I have so many things to catch up on. You will be hearing about my reaction to Dominos new ad campaign admitting flaws in its product. I also recently did some work in the Dominican Republic and there are plenty of thoughts about the island shared by the DR and Haiti. And finally, I am still traveling with Manute Bol, NBA legend, and need to update you on the progress of his Christian-Muslim reconciliation school project in southern Sudan.

But within the hour I have read about the surprise decision by Senate Democrat Evan Bayh to not seek re-election. Senate-watchers who already see Democrats losing seats in November have been hard-pressed to find the formula that could put the Republicans within striking distance of re-taking the Senate. The recent decision by former Indiana Republican Senator Dan Coats to run against Bayh has been seen as a way to put Indiana in the running as one of those states. But weekend polls have shown Bayh leading by 20 points over Coats and winning approval of over 50% of Indiana’s voters.

So we have to take Bayh’s decision at face-value. He has been frustrated by gridlock and hyper-partisanship. He had pushed for a bipartisan commission to deal with runaway deficits only to see fellow sponsors back away so as not to give President Obama or Senate Democrats an advantage in November. The same with a new jobs stimulus bill, shredded to nothingness because it was laden with pork to win some Republican support.

Make no mistake, Bayh is no flaming liberal. His career has been one of moderation and modulation – and for this he has made the short list of possible VP nominees at least twice. But now he says he can best serve the nation and state by possibly running a business or charity, or leading a university into the future. This is the kind of man that should be in the U.S. Senate. And lest I tip my hat too far to the Democratic side, so too have men like John Warner and John Danforth – two decent and honorable Republicans.

Did hyper-partisanship kill Senator Bayh’s spirit? Is this what we have become? Worse – is this what we are becoming?

By John Zogby

This is in the heart of the Cascades in eastern Washington. One of the most beautiful spots Kathy (my wife) and I have ever visited. We were too briefly at the Suncadia Resort, aptly named because it sees 300 days of sunshine every year. I spoke for the second time to the Association of Washington Business.

A long question and answer period but I was particularly struck by the questions concerning the future of the Republican Party. I have written in my Politics column previously that the Republican Party may very well go the way of the Federalists. Interestingly, some conservatives have wondered if I am ready to remedy that suggestion because of the rebound the party has received in the polls lately. Honestly, I am not ready to waver at all. First, let’s look at the demographics that dominate the coalition that elected Barack Obama – young people (First Globals™), Hispanics, African Americans, and the “creative class”. The President has to worry about dwindling support from members of these groups, but does anyone honestly think Republicans are delivering any messages to these groups that appeal to them? Sure, it is scary to think about “death panels”, “socialism”, healthcare “rationing”, but opposition to each of these canards does not make a policy.

Second is the changing makeup of the Republican base. Rallying conservatives and uniting them into a vocal opposition is like holding up a stop sign, but again it is not long term policy. Besides, it is of no longer term appeal to independents.

And lastly, there is the question of independents. Their anger and disgust is aimed much more at the process than at the product. In the post-Katrina America, they simply are putting government on trial. Can government work? Can it get the job done? Can we have healthcare reform? Can we deal with sticky problems? In this arena, Democrats and Republicans, the President, and Congress are all on trial. Many voters are on sacrifice overload, but I have written before that Americans will accept sacrifice if they feel it is necessary and if they see a return on investment.

Stated simply, doing nothing is not an option. Being rejectionist is not a policy. Stopping policy from being made will not win at the polls. And while the Democrats may lose some seats and have to face a very disappointed electorate, right now, the Republicans aren’t providing any answers or any appeal to the powerful demographics that form the new majority.

By John Zogby

Oh, God, Tuscany! The region has it all – world class cities like Florence and Pisa, incredible lush farmland, natural resources and skilled labor that produce among the world’s finest leather goods, timepieces, wines, and marble. The seacoast is just fine. Just fine, indeed.

I traveled to Tuscany and spoke to many local public officials and to a series of business and industry associations and shared with them my ideas on the growth of Secular Spiritualism – living with less, reordering life’s priorities, the need for something more authentic out of life besides material goods. Needless to say, the Italian leaders were particularly interested because they included among them representatives of some of the most important luxury good producers on earth. While the Great Recession has not hurt Italy as much as other countries, the economy there is highly dependent on the export market. Thus, how to move beyond the economic doldrums and prepare for a consumer with different priorities?

We had terrific conversations and my conclusions pointed to a unique opportunity to reposition their goods and brands. Certainly, people will continue to enjoy luxurious goods and extravagance, but to a lesser extent, particularly Americans and Europeans. With a burgeoning middle class and new wealth in countries like Brazil, Russia, India, China, and the Gulf, new demand will cover some of the losses in the West. But the issue in the West is less one of wasteful spending. I believe that conspicuous consumption will be gone for a long time. Rather, the issue is long-term value of products. “Made-in-Italy” should not represent short-term satisfaction and enhanced social status but instead should be defined in terms of a long-term investment. A Bulgari watch should not be used for flash but to define longevity, the highest quality.

This will involve new messaging, new branding, and a change of emphasis. Anyone who can produce such wonderful products will be able to re-position them well.