|
Getting It Right...
Commentary by Bruce
Beardsley
The opinions expressed here are those of
Mr. Beardsley alone and are not the official position of the Lancaster
County Democratic Committee.
So, yes,
Democrat Martha Coakley was an incredibly horrible candidate and ran
an unbelievable bad campaign. But, this was Massachusetts, the bluest
of blue states, where any Democrat should have won. So, yes, there are
lessons here for Democrats and President Obama.
The
"change" the American people (at least, the 30% of the American middle
that determines most of our elections) wanted and expected by electing
Barack Obama was the fixing of a broken political system - a system
that is too hyper-partisan and is dominated by big-money special
interests. The 2008 election wasn't ideological (it rarely is) and
wasn't driven primarily by policy positions. The voters wanted strong
Presidential leadership to reform a process that was no longer working
for the interests of the broad middle class.
What the
American people wanted was a President who generally stuck to his core
principals and would "call out" members of Congress of both parties
(and Independents - that means you, Joe Leiberman) which were
receiving huge special interest money and voting accordingly. They
wanted a President who would loudly and consistently challenge a
blindly partisan strategy of pure obstructionism. And, most of all,
they wanted a President taking charge, leading and explaining the way
forward, and getting things done.
Instead,
President Obama was seen to put the inmates in charge of the asylum by
deferring to congressional leadership, the architects of the broken
system, to write the stimulus and health reform legislation. Worse
yet, he made his own "secret" deals with the special interests. The
administration focused exclusively on getting a bill, any bill,
instead of attacking the process.
The
Republican spin on Massachusetts - "a repudiation of a government-run
health care", "a repudiation of Democratic Party policies" - is
transparently self-serving and, also, demonstrably wrong. According to
post-election polling, by a margin of three-to-two, former Obama
voters who voted for Republican Scott Brown said the Senate healthcare
bill "doesn't go far enough." A mere seven months ago, The New York
Times/CBS poll found that 72 percent of Americans "supported a
government-administered insurance plan -- something like Medicare for
those under 65 -- that would compete for customers with private
insurers." Even half of those identified as Republican said they would
back such a public plan. What the Massachusetts voters were against
was the current Senate bill, which looked too much like the bill
former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney hoisted upon them - a
mandate to buy insurance without any public option or any other
restrictions on premium increases.
Neither
was the Massachusetts message a call to scale back the Obama agenda.
But, it was a clarion call that there is no substitute for strong
Presidential leadership that can consistently and clearly articulates
a simple, unifying theme that can tie even a broad agenda to a single
understandable mission. That ability and discipline that Obama was so
good at during his campaign has been missing from the Obama
presidency. On the other hand, the Republican message of "too much
spending, too much government", as obscenely hypocritical and
staggeringly deceitful as it is, has been delivered with incredible
discipline and mind-numbingly repetitiveness, by every Republican and
conservative talking head no matter what the issue. And, it's a
message that hasn't been refuted effectively by the administration,
despite its fallaciousness.
The fact
that this all takes place during a time of economic travail cannot be
overstated. Americans are much less critical and much more forgiving
when they don't have to worry about losing their job or their home.
It's not too late for President Obama to
recover his bearings. President Reagan, at a similar point in his
first term and, also amidst a recession, had even worse poll numbers
and suffered through a horrible mid-term election two years before he
was overwhelmingly reelected. Our economy is improving and will
continue to improve, and President Obama's policies that saved us from
the brink of economic disaster, will accrue to his and the Democratic
Party's benefit. But, the President must remember that he was elected
to fix the system, not just deal with it. He needs to govern the way
he campaigned and be the president he was elected to be. He must be
willing to do battle with the special interests; he must lead the way
and convince the public to force both parties' leadership to work
together; and he must articulate a clear, consistent message that ties
together his agenda. I'd suggest "Making government work for the
American people." The American people, despite our cynicism, have
always been willing to follow strong presidents - sometimes toward the
right, sometimes toward the left. The direction was always less
important than the perception of leadership strength. The message of
Massachusetts is that President Obama has not yet governed with that
strength. The good news is the wake-up call came early enough, and if
the economy improves quickly enough, he can implement these lessons
and prevent a mid-term electoral disaster.
Massachusetts should also be instructive to Pennsylvania's candidates
for Governor and state legislature. The citizens of the Commonwealth
realize that our state government is broken. The successful candidates
will be those that put forth a truly bold agenda of reform, with
little regard to the past partisan sacred cows. The voters of
Pennsylvania are desperately looking for leaders of courage and bold
leadership skills who are willing to take risks and upset the apple
cart.
Bruce
Beardsley
Comment on this
Commentary - Comments should be directed to Ken Ralph, Editor of
LCDC Media at his
email address. Comments
will be posted here.
|
Bruce Beardsley |
