Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2006 > September > 11 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USPoliticians can still be honest, effective
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The first order of business in a political campaign, it now seems patently clear, is to convince the public that the other guy’s a crook. It feeds the cynicism of the times.
Barring some dramatic shift in public perception, Gov. Sonny Perdue will be re-elected. People like him and believe, for good reason, that he’s done a good job. His efforts are modernizing the state’s day-to-day business affairs, the humdrum stuff that has no political benefit whatsoever but is absolutely vital to a state that has grown the way country houses used to — one tacked-on addition at a time.
The state has long needed somebody to tend to the dull stuff: counting the cars, locating property, consolidating the leases, managing properties to lower costs, planning for the transition of a state work force that will lose to retirement 25 percent of its experienced employees over the next five years. If it’s done really well, nobody notices.
Though Perdue is Georgia’s first Republican governor, there’s been no upheaval. As James R. Lientz Jr., his chief operating officer, noted recently, 90 percent of the governor’s top staff has been recruited from the private sector and from other governments on the basis of national searches. “We have done this without fanfare, and there has been no bloodletting.” It is a diverse group, he said; “but we hired the best individual talent without regard to race and gender.”
The point is that Georgians never bounce elected officials they like and perceive to be doing a good job. Perdue comes across as competent and likable, a grandfatherly figure who projects warmth. Politicians like that don’t lose.
Ah, but corrupt politicians do.
This is the year when the Democratic master plan nationally was to run against a “culture of corruption” as exemplified by corporate scandal, lobbyist Jack Abramoff, Duke Cunningham and the general smear that Big Oil and Halliburton had undue influence in the Bush administration. But that strategy fell on hard times when U.S. Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.) was caught on videotape accepting $100,000 from an FBI informant, cash later found hidden in the freezer of his New Orleans home.
So how do you defeat a grandfatherly figure people like? By throwing him into the “culture of corruption” mix.
It’s the strategy that, I’m convinced, was employed against President Bush after Hurricane Katrina. The Federal Emergency Management Agency is always slow in its response to disasters. Moving substantial quantities of relief supplies quickly through devastation is slow business.
Bush’s strength, like Perdue’s, is that people like him and think his administration is competent. How to beat him? Convince the public that his administration’s not competent. So the usual slowness, combined with the utter failing of state and local officials, set the stage for the avalanche of criticism targeting Bush.
Perdue is not vulnerable there. In fact, though Katrina was not his disaster, he responded admirably, demonstrating both compassion and competence in dealing with evacuees.
The only opening opponents have, therefore, is to somehow convince voters that Perdue’s corrupt. The problem, however, is that he hasn’t been shown to have done anything scandalous. He sold inherited land and invested the proceeds out of state. That was done, he said, to avoid the charge that a decision he made or influenced as governor could affect a personal investment.
He deferred federal taxes by taking advantage of a provision of federal tax law that goes back 20 years. Democrats believe, but have not yet nailed the case, that he deferred state capital gains taxes improperly through routine state tax legislation altered in legislative committee for Perdue’s benefit.
The problem with Perdue’s transaction, and with Republican charges that Lt. Gov. Mark Taylor’s family has improperly benefited from property leases with the state, is that they don’t yet smell. In Taylor’s case, leases are competitively priced, and there’s no evidence that they were awarded on the basis of insider dealing or favoritism.
Like Perdue’s land transactions, they’re fair game for reporting and most assuredly ought to be brought into the open. But the case is not yet made that there’s anything improper about either.
One’s launched in desperation. The other’s tit-for-tat. Both feed the cynicism of the times.
Permalink | Comments (24) | Post your comment | Categories: Column
Comments
By jbmlaw
September 12, 2006 08:13 AM | Link to this
Good morning, all. I’m not certain the “anything is corruption” template works any more, and I doubt it ever worked below the Federal level. In the past 20 years we had two seismic shifts at the Federal level – the 1994 Republican takeover of the House of Representatives, and the Republican Senate takeover in the 2002 off-year election (unprecedented for a party controlling the presidency.) Neither of those shifts can be reasonably attributed to “corruption.”
The 1994 election was dominated by Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America” – by any measure a positive platform, not one that condemned Democrats. (Although, admittedly, the Democrats did themselves no favor by pushing a government takeover of the health care industry before the election.) The 2002 shift was entirely attributable to (1) obstructionism by the left in approval of judges and in (2) the appearance of the left obstructing the public needs in favor of Big Labor in the DHS set up. (The dems always pass their Great Lie about someone challenging Max Cleland’s patriotism, but that is patently phony – you will never find anyone who voted against Cleland for Cleland’s “lack of patriotism.” We all voted against that otherwise decent fellow because he was drinking Daschle’s DHS/Labor kool-aid, strictly a vote against his judgment on a critical matter.)
My guess is that this year’s Federal elections will turn, again, on the issue of the war against terrorism. If the terrorists attack again, the Republicans will do well, as the Democrats portray Republicans as playing fast and loose with Constitutional rights – the Republicans will justifiably be able to say the Democrats would undermine the efforts by providing protections to international terrorists. On the other hand, if there is no attack, the Democrats will do well, by pressing their “unnecessary actions” arguments; the Republicans will be perceived as selling “elephant stampede” insurance.
By Jim Wooten
September 12, 2006 08:53 AM | Link to this
Sorry for the confusion here. A new blog topic has been posted following up on yesterday’s conversation.
By E. Lewis
September 12, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this
Only if we the voter allow them to be. Voters must accept some of the blame for the mess that our political system is in.
We will vote for politician who promise not smart taxes, but to lower them while giving us all the necessary services. Telling the voters that in order to cut taxes we have to cut popular programs that they benefit from even if others don’t is political suicide.
We get most of our political information from the television. This leads to very expensive ads. Unfortunately, most voters don’t do even the most basic of research nor most of us verify anything.
We must assume some of the blame for negative campaigns because, in large part, they work. BTW we all live in glass houses.
When was the last time we voted for a politician who actually made us sacrifice?
By Dusty
September 12, 2006 09:18 AM | Link to this
I think it is a bit sad to examine the title of this editorial. We might precede this title with “Although most politicians seem corrupt, they can still be honest, effective.” Isn’t that what is assumed when we read the heading here? That is the sad part.
Wooten goes on to applaud the honesty of Gov. Perdue. It is right that he should do so. Obviously, Jim believes that there is an effort to make the governor look like he is making profitable, suspicious land deals. And who is doing that? The organizers and promoters of the opposing party.
Thus we come to the methods of current political organizations. Honest politicians will have to see that their own efforts at the party level are as honest as they are. It will be a difficult effort. Just look at the current levels of mud-slinging at all levels from local to national.
So politicians can be honest, effective but they must insist that their party’s efforts are also honest and ethical. I hope it is possible.
By Georgia Gal
September 12, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this
It has become much easier to trounce your opponent than to pull out your record and tell what you have done and project your plans for the future to solve problems of our day. Both parties are guilty of the mud slinging and the voter’s apathy has allowed the political process to become so nasty. We need to figure some way to get back to the old fashioned “platform” where the politician tells us what he/she has been doing for us and how he/she is going to make a difference in the future. How to do that? I don’t know but most of you folks are a whole lot smarter than I and I am hoping you have some ideas! Perhaps one way would be to turn out for some of these campaign appearances and ask the hard questions: what are you going to do about farm families having to sell the farm to pay the inheritence taxes when the patriarch dies?, how do you plan to handle ILLEGAL aliens? are you smart enough to know that the “evil rich” are the ones who provide jobs if they aren’t taxed to death? And on and on and on with whatever your issues might be. I believe the key to getting the political process back to what it should be is for the voter to take control once again!
By Barbara
September 12, 2006 10:01 AM | Link to this
Well said Georgia Gal.
By Captain Freedom
September 12, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this
Good morning Jim,
To be sure, Our Leader is well-liked and his administration is widely known to be effective and repsonsive. That is why I am proud to count myself among the 32-38% of Americans who are willing to say so when contacted by pollsters.
However, your support of Gov. Perdue is perplexing. Twice in recent months he has gone out of his way to thwart and insult Fearless George. This disloyal — yea, even traitorous — opposition to our Leader and Protector is unconscionable.
But then again, I can only agree when you point out the mendacity of all Dumbocrats by highlighting the thievery of Rep. Jefferson. This example more than outweighs the mild infamy brought upon Replublicans through the minor offenses of people like Abramoff, Ney, Noe, Scanlon, Cunningham, Rep. Jerry Lewis, Katherine Harris, Ralph Reed, and Claude Allen.
By Captain Freedom
September 12, 2006 10:23 AM | Link to this
Sorry, I forgot to mention David Safavian and Scooter Libby. Not that their accidental missteps proves a damn thing, and I resent any implaction to the contrary.
By Captain Freedom
September 12, 2006 10:25 AM | Link to this
Sorry, I meant IMPLICATION. It’s just that I get so upset when people impugn the inherent moral integrity of Republicans that my Keyborad Mastery goes to pieces.
I need to rest now. Markus, BM Law, please pick up the flag and defend our True Belief.
By Chazman
September 12, 2006 10:49 AM | Link to this
Is Captain Freedom for real? Including Abramoff and minor offenses in the same sentence?
By Middle America
September 12, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this
I agree that Sonny Perdue has been a good governor. He did a couple of things I liked. Balancing the budget is a big deal in my book. And even though it appeared as though he was going to revert the state flag back to the stars and bars, he made a compromise and GA’s flag now recognizes it’s confederate heritage, just not with the symbol most often associated with hate groups like the KKK. I didn’t mind the Barnes flag, but as long as it isn’t the bad one, we can all move along to more important issues. As a Democrat, I haven’t heard anything from Mark Taylor that is worth bumping Perdue for, yet.
To the topic of painting politicians as corrupt or incompetent. If you are a good steward of the responsibilities afforded you by your constituents, no one will be able to label you. But let’s not pretend that all these allegations are false. I doubt Tom DeLay would have resigned his seat, and not attempted re-election, if he knew he was innocent and could prove it. He isn’t a victim of some leftist witchhunt, he had real ties to Jack Abramoff, who was indicted by the Justice Dept. Bush controls who runs the DOJ, not Democrats. So can we all at least say DeLay has some fair questions to answer? As for Bush’s incompetence, even members of his own party admit that Iraq has been mishandled. Whether you agree with the premise of the war or not or whether you want us to get out of Iraq or not, you have to admit things haven’t gone well. In 1990, we had 500,000 troops ready, and not necessarily for the purposes of taking Baghdad. Colin Powell believed in overwhelming force. He no longer serves at the pleasure of the President. Rumsfeld didn’t think 130,000 was too small a force for securing the entire country. But he stills serves at the pleasure of the President. I don’t see asking for a change at the DOD as a partisan issue. We need people who aren’t too arrogant to make changes, when changes are necessary.
By Chazman
September 12, 2006 11:04 AM | Link to this
Well said MA…DeLay isn’t the devil, but a tough politician like him wouldn’t walk away unless there is a reason. When I think of DeLay, I think of a fighter - a tough fighter. However, I think it is apparent he knows he was getting into a fight he could not win.
By KP
September 12, 2006 11:50 AM | Link to this
People like Bush and think his administration is competent???? Sure you jest! Jim please coome out of the Republican tinged world that makes you believe everythings OK with this president and his admin.
Anyway, you’re right about Perdue. I think he’s done an admirable job as Gov of GA. And that’s how I vote; on the basis of ideas and accomplishments, not party lines. As an independent, I try very hard not to fall into believing the mudslinging without researching it myself first.
I just wish everyone voted that way. Sigh….
By Eric
September 12, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this
Politicians are like septic tanks, even the ones that are somewhat efficient stink and are full of sh*t
By Shooter
September 12, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this
Sure politicians can be hones,but its not likly. but the ones that are makes it worthwhile.
By MrLiberty
September 12, 2006 12:55 PM | Link to this
The only time you can trust that a politician is being honest is when he says he is lying.
What the founding fathers gave us was a federal government with so little power that it hardly mattered if there was corruption. It barely impacted the average man, didn’t involve his income, didn’t involve his property, didn’t require him to give up his life, etc. These were once values that conservatives supported.
With the way things are now set up, there is almost a virtual guarantee that there will be corruption. Now that the government controls the media, you can also be sure that virtually none of it will ever be uncovered.
But americans are so stupid that they continue to press for more and bigger government, but somehow with the controls so that these corruption issues won’t come up again. How ignorant they are of history or the nature of power.
It seems that only the libertarians have it right, but americans just aren’t ready to deal with freedom and liberty right now. They are too busy embracing socialism, totalitarianism, and fascism. Pity.
By Fall Line
September 12, 2006 01:36 PM | Link to this
The first responsibility a politician has to his constituency is to become elected. Without that, his platform is meaningless. Do you want to know what Perdue has done for the state? Then pay attention to his “Sonny Did” campaign ads. He is running on his record. The Taylor campaign is so far behind and his record is so sketchy that he has to resort to mud-slinging to grab a toehold in the minds of the electorate. Taylor epitomizes the old obstructionist, do nothing state house under Thomas B. Murphy.
Stand back everybody, the mud is starting to fly.
By dahreese
September 12, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this
When all is said and done, there’s still nobody to vote for as governor. It’s too bad that we never have a place on the ballot to indicate that. I think it’s because both political machines are scared of what the public really thinks.
By peter
September 12, 2006 04:26 PM | Link to this
HA HA HA Jim Wooten………Gee if the president isn’t honest……why should anyone expect the rest to be so……
By peter
September 12, 2006 05:41 PM | Link to this
HA HA HA Jim Wooten…….When the president is dishonest about policy, why expect any politician to tell the truth!
By Mark
September 13, 2006 08:57 AM | Link to this
Finally, (part of) a colum I can agree with. Yes, indeed, Perdue has done a fine job and I’m glad he’ll likely be our governor for a while longer. I’ve had the pleasure of meeting him a couple of times and he’s a terrific fellow and a good leader and advocate for our state.
But people liking Bush? I’d don’t know anyone who would do so much as cross a room to shake his hand. He’s a terrible person and a terrible president and he’s done more damage to this country than any president I can think of.
Go Sonny! Impeach Buch!
By Chazman
September 13, 2006 09:31 AM | Link to this
I don’t agree with Wooten that Democrats have a master plan nationaly to run against a “culture of corruption”. I think the opportunity, or the circumstances, are there and you automatically go with that. The democrats naturally use that as an issue just like republicans did with Clinton’s troubles or democrats troubles in the past. Things happen and the opposing party goes with it because it’s out there in the open. It’s not like there wasn’t corporate scandal, or that Bush’s largest campaign contributer wasn’t convicted, or that Abramoff & Cunningham aren’t going to prison, or that Halliburton hasn’t ripped off taxpayers with overcharges and poor service, or that Cheney just happen to work for them and they received a huge no bid contract. These weren’t the fault of Democrats. Nor do I think the strategy “fell on hard times” just because of William Jefferson’s troubles. The republicans have had much more ethical and legal troubles because they happen to be the party in power - for now. The fact that Jefferson was caught with $100,000 doesn’t equal out the republican woes.
By Redneck Convert
September 14, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this
All I got to say is I wouldn’t vote for Sonny if he didn’t have sense enough to pick up a free 100,000 bucks that his boys in the legislature gave him. He got it fair and square, unlike this Jefferson guy. If Jefferson had any brains, he would’ve got Congress to give him 100,000 bucks, instead of throwing out all the venison from his freezer and stuffing it with 20 dollar bills he got without any support from the boys.
The different between a stealing Democrat and a stealing Republican is that the Republican does it legal-like. Why can’t the Democrats figure out things like using lobbyists to buy things for them, paying back campaign supporters with big contracts, and giving themselves big tax cuts? Instead of being sneaky about it.
Anyway, I’m awful proud this morning to have the same opinions as BMlaw, TFTT, Markus, and Realist. It means we have the same IQ. They must have had trouble in the 5th grade too.
By Rebel Without A Pause
September 14, 2006 10:26 AM | Link to this
Yes, I’m going to vote for Sonny and I also voted for “W” twice. I think Sonny has done a great job. I don’t agree with a lot of “W’s” policies, especially immigration and spending and yes the repubs have had problems, but no matter what they have done or not done, they are still way ahead of anything the democraps will do.