Fallout From Massachusettes

Let there be no doubt. The Republican victory in Massachusettes is a real stunner. It is impossible to overstate the enormity of this win. The spin from the left will be that Attorney General Martha Coakley ran a poor campaign, took her victory for granted, and didn't really bother to get out there and talk to the voters. She was ahead by 30 points and only by serious ineptitude did she manage to loose this campaign for Ted Kennedy's Senate seat.

I believe all these statements are almost certainly true. They do not however, do justice to the seismic event that has occurred. Start with turnout. Democrats worked hard during the last two weeks of the campaign and actually got large numbers of their voters to the polls. Massive turnout of disaffected voters in the suburbs and other locations also occurred. Somebody was angry out there and all of the last minute grass roots efforts by Democrats was not enough to overcome the excitement that had been generated for Scott Brown and the anger that was directed at politicians in Washington.

What is going on? The most significant problem of course is that too many people are still hurting. The existence of 10% unemployment means a lot of people are going to be upset no matter what anybody does. If I have no job, I'm not going to be happy with any activity in Washington until I have a job. Because of the unemployment picture several concerns surface that with lower unemployment would be less likely to create as much anger. People feel the government is spending too much money. They see the spending as creating debt for themselves and their children that is unacceptable. Bailouts are a problem because again, they have not helped the man on the street. Government has helped out banks and the wealthy, but ordinary people are still suffering. Health care has been trashed unfairly by too many politicians, but the arguments have resonance because however good an idea it might be, it is hard to see how it will help people find work. It is another indication that government is spending time on the wrong issues. When the unseemly wheeling and dealing to get health care passed is added to the equation, anger grows and government is blamed.

I disagree with the interpretation of just about every issue cited in the previous paragraph. I believe Republicans have distorted realities and stirred up poeple to come to conclusions which I don't believe are supported by the actual facts. Yet, the fact that I feel that way means nothing. I believe the previous paragraph reflects where a large part of the country is right now. Is it a majority? Not yet. It is more likely closer to the national split we have developed in this country since at least the Clinton presidency. The important point is it would be a terrible mistake for the Democrats to write-off Massachusettes as an unfortunate anomaly and try to move forward with business as usual.

What to do? I continue to believe the biggest failure of the Obama administration has been its inability to talk to the people about his agenda and convey its importance and why it is expected to produce positive results. I believed from the inauguration that Obama needed to begin something like Roosevelt's fireside chats and attempt to explain his plans in ways that really connect with the American people. While his inspirational rhetoric was instrumental in getting him elected, I believe at this point it may well be counterproductive. The fact that it can be dismissed with such disturbing slogans as 'even Hitler gave good speeches' should give one pause. Inspiration is good, but people need to believe that there is a meaningful plan that sounds like it could actually work.

What to do about health care? I continue to believe that despite the fact that the climate out there has changed, it is still imperative to pass a bill and get health care off the stage. In addition to everything I said in an earlier paragraph there is the feeling that government just isn't working. Of course that is because Republicans are being obstructionist, but nobody cares about that. Obama is the president, and he has a Democratic congress. It is his job to get something done. At the moment that something is health care. If some don't like it, and if additional deals need to be struck to pass it, so be it. It will add to the disgruntlement of some. However, it will create an achievement, and a passed health care bill will look a lot better than a failed bill in terms of government working.

Is there life after health care? Financial reform is critical. With the changed climate it would be a good time to bring Republicans and Democrats together to craft a bipartisan bill that can pass. It likely will not be what Democrats would produce on their own, but now is the time to reintroduce the concept of bipartisanship and find at least some Republicans willing to come on board. A lot of issues such as immmigration and energy may have to be scaled back or altered to account for new realities on the ground, but Democrats must show that they understand what people are feeling even if they believe their point of view represents a distortion.

Spending money is probably the clearest example of where the administration needs a new tack. How does one explain convincingly to voters that we share their concern about specnding and have every intention of reducing spending but that what has been spent so far and what may yet need to be spent are critical to the survival of the economy? Maybe better statistics will show the role the stimulus has had in averting a depression. Maybe evidence of how spent dollars have made a difference for individuals and families needs to be highlighted. Maybe also some honest admissions of spending that has gone awry and has been inappropriate may also be helpful. But spending, the economy, and jobs are front ansd center now, and I believe the selling job for what has been done and still needs to be done is as important or more important the any specific programs that may be implemented.

Finally, the left wing of the Democratic party needs to get on board and support this president. They need to recognize that some of their goals, however laudable, are simply not doable in the political climate of today. Masachusettes should teach that if it teaches anything. Those who think the answer is to propose more radical solutions are in league with those Republicans who believe the more conservative they become the more likely they will win. I believe the evidence shows this country can only be governed from the center. The squabble among Demograts has only served to further the confusion among voters as to whether the Obama program can really be positive if so many members of his own party are not supportive. The presidency of Ronald Reagan is a prime example. He did not govern as an all out conservative, especially on social issues. Yet conservatives supported him without question and he was able to implement a great deal of his agenda. Liberal Democrats can do no less for President Obama.

Bottom line - we have an electorate that is not convinced that the current program is the right one for progress in our country today. If Democrats continue to believe that by and large the president has the right formula for success, they need to figure out a better way to convey the importance of that agenda to the American people. Nothing succeeds like success, so progress and passing some of these program elements such as health care will be critically important. Equally important, however, is helping those disaffected voters understand just why this agenda is so vital and needs to be enacted during the next three years.