Sunday, November 07, 2004
Pre-Emption: A Hope for the Center
Centrists Should Practice Legislative Pre-Emption
President Bush is sitting on a pile of political capital. Granted the pile is not as big as say the capital Ronald Reagan was sitting on when he won with 515 to 13 in the Electoral College. But none-the-less, even my republican friends on Capitol Hill are a bit shocked and nervous by the successful outcome. So how do folks in the center and left of center respond?
It's not going to be enough to simply stand up and say, "I want to protect social security." Protecting the status quo is a ticket to political ruin. Moderates and Democrats should borrow a page from the master of triangulation, Bill Clinton. They should pre-empt, as best they can, Republican efforts on Social Security and social issues like the FMA by pre-empting the administration by introducing and hitting the airwaves with their own proposals.
Social Security
The Dems are masters at scaring the hell out of the senior crowd with repeated calls that any social security reform amounts to a cut in benefits or privatization. But the reality is that social security is a demographic time bomb that needs to be addressed by cutting benefits, raising taxes, partial privatization or a combination of the three. If the dems or centrists have concerns, they should incorporate them into their own proposal and drop it the first day the 109th Congress meets. It should borrow heavily from one of the three plans the President is considering, but should contain elements that 1) cost less and 2) offer a fig leaf of protection for current beneficiaries. It worked for Clinton on welfare reform and the result is one of the most successful implementation of conservative policy principles in the last decade.
FMA
Follow wise King Solomon and split the baby on this one. Yes, some will complain that banning gay marriage relegates gay men and women to second class citizens, but offering up a compromise could undermine the President's position and pull off enough moderates to continue to doom the FMA. Both President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney are on record supporting civil unions. Take them at their word and introduce a modified FMA that protects states from having to recognize other states gay marriages, but also creates civil unions with most, but not all of the rights of marriage. Radical right-wingers would hate it, but the middle and even the public (according to most recent polls) may find it an acceptable resolution to this issue. Accompany the amendment with a host of legislative proposals that would really 'protect' traditional marriage like the permanent elimination of the marriage penalty, banning of no-fault divorce or incentivizing 'covenant marriages' and upping the child tax credit. That's pro-family and probably the best counter offensive they could offer.
The federal system and its checks and balances offer up a host of ways to make the voices of the 49% of Americans who don't totally support the Bush agenda are heard. It's worked in the past, it can work now, but obstructionism will continue to play into the hands of Karl Rove and friends.
President Bush is sitting on a pile of political capital. Granted the pile is not as big as say the capital Ronald Reagan was sitting on when he won with 515 to 13 in the Electoral College. But none-the-less, even my republican friends on Capitol Hill are a bit shocked and nervous by the successful outcome. So how do folks in the center and left of center respond?
It's not going to be enough to simply stand up and say, "I want to protect social security." Protecting the status quo is a ticket to political ruin. Moderates and Democrats should borrow a page from the master of triangulation, Bill Clinton. They should pre-empt, as best they can, Republican efforts on Social Security and social issues like the FMA by pre-empting the administration by introducing and hitting the airwaves with their own proposals.
Social Security
The Dems are masters at scaring the hell out of the senior crowd with repeated calls that any social security reform amounts to a cut in benefits or privatization. But the reality is that social security is a demographic time bomb that needs to be addressed by cutting benefits, raising taxes, partial privatization or a combination of the three. If the dems or centrists have concerns, they should incorporate them into their own proposal and drop it the first day the 109th Congress meets. It should borrow heavily from one of the three plans the President is considering, but should contain elements that 1) cost less and 2) offer a fig leaf of protection for current beneficiaries. It worked for Clinton on welfare reform and the result is one of the most successful implementation of conservative policy principles in the last decade.
FMA
Follow wise King Solomon and split the baby on this one. Yes, some will complain that banning gay marriage relegates gay men and women to second class citizens, but offering up a compromise could undermine the President's position and pull off enough moderates to continue to doom the FMA. Both President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney are on record supporting civil unions. Take them at their word and introduce a modified FMA that protects states from having to recognize other states gay marriages, but also creates civil unions with most, but not all of the rights of marriage. Radical right-wingers would hate it, but the middle and even the public (according to most recent polls) may find it an acceptable resolution to this issue. Accompany the amendment with a host of legislative proposals that would really 'protect' traditional marriage like the permanent elimination of the marriage penalty, banning of no-fault divorce or incentivizing 'covenant marriages' and upping the child tax credit. That's pro-family and probably the best counter offensive they could offer.
The federal system and its checks and balances offer up a host of ways to make the voices of the 49% of Americans who don't totally support the Bush agenda are heard. It's worked in the past, it can work now, but obstructionism will continue to play into the hands of Karl Rove and friends.
