Political Feast

by John Lindstrom
Gongwer News Service
September 3, 2010

It has always been a wonder why it is the American people feel the need to moan about the length of election campaigns. The exhaustion they emote when a campaign ad airs on television. The way they rend their garments when politicians speak on the news. The way they cry out in anguish about the campaigns being so long, and why are they so long?

To that last question there is a simple answer: we always know when the next election will be. Hey kids, look at a calendar and in the U.S. it’s a dead cert that the first Tuesday after the first Monday of November of an even-numbered year will feature an election. What other major democracy can make that claim? Britain? Japan? New Zealand? Lichtenstein? Well, okay, they do in Mexico, but otherwise?

Because we Americans are lucky enough to always know when our next leaders will be named by us (sort of like always knowing when dinner will be served), we are also lucky enough to be the beneficiaries of a giant political-electoral complex that is focused wholly and solely on winning campaigns.

And with November 2 barely two months away, and with the bill-of-fare for both parties now established, it is high season for the political campaign industry. For those who follow politics, we are now in the feast. For the rest, we are into statewide heartburn.

But while Democrat Virg Bernero and Republican Rick Snyder duke it out for governor, and Republicans and Democrats warn the public of the coming apocalypse should the other side win, there is a second more subtle campaign underway. It’s not exactly a secret campaign, but it is hardly one the general public is paying attention to while they munch on the electoral goodies.

The first campaign is obvious: the campaign to win office. That’s what all the money is about. That’s what all the shouting is about. Politics, as has been said, is show business for ugly people, and it is show time, folks. This campaign is about winning the hearts and minds of the voter.

The second campaign is really about the hearts and minds of the candidates. In truth, it’s really more about the minds of the candidates. And while this campaign is underway now, it will really get going the moment the election is done and the winners have finished sweeping away the confetti.

This campaign is about the effort groups all across the state, representing every possible point of view, are taking to make sure candidates and eventual winners understand their particular industry, their specific educational situation, their lands and environment, and the challenges and problems they face — and, by extension, the state faces.

This campaign is similar to the first campaign in some ways. There are going to be lit drops. Most people will have to contend with thousands of postcards and brochures blanketing neighborhoods, introducing the candidates and why they will balance the budget without raising taxes or cutting services, how they will ensure the state is awash with good-paying jobs while ensuring businesses are the most competitive ever, about how they will protect the environment and minimize unreasonable environmental regulation, about how they will get more money for schools and ensure that the schools are tough and every little kiddie gets nothing but As.

In the second campaign, the lit drops will consist of one or two background briefings or position papers for each issue, probably running in the end to thousands of pages, talking about how to balance the budget, about how to build businesses, protect the environment and promote economic development, and boost education.

In the first campaign, candidates will come knocking on doors, glad-handing voters, agreeing to everything the voter mutters darkly about while trying to turn the conversation to his or her basic campaign-speak.

In the second campaign, dozens if not hundreds of scholars, lobbyists, association heads, and wonks will come knocking at the door of the winning candidates, or the designated grandee to receive these callers. The callers will offer hearty handclasps, and nod earnestly and sincerely and concur enthusiastically at whatever the candidate or designated grandee says while they try to emphasize the critical importance of their issues and concerns to the state’s future.

During the first campaign, the candidates and their handlers will watch carefully and listen critically to what the voters seem to say, what issues worry them most, what items in the news will make them upset or enthusiastic. The candidates will attempt to seize on those issues, concerns and sentiments, building an identity with the voters based on their mutual concern or fear or disgust or excitement and weaving their message into the fabric of the moment.

In the second campaign, the policy operatives — be they scholars, lobbyists, association heads, wonks — will listen and study what the candidates say with singular intensity, able to parse each phrase and work it into their overall theme so that it will be irrelevant how far apart the candidate and wonks are at the beginning of the campaign. Because by campaign’s end they will largely be side by side, or at least close enough to win a hearing with the candidate.

None of this is intended as cynicism. It is the reality of politics. Someone will win, someone will have to have policies prepared to show the public he is ready to lead the moment he takes the oath, and someone, therefore, must help them develop the policies they will unveil. And during the first campaign the candidate’s mind is generally on more pressing electoral matters. So once the election is over, the candidate has to turn his or her attention to the issues he or she will be expected to deal with expertly.

Possibly the best public, historical example of how the second campaign works was the wonkstock gathering then-President-elect Bill Clinton held after the 1992 election. He and his soon-to-be vice president, Al Gore, sat at a large circular table while scholars, lobbyists, association heads and wonks sounded off for several minutes each on the issues they were concerned about.

Talk to, once again, scholars, lobbyists, association heads and wonks and you will hear about how papers on all manner of issues are being prepared.

Right now, the focus on preparing and presenting those issue papers seems geared toward Republican Rick Snyder. In part, that is because his lack of considerable government experience means interests see him as a clean slate to instruct and possibly influence.

For the most part, however, the focus is on Mr. Snyder because he has the heavy early lead in the polls, and most scholars, lobbyists, association heads and wonks (look, let’s just call them SLAW from now on) think his is a lead too formidable at this point to completely fritter away by November 2.

No one is ignoring Mr. Bernero, not entirely anyway, not yet. But the SLAW wants to see if he can build up some momentum and begin eating into Mr. Snyder’s lead before they prepare to slather him as well with their concerns, observations and literary exhortations on issues (see, the COLE for the SLAW). He does have the advantage in one sense of having had experience on a number of issues, so perhaps Mr. Bernero does not need the same backgrounding as Mr. Snyder. However, from the SLAW’s perspective, Mr. Bernero also has the disadvantage of having had experience on issues and so may be less open to their concerns, observations…right, right, the COLE.

For the voter it is important to realize that this COLE SLAW campaign is in many ways as important as the first campaign, the appetizer campaign so-to-say, because from the COLE SLAW the winning candidate begins to develop his or her appetite for the main course: the term of office to follow.

And the voters can have a taste of that campaign as well. Instead of being too salty and sour when talking to candidates, they can be better seasoned, more marinated in their views, which could draw out the candidates more. Likewise, the voters can pepper the different groups and associations they share the table with, issue-wise, with their own bucket of COLE, the better to fatten those laddies and lassies up for their intellectual chew with the winners.

As we masticate through this election, let us not forget, however, that politics is not just something to complain about: it is a giant banquet table filled with everything good and bad for you. And in our country, we always know when the next groaning hoard will be spread before us.

As that great gustatory political scientist Julia Child would have said: “bon appétit.”

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.