The end of the Democrats' regime?

James Piereson writes in the New Criterion that the New Deal may finally be coming to an end. A new political coalition may be forming between business interests and middle class Americans. From the 1930s to the present "the Democratic Party has built its coalition around public spending and the recruitment of new groups into the political process, often by promises of new public programs." 

"The Democratic Party has gradually evolved into a “public sector party” that finds its votes and organizational strength in public sector unions, government employees and contractors, and beneficiaries of government programs."

 "The Republicans, much in contrast to the Democrats, have organized themselves in recent decades as a “private sector party,” winning votes and contributions from individuals and business groups committed to cutting taxes and reducing the size and scope of government."

Piereson  shows how we have had three "regime parties:" the Democrats under Jefferson, the Republicans after Lincoln, and the Democrats after FDR. "The dominant parties in each of these eras might be called “regime parties” because they were able to use their political strength to implement and carry forward the basic themes around which these political settlements were organized. Jefferson’s party pushed forward the themes of localism, democracy, and expansion; Lincoln’s, the themes of union, freedom, and capitalism; FDR’s, the themes of national regulation, public spending, and internationalism. In this sense, the United States has rarely had a two-party system but rather a one and one-half party system consisting of a “regime party” and a competitor forced to adapt to its dominant position. These competitors—the Whigs in the 1840s, the Democrats after the Civil War, and the Republicans in the post-war era—occasionally won national elections, but only after accepting the legitimacy of the basic political themes established by the regime party."

Now, however, there are four main reasons why the Democrats' regime may be collapsing:
"(1) unsustainable debt; (2) public promises that cannot be fulfilled; (3) stagnation and slow growth; and (4) political paralysis. The last point is important because it means that the parties will fail to agree on any preemptive solutions to the above problems until they reach a point of crisis." Read the whole article, because he does a great job of explaining each of these point and many more: http://www.newcriterion.com/articles.cfm/Future-tense--X--The-fourth-revolution-7395