Archives for Drew McKissick

A New Conservative Strategy for the Culture Wars

culture1There’s an old saying that you can’t control what other people do or don’t do, but only what you do. It’s true in politics as with most other things in life.

For decades conservatives have lost ground in the fight over religious liberty, primarily via our nation’s courts. But you can’t blame liberals for fighting in venues that play to their strengths (liberal judges), and avoids their weaknesses (public opinion). How conservatives “feel” about it however won’t change anything. Only raw political power does that.

For opinion to become political power it must be focused and organized, and currently for conservatives it’s not. We are scattered all around, constantly fighting defensive actions on numerous issues, rather than going on offense. And given that you can’t win on defense, that’s a recipe for long-term defeat.

Clearly we need a change in strategy, but how to go about it? The recent string of pro-life victories in the abortion debate points the way.

Thanks to technology, it is now possible to view an unborn child in the womb at an extremely early stage of development. And it is becoming more understood that, yes, they are capable of feeling pain, moving the practice of abortion closer to infanticide in the minds of many. The result is that people in the mushy middle of public opinion are becoming more likely to either oppose it, or at least support increasing restrictions on it simply because it is easier to view the unborn child as a victim.

That’s why polls show that younger voter groups are becoming pro-life in greater numbers than other age groups. They’re more liberty conscious; which presents a problem for liberals and an opportunity for conservatives.

Victimhood is the sweet spot in American politics, and liberals have effectively milked it to change our culture for decades. Supporters of gay marriage have worked to legalize such marriages in over a dozen states by casting themselves as the “victims” of bigoted traditionalists, so much so that five members of the Supreme Court recently got in on the act. But whether it’s mandates for abortion coverage under Obamacare, civil penalties for refusing to recognize gay marriages, or branding religious speech as “hate speech”, it’s clear that religious Americans are becoming the victims of government policies.

To effectively fight back there needs to be a rallying point; a specific call to action that conservatives could use as a focal point for messaging, tactics and organization. And politically, it needs to be something that could pull in the mushy moderates who tend to sit on the fence in such debates.

Focusing on “liberty” turns the current frame of the debate upside down and places the focus back where it belongs; on the people whose rights are being threatened and sometimes outright denied. It provides an overarching cause that ties all of these issues together, and offers an outlet that conservatives can focus on and directly see how it can impact the freedoms they are concerned about.

It’s time to begin pushing local and state lawmakers to amend or pass laws and state constitutional amendments to defend religious freedoms in everyday life.

Since the First Amendment is obviously no longer enough, it’s time to call for passage of a more specific religious freedom amendment to the US Constitution; to demand that state legislatures adopt resolutions calling on Congress to support such an amendment, and to pressure members of Congress to act on it.

Politically, it’s important to act while nerves are still raw and such abuses continue to grab headlines and percolate through the legal system. We can’t wait until after the anger dies down or for people to get used to being unable to live out their faith.

We’ve been down that road before with the Defense of Marriage Act.

Democrats supported DOMA in 1996 as a way to short circuit momentum for a constitutional amendment on the subject and give them an opportunity to vote “for” traditional marriage before the elections that year. All the while they were quietly hoping for a Supreme Court ruling to one day strike it down.

That strategy paid off earlier this year. And that’s why nothing less than a constitutional amendment on the subject of religious liberty will do today.

Political battles are all about ground, meaning wisely choosing where you fight, and controlling the debate as well as the language that is used in the debate. Focusing on religious liberty as an umbrella cause in the culture wars gives conservatives that opportunity.

It’s time to stop complaining about what the other side is doing and get busy.

How Did that Idiot Get Elected? (Impact of Apathy in Politics)

apathy in politicsEver sit at home and watch the evening news or read the paper and see a story about some elected official who does something so incredibly stupid that it makes you mutter (or yell) to yourself, “How did that idiot get elected?”  If so, you’re not alone.

So how did they get that job?  The short answer is usually, “he (or she) showed up” – plus “apathy”.

  • They went to the meetings nobody else wanted to go to.
  • They volunteered to do the things nobody else would do.
  • They were then asked to serve on some committee.
  • Eventually they were put in charge of something because there were so few people willing to do anything.
  • When that vacancy for school board or some other commission opened up, there they were.  Somebody decided they should get promoted (or just wanted to get them out of the job they were in to be rid of them).
  • When a city or county council seat opened up, there they were.
  • Then it was the state legislature…and before you know it, they’re a congressman, governor…or even President.

The Result of Apathy in Politics

It’s sort of a political version of the “Peter Principle“, which states that “employees tend to rise to their level of incompetence”.  I call it the “Unified Theory of Political Incompetence”: people in politics rise beyond their level of incompetence due to the apathy of others.

Apathy in politics is why only around sixty percent of the people in our country register to vote, and about half of those bother to vote in the average election.  Fewer still will vote in primaries, local or special elections.  And only a fraction of those people bother to participate any further, which leaves political parties and other civic groups starved for participation.

Politics, like everything else in nature, abhors a vacuum.  Of course suffering under incompetence is one thing, but it can be worse.  As Edmund Burke put it, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing”.

“Apathy plus showing up” is not a formula for good leadership.

Everyone started somewhere.  Whether we like it or not, the lower ranks of American politics serve as the “farm team”.

Don’t abandon the lower ranks to idiots and you’ll have less to complain about.

Obamacare Promises vs Reality

obamacare promises vs realityLike some cheesy infomercial that tries to convince you of how great its product is, the Obama administration continues to tell us about the wonders of Obamacare.  But a critical difference between Obamacare and the “as seen on TV” product is that the sales number and website for the latter always works, (even if the product doesn’t).

That’s the first insult of the government’s healthcare site: it can’t competently sell you what you’re being forced to buy.

So, how did we get here? Because Obama and other Democrats made political promises that were necessary in order for the bill to have any chance of becoming law. Promises that turned out to be, shall we say, slightly less reliable than the standard infomercial.

Let’s review:

Promise: “If you like your health care plan, you can keep it”. Reality: you can’t keep your insurance plan if it is cancelled because the government tells your insurance company that it doesn’t comply with new regulations, or if your employer stops providing it because those regulations make the costs go up. In fact if you like your job you may not be able to keep it either – especially if your employer needs to drop enough employees to avoid higher costs; or you may lose hours on the job (and thus income) so as not to be deemed a full-time employee.

Promise: “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor”. Reality: not if he quits because of the costs and complications of the law, or if your “new” insurance plan doesn’t include your doctor in it’s network of approved providers.

Promise: Obamacare’s would not cover abortion. This was such a huge debate that there were several dozen pro-life Democrats who refused to support the bill until changes were made to guarantee abortion would not be covered. Reality: it does, because HHS regulations require that insurance plans cover prescriptions for abortion inducing medications – a regulation that even applies to religious organizations.

Promise: Congress will have to abide by it too. The bill required that members of Congress would have to live under the same rules that they were passing for the rest of us. Reality: Obama granted Congress a waiver, which he doesn’t have the power to do, (but what’s that between friends?). It really does make you wonder why we need to get so worked up over this business of passing laws if they don’t actually mean anything.

Promise: It will lower costs. Reality: most people are seeing increases in monthly premiums, even after government subsidies. And any plans that are actually cheaper come by way of narrowing the networks of hospitals and doctors you can use, or by raising your out-of-pocket expenses.

Promise: It will be easy! Per Obama, “It’s a website where you can compare and purchase affordable health insurance plans, side-by-side, the same way you shop for a plane ticket on Kayak – or the same way you shop for a TV on Amazon”. Reality: not so much. Three years and over half a billion tax dollars later, the government serves up a website that no one can use if they need to buy the insurance that the law says they must have.

Many Republicans have been worried that if Americans become accustomed to Obamacare, we will never get rid of it. A reasonable fear, when it comes to the political consequences of government programs, and precisely what Democrats hoped when they got bold enough to pass it despite never having the support of a majority of the American people. But the reality seems to be that Obamacare will be a political hobgoblin that will haunt Democrats for years to come.

This isn’t just a run-of-the-mill government program. It covers one-sixth of the US economy, and an area that is extremely personal to every American. That means lots of political exposure for Democrats – and lots of opportunities for Republicans.

It’s an ironclad rule of politics that things behind the scenes are much worse than they are presented to the public. Applied to Obamacare, this leaves many Democrats more nervous than they let on. But despite its flaws, Republicans in Congress will never help “fix it”. As they say in NASCAR, Democrats will have to “run what they’ve brought to the track”.

In the end, Obamacare may be a “bridge too far” for big government liberalism. It’s a failure that could ONLY come from government, and it puts a bright spotlight on the limitations of big government for our increasing number of “low information” voters to see.

As Margaret Thatcher once said, “First you win the argument, then you win the vote”. During the next few months conservatives should focus on the realities of Obamacare; to build and control the narrative while it’s still being written. This will provide all the argument we need to “win the vote” on this and many other issues in the future.

Undermining faith in big government will be a bonus.