The Problem With The "We're Not Them" Approach

To this point in time, there have been documented none of the terrible crimes against human freedom and dignity that so many have been warning would be the result of the Patriot Act. Even liberals like Diane Feinstein have had to acknowledge as much. What can be documented, however, is that Americans recognize that there are terrorists who want to kill more of their fellow citizens, that there needs to be some new way of combating, and preventing, the new kind of warfare waged by this new kind of enemy, and that the Patriot Act, with whatever faults it might have, is a step in that direction.

And yet, it was just a month or so ago that Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid boasted, when the Bush Administration had to settle for a temporary extension of the act rather than renewal, that he and his Democrat colleagues had “killed the Patriot Act.”

At this point in time, most Americans are aware – and have been for a while – that the Social Security system cannot long endure in its present state and form. They know that, absent some workable reform, the only way to meet the commitment made by the federal government to retiring seniors will be to continue to raise taxes on those still working. And they know that, the longer the nation goes without implementing some attempt at a fix, the more difficult and the more painful it will be to solve the problem without causing economic chaos.

And yet, when President Bush noted in his State of the Union Address that Congress did not act on his proposed reforms last year, the Democrat side of the House Chamber erupted in raucous applause.

Rather than being isolated events, these two episodes reveal much as to why it may be harder for Democrats to retake one or both chambers of Congress than they currently realize. In both instances, they allowed the American public to witness a display of their joy over failing/refusing to deal with issues that need to be dealt with – and all primarily because their minority status prevents them from enacting whatever solutions they might prefer, if such actually exist, and claiming a political victory. So, in the absence of the ability to claim one for themselves, they have opted to work merely to prevent their opponents from claiming one, regardless of the effect on the nation.

And it seems that to at least some at the highest levels of the party, this is enough. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, in responding to fears voiced by some prominent Democrats that they are not doing a good enough job of convincing voters why they should vote for Democrats, as opposed to simply not voting for Republicans pointed to their “achievement” in stalling Social Security reform. As noted in the New York Times today, the California Democrat stated, “People said, ‘You can’t beat something with nothing,’” and then tried to make the case that that is exactly what they had accomplished on the Social Security issue.

But she is making the mistake of believing that preventing a victory by the Republicans constitutes a victory for the Democrats, regardless of whether or not that “victory” so defined helps or hinders in the struggle to solve the nation’s ills. And she may or may not realize that this puts anyone who holds such a view in a politically dangerous position in which what is best for their party might not be what is best for their country.

The problem here is that the great American swing-vote constituency – that both parties so fervently work to win – cares less about what group of politicians gets credit for solving pressing problems than they do about simply getting those problems solved. And they can be most unappreciative toward a party that is perceived to be holding up progress on an issue for purely political reasons.

The Republicans made what one might consider to be variations on this erroneous line of thought in 1998. At that time, they relied almost exclusively on exploiting Democrat scandal/controversy rather than on a positive agenda for the nation. They were rewarded for the efforts, while still maintaining control of Congress, with reduced numbers in both chambers.

And the Democrats may find, much to their surprise and chagrin, that they could likewise lose numbers in Washington this year. They’ve spent the last twelve years – since Republicans won control of Congress – trying to convince American voters that they’ve made a terrible mistake, without trying to make a case to convince those voters why this is so. This writer doubts that this tactic – despite recent problems in the Republican ranks – will be much more effective this year than it has in the last five elections.