Electoral Math
Reality-Based^TM Political Numbers from Nicholas Beaudrot

Bush's Non-proliferation Non-initiative | Home |

Can't Anybody Here Play This Game! (Special Terri Schiavo Edition)

[This will be my one and only post related to the current pseudo-legal soap opera that the national press corps has decided is the most pressing issue of the day. That's right: the fate of a woman who has been in a persistent vegetative sate for fifteen years is more important than Iraq, Social Security privatization, or any number of issues that are of more importance to people those of us who are not friends and family of Terri Schiavo.]

There has been much liberal hand wringing and gnashing of teeth over the fact the Democrats are not publicly opposing the GOP. The logic works like this:

• The Republican party advocates Congressional intervention to reinsert Schiavo's feeding tube.
• Public opinion, to varying degrees, shows that it is inappropriate for Congress to intervene. Also opinion polls show that most people think the feeding tube should be removed (it is unclear how biased the polls' questions are).
• Therefore, Democrats should follow the polls and loudly make a case in opposition to the Republican party, and object to interfering in the case, out of respect for the wishes of Schiavo's husband.
• By saying nothing, Democrats reinforce the idea that they stand for nothing, and lose support from both sides.

To which I say: no, no, no, no, no. No. A thousand times: no.

The primary political effect of l'affair Schiavo has been to destroy any remaining shred of public confidence in Congress. The job approval rating for Congress has dropped from 42% to 34%. Therefore, one way to turn this matter into a political win is to identify Congress with the Republican Party. Americans should think that the Senate consists of John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Barack Obama, and 96 Republicans, while the House has 435 Republicans. Democrats should remind the American public each and every day which party is setting the agenda for America's government. If the people want a different agenda, they should pick a different party. This is not rocket science: if you are not the party of government, you can win by opposing government itself.

Other alternatives carry some amount of risk. Should Democrats join the GOP in favoring intervention? Probably not; it will be unpopular with many die-hard Democrats. Plus, you'd be throwing out the Constitution and the Rule of Law. Should they oppose loudly? No, that will hurt the few Democrats who represent pro-life districts. Attack Terri's parents as camera-hogs? That has some promise, but it could backfire. In contrast, sitting back and attacking government itself is risk-free. We just need more clever lines like the one Barney Frank had:

If you don't want something to be political, why would you ask 535 politicians to decide?

So, let's let the pro-life Democrats off the hook and vote for whatever abomination bill the Republican leadership creates for political purposes. Maybe it will reduce the chances that Focus on the Family will target them for defeat, maybe it won't. But very few liberals are going to remember this vote in November of 2006 and hold it against a Democratic Congressperson.

| | technorati

Home | Mail  | RSS

Last updated by Nicholas Beaudrot on 09:27 26 March 2005