The Scum at the Top
Commentary on the Rats in Washington
A Reality Check On ‘Change’
By Jonathan Alter
Newsweek
© September 22, 2008
Being labeled a 'maverick' sounds good to the public,
but it makes it hard to forge bipartisan deals.
So far the fall campaign has majored in Sarah Palin, with
a minor in the false ads launched (though rarely widely
aired) by John McCain. Rather than debating whether Barack
Obama voted to teach sex education to kindergartners (he
didn't) or called Sarah Palin a pig (he didn't), it would be
nice if the central dynamic of this contest were about, say,
the record and temperament of each candidate. Is that asking
too much?
To that end, let's go back to Palin's acceptance speech in
St. Paul. "Listening to him [Obama] speak, it's easy to forget
that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a
single major law or reform—not even in the state Senate,"
Palin said. "In politics there are some candidates who use
change to promote their careers. And then there are those,
like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change.
They're the ones whose names appear on laws and landmark
reforms, not just on buttons and banners, or on self-designed
presidential seals."
That last crack refers to the Obama campaign's idiotic
effort last spring to make their man seem presidential
with a silly seal. As zingers go, Palin's was justified.
But the rest of what she said in that section of her speech
is as phony as a moose in Manhattan.
Obama served eight years in Springfield, and has been in
Washington nearly four so far. In the Illinois state Senate,
he authored about a half-dozen "major laws" on issues
ranging from ethics to education. The best example of his
leadership style was bipartisan legislation to require the
videotaping of police interrogations, which is now a national
model. Obama brought together police, prosecutors and the
ACLU on a win-win bill that simultaneously increased conviction
rates and all but ended jailhouse beatings. In Washington he
has his name on three important laws: the first major ethics
reform since Watergate; a much-needed cleanup of conventional
weapons in the former Soviet Union, and the "Google for
Government" bill, an accountability tool that requires notice
of all federal contracts to be posted online. Besides that,
Obama hasn't been around long enough to get much done.
McCain served four years in the House and has been in the
Senate almost 22 so far. But he, too, has authored fewer
than a half-dozen major laws. Trying to fix immigration
counts for something, but nothing passed. So while McCain
deserves credit for the landmark 2002 McCain-Feingold
campaign-finance reform bill, the only other major law on
which his office says his "name appears" (Palin's standard)
is the "McCain Amendment" prohibiting torture in the armed
forces. But that has little meaning because of a bill this
year, supported by McCain, that allows torture by the CIA.
Under longstanding government practice, military intelligence
officers can be temporarily designated as CIA officers
("sheep-dipped" is the bureaucratic lingo) when they want
to go off the Army field manual. In other words, the
government can still torture anyone, any time. McCain caved
on an issue he insists is a matter of principle.
The single domestic issue that McCain gets passionate about
is pork-barrel politics ("earmarking"), the 200-year-old
process by which members of Congress slip in goodies for
their constituents outside the normal appropriations system.
Earmarks account for less than 2 percent of the budget; the
"Bridge to Nowhere" is offensive but amounts to the cost of
a few hours in Iraq. McCain claims he has never sought
earmarks for Arizona. This is mostly true. But the vast
majority of all the bills he has sponsored in Congress have
been favors for Arizona's Native American population. While
the Indians deserve it, the difference from earmarks is
procedural. Both amount to bringing home the bacon.
McCain did important work with John Kerry in 1995 to pave
the way for normalization of relations with Vietnam, and
he's been a fierce if occasional enemy of Pentagon waste.
But that's about it. Given his claims of two decades of
"making change," his record of legislative achievement is
surprisingly thin. Nothing big on the economy, education,
health care, law enforcement or other major issues.
One reason for the sparse record is McCain's history of
unpopularity with his GOP Senate colleagues. Being labeled
a "maverick" sounds good to the public but makes it hard
to get bills passed. Besides helping pave the way for some
judicial nominees in 2005, he isn't known for forging
bipartisan deals that stick. Consider the 2002 McCain-Bayh
national-service bill to expand AmeriCorps to 250,000
participants. At last week's Service Nation Summit in New
York, McCain grudgingly endorsed his own bill, now called
Hatch-Kennedy. But he's rarely mentioned it on the trail or
done anything to advance it.
Part of the problem is McCain's explosive temper. He blows
up, then apologizes and is quickly forgiven. The forgiveness
is "directly related to an appreciation of what he has
suffered [in Vietnam]," says a Democrat who didn't want
to be named talking about a colleague. "The thought of
his being president sends a cold chill down my spine,"
Republican Sen. Thad Cochran told The Boston Globe in
January. "He is erratic. He is hotheaded. He loses his
temper and he worries me." Cochran, a McCain supporter,
now says McCain has learned to control his emotions better.
But I've spoken to four senators and two former senators in
recent weeks who believe Cochran's concerns are widely shared
in the Senate. Five of the six think that McCain is temperamentally
unsuited to the presidency. None would speak for the record.
Palin's right that McCain has at least tried to "use his
career to promote change," even if he hasn't succeeded.
But she's wrong to deny the same to Obama. The faith-based
community organizing Obama undertook (and that Palin
continues to trash) exemplifies the very idea of putting
social change before selfish career. Why else take a job
for a fraction of what he could have made elsewhere? As
for temperament, Obama is unflappable, perhaps to a fault.
Record and temperament. They might not be campaign
issues, but they tell us a lot more about the future
president than all the trivia that passes for news at
the moment.
URL: http://www.newsweek.com/id/158767
© 2008
The Scum at the Top - Home
E-mail: dwagner2@isd.net
©2008 DJW
Last Modified:
October 1, 2008