04/23/26

4/23/2026

As the nation prepares to celebrate its 250th birthday this year, it seems worthwhile to consider how closely we’ve hewed to the Founders’ vision for their new creation, and likewise how far we’ve strayed.

One way the path we chose diverged almost immediately was the spontaneous explosion of political parties. President Washington, in his iconic 1796 Farewell Address, warned Americans against “the baneful effects of the spirit of party.” 

Washington, and many others at the 1787 Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, envisioned a distinguished collection of benevolent statesmen sitting in concert in Congress, especially in the Senate, fashioning laws solely for the public good. They feared the rancor that factional political parties would inevitably create within the American body politic.

History, not least in recent days, has justified their concern. Political infighting has become so embedded in our way of life, for so long, that it’s hard to imagine America without it.

But a few of today’s politicians—Independents, for that’s what they are—want to abandon that debilitating development, with a return to the Founders’ concept of party-less government. They have deep beliefs about what American government can and should do, but they choose to work toward it without the benefits, and the constraints, of party.

Today there are only two Independents in Congress: Senators Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Angus King of Maine. There are no Independents in the U.S. House, and there haven’t been since 2008. Sanders and King both caucus with the Democrats, as the Democratic caucus allows them to do.

(It’s ironic that King and Sanders represent the only states that voted against Democrat Franklin Roosevelt in the 1936 election. Maine and Vermont both went for Republican Alf Landon of Kansas. Both states have been noted in recent years for their independent-minded politics.)

Strong factors mitigate against electoral success for Independent political candidates in America. One of the biggest, of course, is money. Modern congressional campaigns have routinely spent millions and millions of dollars for their parties’ candidates. That largess comes with an expectation: support for the legislative wishes of the donors. Traditionally the political party of the candidate is the conduit, or at least the cooperative entity, for the funds, and an Independent candidate lacks that competitive advantage.

Political money greases the wheels of a campaign: advertising, staffing, consulting, traveling, public gatherings, all the factors necessary for election success.

But today’s communication revolution, where everyone can now be a publisher or broadcaster through social media, offers at least the theoretical possibility that a campaign can be run without the really big bucks. An attractive candidate who speaks to the key desires of the voters possesses the possibility of making a run without a huge campaign checkbook. 

Of course, it helps if the candidate is already known for one reason or another in the public sphere. Name recognition is at least half the battle in today’s elections.

Independent candidates face another tough headwind: political parties, fearful of Independent opponents siphoning off the party’s potential support, can make nomination filing requirements for Independents hard to meet. Laws requiring Inordinately large numbers of signatures, from large numbers of counties, are a common method parties try to keep non-party candidates off the ballot.

Bottom line: a serious Independent campaign requires careful planning and coordination throughout the potential candidate’s district or state. It’s not something to be undertaken on whim, without preparation and organization. The candidates with the best chances of success are those already well known for non-political reasons, or who have left a party and chosen to strike out on their own.

But despite the challenges facing political Independents, now may be the hour for Shakespeare’s insight: “There is a tide in the affairs of men; Which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune.”

Both houses of Congress are so evenly divided that that just a few more Independents could create a voting bloc that in turn could determine the future of all-important legislation, either through the bloc’s support for or against a bill, or through forcing the two parties to meet in the middle on the issue. 

Either way seems preferable to me than what we have now. At least four states  have Independent Senate candidates with at least an outside shot at a successful run this fall. Depending on how the November election goes, there may be more in the years to come, and partisanship may loosen—at least occasionally—its grip on the reins.

After 250 years, an antidote to poisonous party politics would be welcome. ♦