Posted by So, I finally decided to give it a try. This is my first attempt at a serious (or not so serious) blog. As we gear up for the 2010 elections, I thought that it might be useful, helpful, or just plain fun to contribute to Doc’s Political Parlor. I have been accessing “Doc” for quite awhile and have come to rely on him for some of the best political intelligence there is for Alabama.
“The Purple Dot Connection” is my effort to have a conversation about politics which relies on civil discourse. I hope that does not mean it has to be boring. To be honest, I’ve had it with the far left and the far right. County-by-county analysis of the 2008 election showed America, including Alabama, looked a lot more purple than “red” or “blue.” I came away thinking America just might be on the road to some great times. But 2009 has been anything but that. Granted, we have been through a lot: recession bordering on depression, TARP—a bailout for the big guys; an enormous amount of stimulus money that does not seem to exist anywhere; the probability of double-digit unemployment; healthcare reform which has been difficult not only to understand but also to swallow; and not to minimize the war in Iraq, a continuing and perhaps permanent war in Afghanistan. The dialogue surrounding these issues is anything but purple.
Let me play professor for just a minute … A few years ago, E. J. Dionne wrote a wonderful book, Why Americans Hate Politics. His thesis was simple. Politicians want to talk about issues. We want to talk about solving problems. The truth about Americans, even Alabamians, is that most of us are a little left of center or a little right of center. The center moves from time to time, but very few people are on the very far right or the very far left. However, to be nominated by one’s political party, whether for a state legislative seat or the Presidency, the candidate must earn the support of people on the far ends of their respective parties. They’re the ones who fund campaigns; they’re the ones who vote in primaries. So, strident candidates from both party camps go on to compete in November. Most of us lining up to vote end up saying, “Who are these guys?” [And we know that most of them are “guys.”] “What’s in it for me?”
When you begin to take on the kinds of problems we face, we know the stakes are high. That’s why health care reform is so hot. Afghanistan? Serious stuff. Appeals to the extremes, to our worst instincts, are not what we need. That does not mean we abandon principles. It does not mean that we give up on great ideas. What it means is that we approach these problems not from the point of view of FOX News or MSNBC, but in a way that demonstrates respect for those who might not share these principles or big ideas. I’ll quit preaching.
My effort, (and we’ll see how long it lasts) is to try to steer to the middle. I’ll lay my cards on the table. I am a little left of center. If I get too far out there, I know you will reign me back in. But I hope to raise some issues and talk about politics in a way that suggests we can all be part of one conversation.
And we have a lot to talk about. This blog is going to focus on both national and state politics. We may have an historic election in 2010, right here in Alabama. All of the constitutional offices are up, every legislative seat is up, at least three supreme court seats will be on the ballot, county commission races, not to mention BINGO! Jefferson County in bankruptcy? A Birmingham mayor to be tried? It doesn’t get better than that.
And, we’ll be looking at some of the most interesting issues and races across the country. Will the 2010 Congressional elections resemble 1994? Republicans certainly hope so. Is it possible that Democrats may exceed sixty seats in the Senate. It’s too early to tell, but it’s a lot fun to speculate.
If there is a topic you want to talk about, just say so–but I’ll get us going in a couple of days. Hope this works. So, for the time being, let’s think purple.
Disclaimer: This blog reflects the views of its author and not in any way the views of Birmingham-Southern College.
Legislative Dispatch
Purple Dot Connection
2010 Big List
2010 Senate Elections
2010 House Elections
Press Releases
Dr. Davis,
Good to see you here. I never got to take a class with you for the better part of a decade that I was at Southern, but always wanted to. My PolySci friends all loved you, and I’ve enjoyed seeing/hearing your commentary in the media. Good luck with the blog. I’ll be following it.
Madison
Welcome! This is going to be fun! You have an excellent writing style.
There is certainly no question that our political discourse is far from civil, and I agree that all sides should show much more respect, but at the moment I think the far right is much more to blame than the far left. Let’s take health reform, for example. How is the far left controlling anything? A single payer system isn’t even on the table. Democrats are fighting fellow Democrats just to get some form of a public option. And a public option is hardly a far left proposal, as a strong majority of Americans support it (in June, 72 percent of the American people supported a government-run insurance plan, similar to Medicare). Regardless of how far the left moves to the center (or purple), oftentimes while sacrificing principles, it does little to promote civil discourse or to reach compromise with the right. And how can we expect any type of civil discourse when some of the strongest voices in the Republican Party celebrate when an American city loses its Olympic bid, bash the President for winning the Nobel Peace Prize, and question whether the President was born in the United States?
In terms of the specific comment about the stimulus package, I concede that much of the money has still not reached communities, as it takes a long time for federal dollars to go through all the various channels, particularly when there is accountability attached. However, I think it is critically important to recognize the many positives (often not reported in the media) that have resulted from the stimulus package, including the fact that it’s kept over 6 million Americans out of poverty. A great analysis is available here http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=2910. Quite the significant accomplishment, to say the least.
Doc,
First off I want to say welcome, and that I look forward to future posts.
No on to the civil discourse…
Webb,
Lets be civil. The spending bill, aka, The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, was simply a government appropration to government programs. Yes, there were “credits” littered throughout which would encourage spending. As a tax payer I saw many of these things as an attempt to encourage me to spend by providing tax payer funded discounts on select items. This form of stimulus will show sales short term, but does nothing long term to increase consumer confidence.
Cash for Clunkers is a prime example of short-lived “stimulus” for a contracting market. There was a nice short term boost to auto sales, immediately followed by a month of minimal sales. An alternative
would be to cut income tax rates, or cut payroll tax rates. Remove the new construction taxes which went into effect this year [why institute a tax on an industry that is contracting--sounds like poor fiscal policy to me]. Regardless of your stance on Left Wingers vs Right Wingers and who is to blame, both are equally destroying this country. In the game of politics what seems like a schism to the general population is often ametuer theatre at best. Anamosity towards one’s political rival makes for good entertainment when people are looking for action, and the art of “one-up-manship” is alive and well.
As for keeping 6 million Americans out of poverty, I ask the same question I always do, poverty by whos standard? And when the same goverment that is causing market contraction provides the relief to those millions at the expense of future generations can you really call it salvation?
Good points, Tom. While we probably disagree about a number of elements of ARRA, I think you’re absolutely right that some of the provisions (Cash for Clunkers, first-time homebuyers’ tax credit, and others) provide short-term incentives but may do little to increase consumer confidence and boost the economy after those programs expire. I go back and forth on whether that’s a good or a bad thing. In some ways those programs had the intended “stimulative” effect, but it’s definitely a legitimate question as to whether it was/is worth it.
In terms of the poverty question, the standard is the official federal poverty line, which of course has all sorts of problems, but at the moment is how the Census Bureau calculates the poverty rate, and how some federal agencies determine who is eligible for benefits. During a recession – or really any time – low income people suffer the most, and I think the extent to which ARRA – through both tax credits and federal programs like food stamps and unemployment compensation – can alleviate that suffering then all the better.
Thank you Dr. Davis for your effort. Civil discourse is something I have been discussing for a long time on my site as well (The World Around You).
There is room to have differing opinions, but back up your opinions with facts and be willing to listen to the other side. I also believe there is much value in getting away from talking about the “games” and focusing on policy. Policy is politics.
This should be an interesting addition to Doc’s Political Parlor. I hope the comments posted are not only civil, but not frivolous as well (as many posts on many political blogs seem to be when people can post comments under assumed names or anonymously….including Doc’s). I look forward to following this addition and extend my welcome to Dr. Davis.
Natalie!
So good to see you on the Parlor… I miss hearing your perspective on a regular basis. Discourse on politics is definitely more civil when your voice is in the mix.
-RB
No one who calls an E.J. Dionne book “wonderful” is purple. My guess is you’re full-on blue. But I understand that liberals calling themselves anything but liberal is a time-honored tradition.
Thanks to all of you who have already left a comment. I’ll try to be responsive–
On the stimulus, I know the WH gurus have to be thinking that it’s not enough that they may have saved X number of teacher jobs, etc. There needs to be come $$$ out there showing that some folks have to be hired. What happened to all of that infrastructure talk.
I saw Jim Cramer on something last night saying that he thought unemployment had peaked and that we would not get to 10%. Does anyone know whether he’s an outlier on this?
To rivlax,
Do you think E.J. is wrong on this point?
Natalie, good to have you blogging on this site. I look forward to reading your posts and enjoying the good dialogue!!
Welcome and I too look forward to your coming posts.
However, let’s be clear and open for on minute about discourse in the country. Discourse means two or more sides working toward a common understanding or resolution. Discourse does not mean one side lying, cheating, stealing, breaking laws or otherwise doing and/ or saying whatever crosses their infintile brain while the other side stays silent, concedes or simply shirks way from pushing back in order to keep the peace.
So are we talking about politics or discourse?
Great to see your debut in a new media. Hope to see more. I’d be happy to help out if you need any.
On the employment situation, Bureau of Labor Statistics, shows Cramer is an outlier.
Sporting goods and groceries appear the safest investments about now.
WOW! I didn’t expect such a great response. Let me just say that I appreciate your positive welcome. I just came from a monthly get together of friends, all of whom are women, and we were talkng about Artur Davis’s vote on the Defense appropriation bill with the hate crimes amendment. Many saw the vote as a little ingenuous–the Congressman can say his vote was to see to the security needs of our country and to support our troops AND, at the same time, wink to the gay community–given that he voted against hate crimes legislation in the past. What do you think?
Many in Alabama will view Artur’s “wink” to the gay community as more of an all out embrace. The “wink” will most likely be brought up as a move towards the far left, which will not bode well for Artur in Alabama.
Wouldn’t call it ingenious.
#17- anon has a good point, there is already some cannon fodder out there regarding the “wink”, and the discussion is likely to continue in some less than urbane circles.
Natalie, great qusstion on the infrastructure talk… I have seen this as a way to sway general support. It was one of the primary talking/selling points of the stimulus bill, but accounted for a rather small part in the end. To me, and I am a layman, the stimulus was more of an after the fact coping package as opposed to a preventitive measure or correction to problems. I bleed red on tax cut issues, I think they often can encourage business where other things may hinder it.
I didn’t stay in a holiday inn last night, and I’m not a fiscal policy maker, but play a few games of sim city and you find that tax policy is key to encouraging new markets and discouraging those which lower the quality of life. Think in terms of a “Porn” tax or “Gambling” tax. If the fees are set high enough, those markets will never materialize as it is difficult to remain profitable. Now before you say I’m a “tax and spender”, replace porn with “construction”, and Gambling with “payroll” and you’ll see my true point. These markets are limited by high taxes which are all to often used to pay for non-associated programs that due to poor management and unclear intent never provide a net positive in the market.
Anyone up for some coffee?
Great opening post, Natalie. Nice to see you doing this. Good luck.
Looking forward to reading more!
Oh my gosh someone who is trying to make sense of this mess… I am fed up with both sides.. and so look forward to hearing more from you.