Metamorphosis by Barry Rosenbaum

My wife and I recently celebrated our 40th anniversary by traveling to Costa Rica on a Road Scholar tour. When it began in 1975, it was called Elderhostel, and participants were required to be 60 or older. I hope that whoever came up with the idea to rebrand it in 2010 and to lower the age eligibility to 50 was amply compensated. No question that the aging of the Baby Boomers precipitated this change, since none of us  Boomers ever want to be considered elderly, and we all have long since passed the time of considering a hostel with bathrooms down the hall as a suitable accommodation.

Likewise, it’s time for a rebranding of the Democratic Party. By 2028, Millennials and Gen Z will make up over half of the potential voting population. Even the oldest of Generation Alpha will also be eligible. We ask Republicans during this time of crisis to put country over party. The Democrats need to put country over individual self-preservation and quickly move to change the face of the Democratic Party. We simply cannot present the voters with the same package in 2026 and 2028 and miraculously expect a different result. It’s foolhardy, and we have long since passed the time when we can afford to be foolhardy.

The party’s favorability rating among registered voters has dropped to its lowest level in at least thirty years.  The leaders of the party are perceived as being too old and out of touch.  It has almost twice as many members of Congress 70 or older, as Republicans. The average age of the top Democratic leadership in the Senate is almost 70.  Eleven of the fourteen House members over 80 are Democrats. Not surprisingly, 20 of the 25 members of the House with the longest terms of service are Democrats.  Dating back to 2022, the last eight House members to die in office have been Democrats, a disturbing statistic with serious repercussions.  

Additionally, while the Democrats enacted significant legislation during the Biden Administration, it was not, in large measure, legislation that was of immediate and transparent effect, and the Democrats sucked at messaging. On top of that, much of the substantive action was undertaken through executive order, which has quickly been reversed. Then there is the storyline, whether accurate or not, that the party is no longer willing to address, much less meet the needs of, the working class. In contrast, the ultra-wealthy seem to prosper irrespective of the party in charge.

Individual Democrats clinging to power have had disastrous effects, whether that be Biden’s decision to run for a second term or the recent passage of the reconciliation bill by a vote of 215–214. Had three Democratic seats not been vacant due to death, the measure might have failed. The refusal of the old guard to endorse the Democratic nominee for mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani, or to elect AOC to be the top Democrat in the House Oversight Committee reflects a failure of vision and an unwillingness to meet the times. Ironically, the Democrat chosen instead for that oversight position died shortly thereafter. It is also said that Democrats are concerned with the impact that a Mamdani endorsement would have on certain donors. This feeds into the belief held by many young voters that the Democratic Party is beholden to the same donor class as Republicans. Possibly, if the party showed some backbone, other donors would fill the gap.

The Democratic Party has a history of reinventing itself in response to a changing electorate, and it’s time to do it again. In the 19th century, it did not oppose slavery, and after the Civil War, it opposed civil rights reforms. By the mid-20th century, it had transformed 180 degrees, supporting organized labor, civil rights, and progressive reform. This change was not without serious consequences — it lost the Southern white vote in large measure but positioned itself as the party that defends the rights of all people and strives to make the system work for everyone. Today, the Democratic Party is not seen that way by large segments of the voting population.

Along with youthful leadership, rebranding of the party would signify a willingness to pursue a different path and the fortitude to actively oppose this authoritarian onslaught. In the 1990s, the UK’s Labour Party, under Tony Blair, became rebranded as the New Labour Party, making a statement that it would pursue fresh policies to meet the moment the country faced. Voters put the New Labour Party into power. We could follow suit with the New Democratic Party, a similar rebranding that may also appeal to disaffected Republicans who would not be comfortable joining the tired old Democratic Party but might feel differently about a revitalized party.

Rebranding, of course, is not enough. It must be accompanied by a clearly articulated legislative course of action detailing the party’s priorities. That suggested agenda is for the next writing.

Ours is the party that still believes in the binding force of the Constitution and holds the Bill of Rights with reverence. All individuals have equal rights in this country. No single group has any greater entitlement to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness than any other. I used not to question that these fundamental beliefs would always be our guidepost. I’ve been proven tragically wrong and am reminded of my folly almost daily. Given what we face at this moment, anyone who accepts these foundational precepts should be welcomed into our party.

The Democratic Party has prided itself on having a big tent. Now is the time to expand that tent even further. Our party should be large enough to span from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to Adam Kinzinger, Andy Beshear to Tim Miller, Pete Buttigieg to Joe Walsh, Wes Moore to Cassidy Hutchinson, JB Pritzker to Christine Todd Whitman, Josh Shapiro to Jeff Flake, Gretchen Whitmer to John Giles, Raphael Warnock to Geoff Duncan, Maxwell Frost to George Will, Jasmine Crockett to Fred Upton, Gavin Newsom to Mark Cuban, Chris Murphy to Liz Cheney, and Pramila Jayapal to Stephanie Grisham. They are all patriots. There will still be major policy disagreements, but if we can simply stop viewing the other as the enemy, that would be a major advance. And while we may have significant differences, we all seek to maintain and advance American democracy. At this moment in time, that’s a recipe for success.