The disunited states

美利坚分众国

American states are now Petri dishes of polarization

美国各州已成为极化的温床

Only electoral reform can make them work properly

只有选举改革才能使各州正常运作


Two states, two very different states of mind. On August 25th California banned the sale of petrol-powered cars from 2035, a move that will reshape the car industry, reduce carbon emissions and strain the state’s electricity grid. On the same day in Texas a “trigger” law banned abortion from the moment of conception, without exceptions for rape or incest. Those who perform abortions face up to 99 years in prison.

两个州，两种截然不同的理念。8月25日，加利福尼亚州规定自2035年起禁售燃油车。该举措将重塑汽车行业，减少碳排放，使该州的电网不堪重负。当天，德克萨斯州颁布“触发式法律”，规定从怀孕那一刻起禁止堕胎，强奸或乱伦也不例外，堕胎者将面临最多99年的监禁。

These two events may seem unrelated, but they are symptoms of an important trend. Washington, dc, may be largely gridlocked, but the states are making policies at a furious pace. In theory, that is no bad thing. With 50 states, America has 50 laboratories to test which policies work and which do not. People can choose to live and companies can opt to operate in places where their preferences are reflected in local rules, as many did during the pandemic, typically moving to states with fewer restrictions. Each state can make its own trade-off between the weight of taxes and the generosity of public services. Any state can learn from neighbours with better schools or business regulations.

两个事件看似毫不相干，但折射出一个重大趋势。华盛顿哥伦比亚特区可能很大程度上陷入了僵局，但各州正在火速制定政策。理论上，这不是坏事。美国拥有50个州等于拥有50座实验室，检验哪些政策可行，哪些不可行。个人和企业可以选择当地法规符合自身喜好的地方去居住和经营，正如在疫情期间，许多个人和企业迁移到限制措施较少的州。各州可以在税负轻重与公共服务多寡之间做出自己的权衡，向拥有更好的学校或商业法规的邻州学习。

Alas, this constructive form of federalism is not what state politicians are pursuing today. Instead, they are fighting a national culture war: prescribing what can be discussed in classrooms, how easy it is to buy and carry a gun, which medical interventions may be offered to teenagers who identify as transgender, and what sort of benefits unlawful immigrants may claim. Such issues enrage both parties’ partisans in a way that, say, fixing the roads or refining tax policy does not. Moderates might prefer less rage and more road-mending, but many state politicians can safely ignore them.

唉，当今州级政客追求的不是这种建设性的联邦制，而是参与全国性的文化战争：规定课堂上可以讨论什么，购买和携带枪支的难易度，自我认定为同性恋的青少年可以接受哪些医疗干预措施，非法移民可以要求获得哪些福利待遇。这类问题会激怒两党的铁杆拥护者，而修路或完善税收政策等问题则不会。温和派可能不喜欢动怒而喜欢修路，但许多州级政客根本不把他们放在眼里。

This is because 37 of the 50 states, where three-quarters of Americans live, are ruled by a single party. The number where one side controls both legislative chambers and the governor’s mansion has nearly doubled in the past 30 years. These one-party states are self-perpetuating, as the winners redraw electoral maps to their own advantage. And politicians with ultra-safe seats have perverse incentives. They do not worry about losing a general election, only a primary, in which avid partisans call the shots because they are more motivated to vote. The way to woo such partisans is to eschew compromise.

这是因为50个州中有37个州（占美国人口四分之三）由一党执政。过去三十年来，这些州的数量几乎翻了一番，即参众两院和州长职务由一个政党把控。这些一党执政的州具有自我延续性，赢家根据自身利益重划选区。他们担心的不是输掉大选而是初选，铁杆拥护者在初选中起决定性作用，因为他们的投票积极性比较高，而拉拢铁杆拥护者的方式是避免妥协。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处


Hence the proliferation of extremism. Most Texans think their new abortion laws are too draconian, for example, even though most also think the old national rules were too lenient. If Texas were not a one-party state, its legislators might have found a compromise.

极端主义由此而盛行。大多数德克萨斯人认为新的堕胎法过于严苛，但也认为全国性的旧法过于宽容。如果德克萨斯州不是一党执政，立法者可能达成妥协了。

Hence, too, a new politics of confrontation. Some states aim to punish those who seek an abortion or transgender surgery in another state; others offer sanctuary to the same people. Blue states encourage lawsuits against gunmakers; red states sue to stop California from setting its own emissions standards. Some partisan pugilism is largely performative. To publicise his view that blue states are too soft on illegal immigration, Texas’s Governor Greg Abbott has sent busloads of migrants to New York. But the relentless focus on national controversies is at best a distraction from the local problems that state politicians are elected to solve. Governor Ron DeSantis in Florida, a probable presidential contender, unveiled a “Stop woke Act” to restrict how race is discussed in classrooms; of the ten examples of excessive wokery in his press release, not one was from Florida. And all these battles are divisive; all entrench the notion that red and blue America cannot rub along despite their differences.

由此也催生了政治斗争。有些州旨在处罚去其他州寻求堕胎或变性手术的人；也有些州向这些人提供保护伞。蓝州鼓励人们起诉枪械商；红州通过诉讼阻挠加利福尼亚州制定自己的排放标准。有些党派斗争基本是表演性质的，德克萨斯州长格雷格·阿博特为了宣传蓝州对非法移民过分软弱，他将满车的移民运送到纽约市。然而，不断地聚焦全国性争议充其量是为了分散人们对地方问题的关注度，而这些问题正是当选的州级政客需要解决的。佛罗里达州长罗恩·德桑蒂斯有望成为总统候选人，他出台《停止觉醒法案》限制课堂上的种族讨论；他在新闻稿中列举的十个过度觉醒的案例中，没有一例发生在佛罗里达州。所有这些斗争造成了分裂，并强化了这样一种观念：红蓝美国无法求同存异、和谐相处。

This makes for a nastier, shriller national conversation. It also makes it harder to do business in America. Whereas once the country was, roughly speaking, a giant single market, now California and New York push companies to become greener while Texas and West Virginia penalise them for favouring renewable energy over oil and gas. Recently Texas went so far as to blacklist ten financial firms for going too green.

这会导致全国性对话变得更加尖酸刻薄，在美国做生意也会更加困难。大体而言，美国曾经是一块巨大的单一市场，但现在加利福尼亚州和纽约州促使企业更加环保，而在德克萨斯州和西弗吉尼亚州，企业由于偏爱可再生能源而不是石油和天然气而遭受处罚。最近，德克萨斯州甚至将十家过于环保的金融企业拉入黑名单。

The biggest worry is that partisanship could undermine American democracy itself. Many Republicans cannot win a primary unless they endorse Donald Trump’s Big Lie that he beat Joe Biden in 2020. That year a coalition of Republican state attorneys-general sued other states to try to have their votes invalidated. Whatever happens in the November midterm elections, such sparring could proliferate. America is not going to have another civil war, as some feverish pundits speculate, but it has already endured political violence, and that could get worse.

最令人担忧的是，党派斗争可能破坏美国民主。许多共和党人无法赢得初选，除非他们支持特朗普的“弥天大谎”，即他在2020年大选中击败了拜登。当年由共和党州总检察长组成的联盟起诉其他各州，企图让它们的投票结果无效。无论11月中期选举发生什么，党派斗争可能愈演愈烈。美国不会再次爆发某些狂热学者预测的内战，但已经出现了政治暴力，并可能进一步恶化。

American dysfunction poses a risk to the world, which depends on America to uphold the rules-based order (or what’s left of it), to deter military aggressors and to offer an example of democratic governance. It is doing especially badly on the last of these. What can be done?

美国政治失灵给世界带来风险，世界依靠美国维护基于规则的秩序（否则还剩下什么），遏制军事侵略者，树立民主统治的榜样。美国在最后一个方面表现得尤为糟糕。那该怎么办？

The federal government should stop neglecting its responsibilities. Policies on immigration and climate change, for example, are clearly better set nationally than locally. Reforms to break the gridlock in Washington, such as ditching the Senate filibuster, might help. But more than this America needs electoral reform.

联邦政府不应该再罔顾自身的责任。例如在移民和气候变化方面，全国制定政策显然比地方制定政策更好。通过改革打破华盛顿的僵局也许会有所帮助，例如废除阻挠议事的冗长演说。但除此以外，美国还需要实施选举改革。

States of play

各州密云

It should end gerrymandering, which lets politicians choose their voters rather than vice versa. States should do redistricting through independent commissions, as Michigan does, to de-politicise the process. This would make it harder for one party to entrench itself. It would also, by creating more competitive districts, force more politicians to appeal to the centre.

美国应该停止不公正地重划选区，因为这会导致政客选择选民而不是相反。正如密歇根州所做的那样，各州应该通过独立委员会重划选区，使这一过程非政治化。这样会使一个政党更难以站稳脚跟，同时会产生更具竞争性的选区，迫使更多的政客去拉拢中间派。

Allowing for multi-member districts could also help. Instead of carving up districts and allowing them to elect only one representative, this would increase the diversity of voices in state legislatures and Congress. Ranked-choice voting, in which voters’ second and third choices count if no candidate wins an outright majority of first preferences, could promote moderation. (Ranked-choice voting in Alaska this week kept Sarah Palin out of Congress.) Different states could try different policies.

允许多名议员选区也许会有所帮助。相较于瓜分选区和只允许选举一名代表，这可以增强州立法机关和美国国会的政见多元性。排序投票制有利于让政客保持克制，如果没有候选人赢得绝大多数的第一选择票，那么选民的第二和第三选择就很重要。（本周，阿拉斯加州通过排序投票制阻止了莎拉·佩林进入国会）各州可以尝试不同的政策。

Voters, too, have a responsibility. It may be hard, in the era of social media, to ignore the blizzard of confected fury and vote for leaders who want to get things done. But the alternative is ever greater disunx, and that does not lead anywhere good.

选民也有责任。在社交媒体时代，选民可能很难忽视精心炮制的愤怒风暴，将选票投给希望把事情做好的领导人。但不这样做会造成更大的分裂，没有任何好处。