Hangover Politics

by John Lindstrom
Gongwer News Service
January 22, 2010

Okay, everyone take a deep breath. We are just three weeks into 2010 and political actions and portents have already uncorked a heady brew that could leave the state and nation seriously hung over as they lurch into the elections that are still 10 months away.

Even in an age of the never-ending campaign (which is the normal state of electoral politics in the U.S. today) the pile up of developments in the first 21 days of the year is imposing. Just since the sun came up on January 17 there have been so many changes one can be forgiven for taking a steadying brandy or two. Or maybe a bottle. Or maybe a case.

Consider Tuesday, January 19. Yes, we’ll get to Massachusetts in a bit, but start at the Capitol, where Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop (R-Rochester) unveiled a proposed constitutional amendment to cut the pay of every public worker directly and to require them all to pay more for their health insurance. It is one of the broadest slaps at public workers since Calvin Coolidge blackjacked the Boston Police Strike in 1919 (see, told you we’d get to Massachusetts).

Reducing the size and scope of government in every conceivable form has always been a guiding principle for Mr. Bishop. He speaks of it frequently and fervently. Even so, the proposal he outlined is a very big, risky move that could easily work for — or against — Republicans.

With ongoing economic hard times there is a lot of public anger directed broadly at government and government workers, especially at teachers. It’s a hard anger to pin down because the invective directed at government is also often tied up in frustration that government can’t do, won’t do, is unable to do certain things. That government can’t, won’t, is unable to, is often tied up in the cutbacks state and local governments have had to make during the ongoing recession. Still, many in the general public, especially those struggling, feel government has to take even more of a hit. So Mr. Bishop’s proposal could tap into that mood to help win passage of his plan to not only cut government workers’ pay but make enormous changes in overall government management.

Yeah, but…this is also a state that has a lot of worker sympathy. So targeting workers directly could easily backlash on Republicans by giving Democrats and their supporters in labor a rallying point. Clearly, Mr. Bishop recognizes that risk, which is one reason why he wants a vote on this proposal with the August primary, when turnout would be lower and more likely to support the change. Putting the proposal on the November ballot would draw more Democrats in opposition and potentially hurt GOP candidates.

In the end, though, expect this more to be a subject in the campaign than an actual campaign issue for the voters to decide. There is a greater chance that a former Cosmo centerfold will get elected governor than that legislative Democrats would put up the votes to allow the issue on the ballot, and unless there is a spectacularly successful petition drive we can expect this will be a matter of argument and not action.

That same day, of course, a former Cosmo centerfold running as a Republican (the party that one just doesn’t think of when one thinks of nude photos) was elected U.S. senator from the state that invented blue laws. Much already has been written about the irony of Scott Brown, pledged to defeat a health care insurance bill, being elected to succeed Ted Kennedy, who made universal health insurance his great campaign, and about how Mr. Brown tapped public worry and anger and how the Bay State Democrats ran such an incompetent campaign. Beyond proving that there are more Republicans in Massachusetts than an award-winning oil painter in Weymouth, what does Mr. Brown’s election portend: a massive win for the GOP in November or a resurgent Democratic Party able to pick up the pieces and add to their successes of 2006 and 2008? Yes.

Wise Republicans know not to gloat too much over the victory, and wise Democrats know not to despair over the loss. Mr. Brown’s victory could indeed be the spark that sets off a new GOP bonfire, sweeping Michigan and the rest of the nation and snapping politics back to the right. But it could also be the spark that sets off GOP self-immolation and allows the Democrats to regroup, refocus and recapture the public mood.

Since governing politics, as opposed to electoral politics, tends to operate on a stampede-or-standoff mode, Republicans have to be careful not to simply stand in the way of decisions and then be blamed for the country continuing to founder. And Democrats must be able to show they can bring in everyone to hammer together some legislative wins. Who plays the hand the most deftly could tip the winner.

Then following that, Sen. Gretchen Whitmer (D-East Lansing), perhaps the prohibitive favorite, announced she was not running for attorney general but for re-election instead. Her supporters portrayed the decision as a victory for motherhood, since as a single mom being a senator will allow Ms. Whitmer more time with the kids. Okay, sure.

Since her domestic revelation came two weeks after Lt. Governor John Cherry Jr. pulled out of the gubernatorial race and the day after Mr. Brown won in Massachusetts, it just ain’t going to rank with trotting down the road to Damascus. Whatever, Ms. Whitmer is a young woman and an ambitious politician, and this probably is not the time for a Democrat to give up what would be a safe seat for an uncertain campaign. That she will seek a higher office at another time is a safe bet.

The big effect of Ms. Whitmer’s decision is to emphasize the uncertain status of the Democrats right now. For as she came forward with her announcements, top Democratic names — Denise Illitch and Bob Bowman — were to meet with labor and others to discuss their potential campaigns for governor. Mr. Bowman, the financial whiz kid who was the boy treasurer in the 1980s, also said he could self-fund a campaign. If he is the nominee, that would be a Godsend for the Democrats, who know they will have a viciously tough election.

Then comes Thursday and the extra shot added to the cocktail was the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that corporations (and labor unions, don’t forget them) can spend directly on political ads. The old joke used to be that you had to feel sorry for car dealers during elections because they could never get an ad on TV with all the candidate ads. Now, the car dealers will be able to run an ad for both their four-wheel clunkers and their political jalopies. “Come on down to Honest Harold’s, where every car is $100 over invoice and carries a bumper sticker for Tom Bananaramapeel for Congress!”

The potential effect of this ruling on campaigns is ginormous, it’s spectacucolossal, it’s mammothmindblowing, it’s awesomeious, it’s whatever ridiculous new-age word-merge you want to invent. It is no understatement to say the ruling could have a major effect on federal and state campaigns.

And it is only third week of January. Drink up, we’ve got a wild ride ahead.

John Lindstrom is publisher of Gongwer News Service. For nearly 50 years in Michigan, Gongwer News Service has provided independent, comprehensive, accurate and timely coverage of issues in and around Michigan’s government and political systems. For subscription information, including a free trial, visit Gongwer online.