Financial Times Editorial - The Do-Nothing party
Financial Times Editorial - The Do-Nothing party
Published: May 18 2006 03:00 | Last updated: May 18 2006 03:00. Copyright by The Financial Times
Newt Gingrich, the former Republican leader, recently advised Democrats to adopt the slogan "Had Enough" for their mid-term elections campaign this November. Coming from the man who led the Republicans to a sweeping congressional victory in 1994, the advice struck a chord. So, too, do opinion polls that show the Democrats consistently leading the Republicans on every issue, whether it is their ability to handle the war in Iraq, fight terrorism or tackle America's budget deficit. For the Democrats the temptation is clearly to sit back and hope the American public still feels the same way in November.
There are two dangers to what at first glance looks to be the least risky strategy of doing nothing. First, in the absence of a well thought out platform the Democrats will prove more vulnerable to the allure of populism as the campaign unfolds. We already glimpsed this two months ago with the party's unprincipled opposition to Dubai Ports World's takeover of container terminals at six American ports. On ethical grounds alone, xenophobia is always wrong. In this instance it was even less defensible given that Democrats were perfectly aware the Gulf-based company would have had no say over US port security. But economic nationalism is also objectionable on grounds of self-interest. Congress is still appraising legislation that would make it tougher for foreign companies to buy American ones. Any such move - or in- deed any attempt to make a scapegoat out of China for America's rising current account deficit - would re bound on the US economy. The Democrats should remember economic openness is not just in America's interests but also their own. It is no coincidence Bill Clinton, former US president, was the most pro free trade and also the most successful Democrat of the last generation.
The second danger is that the public will want to know much more about what the Democrats would do as the likelihood of victory approaches - and yet credible answers would be lacking. Of course, victory cannot be assumed, even when you are 20 points ahead in the polls. Because of America's politically driven system of district boundary drawing, very few seats qualify as open contests - roughly 30 out of 435 in the House of Representatives and about 10 of the 33 Senate seats that are up for re-election this year. Such gerrymandering only reinforces the tendency to focus narrowly on a few seats at the expense of constructing broader national campaigns. This, too, is a temptation that should be avoided. Whether it is putting flesh on their call for US "energy independence", addressing America's rising health and education costs, or seriously addressing how to solve the crisis in Iraq, Democrats need to go beyond the politics of slogans. Many observers see the 2006 election as the most important clash of ideas since 1994. It would be a pity if the Democrats were unable or unwilling to meet that challenge.
Published: May 18 2006 03:00 | Last updated: May 18 2006 03:00. Copyright by The Financial Times
Newt Gingrich, the former Republican leader, recently advised Democrats to adopt the slogan "Had Enough" for their mid-term elections campaign this November. Coming from the man who led the Republicans to a sweeping congressional victory in 1994, the advice struck a chord. So, too, do opinion polls that show the Democrats consistently leading the Republicans on every issue, whether it is their ability to handle the war in Iraq, fight terrorism or tackle America's budget deficit. For the Democrats the temptation is clearly to sit back and hope the American public still feels the same way in November.
There are two dangers to what at first glance looks to be the least risky strategy of doing nothing. First, in the absence of a well thought out platform the Democrats will prove more vulnerable to the allure of populism as the campaign unfolds. We already glimpsed this two months ago with the party's unprincipled opposition to Dubai Ports World's takeover of container terminals at six American ports. On ethical grounds alone, xenophobia is always wrong. In this instance it was even less defensible given that Democrats were perfectly aware the Gulf-based company would have had no say over US port security. But economic nationalism is also objectionable on grounds of self-interest. Congress is still appraising legislation that would make it tougher for foreign companies to buy American ones. Any such move - or in- deed any attempt to make a scapegoat out of China for America's rising current account deficit - would re bound on the US economy. The Democrats should remember economic openness is not just in America's interests but also their own. It is no coincidence Bill Clinton, former US president, was the most pro free trade and also the most successful Democrat of the last generation.
The second danger is that the public will want to know much more about what the Democrats would do as the likelihood of victory approaches - and yet credible answers would be lacking. Of course, victory cannot be assumed, even when you are 20 points ahead in the polls. Because of America's politically driven system of district boundary drawing, very few seats qualify as open contests - roughly 30 out of 435 in the House of Representatives and about 10 of the 33 Senate seats that are up for re-election this year. Such gerrymandering only reinforces the tendency to focus narrowly on a few seats at the expense of constructing broader national campaigns. This, too, is a temptation that should be avoided. Whether it is putting flesh on their call for US "energy independence", addressing America's rising health and education costs, or seriously addressing how to solve the crisis in Iraq, Democrats need to go beyond the politics of slogans. Many observers see the 2006 election as the most important clash of ideas since 1994. It would be a pity if the Democrats were unable or unwilling to meet that challenge.
posted by Carlos T Mock at 10:27 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home