Do we attack the problem, or fix the problem? An interesting question. Writes Steve Clemons tonight:
[In a telephone discussion] Senator Reid shared with us that just that day an unnamed Democratic Senator had come to him with a proposal on “ethics reform” ala Abramoff that could be bi-partisan. Reid told this person that this was the wrong time to be engaged in construtive “reform” proposals with the other side. He said that this was the time to draw a line and to show how “our side” differed dramatically from “their side.”
Given the 2006 elections ahead, this strategy makes sense on many levels. But this reminds me somewhat of the attitude of the AFL/CIO in 1996-1997, when I worked for a Democrat in the Senate, that “we needed to be about defining the problem, not about fixing things.”
I think that there will be more than enough problems and failed policies and brewing scandals for contrasting images to be juxtaposed to Democratic party benefit in the next elections.
However, generating constructive and positive policy proposals — that fix problems and that would appeal to “most Americans” meaning Dems, reasonable independents, and independently minded Republicans” — are vital parts of a successful political strategy, in my view.
This reminded me of Jim Lehrer’s questions of Harry Reid tonight on PBS Newshour … Reid’s emphasis throughout the interview was on the GOP’s “culture of corruption,” but Lehrer kept trying to turn the discussion to a solution-oriented, not a blame-them, approach … continued below …
JIM LEHRER: But the specifics that are involved in the current situation aside, the practices of lobbyists taking people — financing trips abroad, taking people to meals — all of that — free airplane travel — all that sort of stuff has been common practice. Democrats and Republicans have been doing that for years, correct?
SEN. HARRY REID: Well, Jim, listen. The Jack Abramoff situation where he’s flying people around to golf tournaments in Scotland and other places, I don’t think that has been — if it has, I don’t know about it, but if it has been, it’s time to stop.
I just know that this is another one of the things that I didn’t take the time to mention that has been so abused, and the American people now see this.
JIM LEHRER: Okay. But members of Congress did not see it until the Jack Abramoff case came along?
SEN. HARRY REID: Of course, we as — friends have helped us; there have been criminal indictments. I’ve listed those.
JIM LEHRER: Right.
SEN. HARRY REID: We have had ethics committees who have met, and the Democratic — I’m sorry, pardon me. Strike that from the record, the Republican leader in the House four times convicted of ethics violations. I mean, we’ve had a little help bringing this to the attention of the American public.
JIM LEHRER: What I’m getting at, I think, Senator, is it’s a little bit of an “oh, I’m so shocked” element to this that a lot of people are having trouble understanding because this kind of practice of lobbyists trying to influence legislation is part and parcel of the system.
What do you think? Which strategy plays best for ’06?
