Colosseum rife with Western ideals that were meant to clash with the opposition, reforming and advancing for the progress of the people. Party politics greatly endangers that purpose, evident in the party establishment’s growing disillusionment with Senators prone to breaking from their party’s beliefs. America itself is growing sour on moderates like John Fetterman and Susan Collins, regardless of party affiliation. In fact, reports indicate many top Pennsylavia democrats are seeking to challenge John Fetterman in the primaries, primarily due to his inconsistency with the Democratic party. The growing disillusionment could be attributed to both parties becoming increasingly entrenched in their ideologies, which may reflect America itself. This reality mirrors Washington’s deepest anxieties: that factionalism, on the pretense of democracy, would corrode the republic from within. Senators ought to recognize the compounding fragility of dissenting opinion and do everything they can to break it. Otherwise, the chamber once built for debate and compromise risks becoming just another echo chamber for hollow noise.

***

This article was edited by Colin Mitchell.