Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Topics

Topics

The Party Platforms


 

If you are an American child on January 20th, 2001 when the next president of the United States is sworn in, what can you expect the new government to do on your behalf?

The answer, based on the two platforms unveiled this month at the Republican and Democratic conventions:

If Republicans are elected, according to the Republican National Committee platform, expect computers in your classroom and your library to be secured against pornography. Your school will enact a zero-tolerance policy toward disruptive kids, and will reinstate voluntary school prayer. You will be protected from offensive and intrusive questionnaires. When you go to sex ed, you will be protected from talk about sex; you will be offered lessons on abstinence instead. Do not expect any new supplies, library books or building improvements if the Republican platform prevails.

If the Democrats get in, you can look forward to a reading exam in fourth grade and a math exam in eighth grade to check your progress. Not to worry: your teachers will also be taking a new test. They'll have to pass a "rigorous and fair" exam before stepping foot in your classroom. If you're a four-year-old, you may be one of the lucky ones to benefit from new federal funding for preschools, and if you're an elementary school student, you may find yourself in one of the reduced class-size schoolrooms funded with federal money. Whatever your age, if the Democrat's platform prevails, your folks will be entitled to take family leave from work to go to parent-teacher conferences.

The GOP planks on education, it should be noted, have just about nothing in common with proposals coming out of Bush headquarters. Governor George W. Bush's proposals focus attention on the achievement gap between black and white students, a topic that is never mentioned in the GOP platform (or the Democratic platform, for that matter). You can see the Republican platform and the Bush proposals on-line. The Democratic platform will go on-line later this month.

Standardized tests are going to dominate your school days from now on, no matter who wins. Both Democrats and Republicans will use federal money to reward states that improve test scores and punish those that don't. Bush is more explicit than Vice President Al Gore in tying the sanctions to closing the gap between minority and white students' scores. If Bush is elected and your state fails to reduce the gap, he'll transfer money that would have gone to state bureaucrats directly to your folks. If Gore wins, he'll punish state bureaucrats by giving the money directly to schools.

It will come as no surprise that both parties want parents to create stable, prosperous homes. The Republicans will give parents, no matter what their income, a new $500-a-year child tax credit. The Democrats will raise the minimum wage and increase the amount of money parents can earn and still be eligible for the Earned Income Tax Credit.

The Republicans say they will toughen the juvenile justice system, even though there are now twice as many children serving time in adult prisons than a decade ago and every state has passed laws making it possible to try youngsters in adult courts. The Democrats are mostly silent on juvenile crime except to call for expanded drug-treatment programs for kids.

Twelve million kids -- one in six -- do not have health insurance. Both parties tried to fix this with the creation in 1997 of CHIP, the Child Health Insurance Program, which covers children from families with too much income for Medicaid and not enough for private insurance. The bottleneck seems to be at state capitals, where legislatures have been slow to draft state versions and welfare officials have been wrongfully steering working families away from benefits. The platforms of both the Democrats and Republicans pledge to do more to get children signed up.

Whether they will do what they promise is a different lesson.

Peggy J. Farber is freelance journalist specializing in children's issues. Her reporting on conditions of NYC children has appeared in City Limits Magazine as well as on National Public Radio.

In The News: The Republican National Convention


Exactly one hundred years ago, there was another Republican Convention; it too was in Philadelphia. At that time a young New York governor, Theodore Roosevelt, was nationally renowned for his leadership of the Rough Riders. At home, though, he was getting on the nerves of the Republican leadership; they felt he was not sufficiently walking the party line.

New York political bosses tried to draft Roosevelt as Vice-President in order to get rid of him; the sitting Republican President, William McKinley, didn't want Roosevelt and resented the interference.

In the end, McKinley's veto was effectively overridden by the sight of a young Teddy Roosevelt walking into the convention hall in his trademark broad-brimmed hat. It was pure political spectacle, and excitement, and anticipation, all coming together at once. The delegates went nuts, the back-room political brokering abruptly stopped. He went on to become Vice-President, and then President not long after.

This is not the kind of story that can happen in modern political conventions of either party. These days, a convention has no real conflict, not even behind the scenes. There are no real surprises. And, there isn't anything spectacular on the order of the 1900 Philadelphia convention that catapulted Roosevelt, even though the Republicans will wind up having spent something close to $50 million for the balloons and placards and the rest of the spectacle of the 2000 Philadelphia convention. Even John McCain rolling into the convention hall on his Straight Talk Express bus could not under any circumstances cause an uproarious shift in the proceedings.

The reason why the Republican convention has no conflict or surprise anymore is not because the Republican Party is made up of shiny happy people holding hands. And not because of Party discipline, or good manners, or a desire to provide the world with a united front.

The reason is that there really isn't anything to do, and nothing to fight about. The players are all in place; even the VP question was answered a week before the convention started. The few remaining social issue-type-questions have been relegated to a "Let' s Agree to Disagree" type category. So that's it. Nothing left to talk about. And that's going to be the real problem for Republican candidates across the country. Without internal struggles to decide what to stand for, political parties have no sense of identity, and very little of value to pass along to the candidates who carry their banner.

That is, after all, one of the main purposes of the convention spectacle--to provide the nation with a sense of what it means, right now, to run for office as a Republican. Or to call yourself a Republican. Or to vote Republican.

Is there a sense of political identity? The answer is, of course, yes: most Americans, even those in states with no party registration, identify themselves with one of the two major parties. But does that sense of political identity come from a pattern of voting behavior, that is, "I am a Republican because I mostly like and vote for Republicans"?

Or is it something more-"I am a Republican even though I can't stand any of the Republican candidates who have run for office in my state in the last ten years"?

Helen Fielding's new novel, Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason, is the sequel to the best seller, Bridget Jones' Diary. In the sequel, the title character Bridget is horrified to find out her new boyfriend votes Tory. As she points out, she votes Labour, because Labour stands for "the principle of sharing...kindness, single mothers and Nelson Mandela...."

It is less clear if most Republicans or Democrats in this country could describe what it means to be a big D or R. That is less of a problem for George W. Bush and Al Gore, who have the famous names and enormous warchests to go to battle over subtleties and fine distinctions.

It is more of a problem for candidates on down the ballot. Party identity is still the best determinate of voting behavior that we have. The less well-known a candidate is, the more important that candidate's affiliation becomes. Rick Lazio, the Republican running for U.S. Senate in New York, is a perfect example. Lazio has served well but without much fanfare, as a Congressman from Long Island. As a statewide candidate, running against First Lady Hillary Clinton, he had a lot of catching up to do in the name identification department. But he started the race with the solid support of those voters who wanted to cast their lot with a Republican.

Candidates running in a state like New York have to rely even more on the party label: New York is a big, diverse, populous place, and anything that automatically connects you with a whole set of social, economic, environmental and national security issues is a welcome advantage.

Whether or not voters will be able to make that connection between Republican candidates and a zeitgeist-like set of policy positions remains to be seen. Rick Lazio, and Republicans across the country, surely hope that those tuned into the events in Philadelphia will not sum it up as just a coronation of the son of a former President.

The Democratic View

by Jon Trichter

It is true that Party identification is important to Rick Lazio, since the less well-known a candidate, the more important his affiliation, and voters have yet to learn much about Lazio other than his affiliation. It is also true that Party affiliation is the best determinate of voting behavior known to both pollsters and political scientists alike. But New York is a Democratic state. When asked, the plurality of the general electorate (about 46 percent) says they are Democrats (compared to about 34 percent Republicans).

To win, then, Rick Lazio must reach beyond the majorities who vote along Party lines. By offering his own agenda, different than that offered at his Party's convention, he could break the connection between himself and some unpopular Republican positions. Only then could he hope to steal from the Democrat's majority in New York.

So far, though, Rick Lazio has been content to run an anti-Hillary campaign, void of any agenda except that of hating Hillary. While this may be enough for a core constituency of Republicans, it's not enough to attract Democrats. Until Lazio carves out his own platform, New York Democrats -- from the top down -- will stick with Hillary. After all, Lazio is no Teddy Roosevelt.

Susan Reefer is a Republican pollster and media strategist. She is based in New York City.

Advice for Taming the Dog Days of Summer


From July Fourth until Labor Day, political campaigns usually shift strategies. With most voters tuned out, candidates normally concentrate on raising money for a costly media blitz after Labor Day. But this year's New York Senate race will be different. Hillary Clinton and Rick Lazio should easily attract the necessary funds to drive their paid media efforts. They will also attract enough free media to fuel a high-octane summer battle. With both candidates polling more or less the same, in the mid-forties, Clinton and Lazio must use the summer months to their respective advantages. Here are some summer strategies for each candidate:

For Clinton

by Trichter

For months now, Hillary Clinton has been stuck at around 45 percent in the polls. While she has near-total name recognition (92 percent of the electorate are familiar enough with Hillary to offer an opinion of her), she is also viewed unfavorably by 39 percent of that same electorate. (Fifty-three percent view her favorably) These numbers reveal that there are few voters still open to her candidacy. To go above fifty percent, then, the First Lady will have to work through the summer to accomplish three strategic objectives.

(1) Move the campaign dialogue toward policy, away from politics and personality:

Hillary has a natural advantage when it comes to education. Yet, her campaign has not completely claimed the issue as their raison d' etre. This summer, they should publish policy proposals and develop press events that highlight an education theme. The policy proposals don't even need to stand up to strict scrutiny (Bill Bradley's health care plan was roundly criticized in its details, but it defined the debate in this year's Democratic presidential primary). The press events should be bold enough to break through a cynical press corps and capture the imagination of voters, transforming her from a "political personality" to an "issues candidate."

(2) Attach herself to a New York cause:
The carpetbagger issue is a legitimate problem that has tainted Hillary's candidacy. The best way to deal with any legitimate negative is to contain it, as opposed to wasting credibility trying to overcome it. (Did anyone believe her when she said she was a Yankees fan?) To contain the carpetbagger negative, Hillary should devote some summer time to something other than campaigning. Saving a landmark in Schenectady or a park in Buffalo, say, could win her some street credibility. Attaching herself to a New York cause would do more to demonstrate Hillary's sincerity than a hundred campaign rallies.

(3) Define Rick Lazio before he defines himself:
Many voters are still unable to offer an opinion of the substitute candidate. Yet, the same polls measuring Lazio's obscurity also reveal a rapid ascension in his vote total. In the absence of candidate debates or significant ad campaigns, it is reasonable to conclude that the only thing voters have learned about Rick Lazio is that he isn't Hillary Clinton. (According to the most recent Marist Poll, only 43 percent of Rick Lazio's supporters say that their choice is based upon positive views of him.) Consequently, the Clinton campaign is facing a strategic imperative; they must define Rick Lazio unfavorably, highlighting his controversial voting record in Congress. This will raise Lazio's negatives and tarnish his campaign before it has fully begun. And remember the words of Lee Atwater: "He who defines first, defines last."

For Lazio

by Reefer

When he entered the race two months ago amidst the whirlwind of Mayor Giuliani's departure, Rick Lazio had to contend with a desperate Republican Party. With impressive efficiency, he assembled the campaign team, chartered the bus, and secured the requisite endorsements. This zero to sixty campaign acceleration has served to ease the minds of Republican Party stalwarts, but Lazio remains an unknown to most of the voters he courts (one recent poll had him at 24 percent name recognition). In order to garner more than just the Hillary haters, Lazio needs to fine-tune his strategy over the summer months.

(1) Run for Senate, not for a series of Congressional seats:
Campaigning in a state as large and diverse as New York is no easy task. Rather than focus on strategic targeting, which might dictate a tailored message to a regional audience, Rick Lazio needs to find an inclusive statewide message, beyond Native Son, that elevates him to the level of the office he seeks. Finding a theme that engages equally the attention of every voter may be a challenge, but it will be the difference between winning and losing the votes of those who look beyond party loyalty when determining their vote. Linking his campaign to a populist issue, whether campaign finance reform, privacy protection, or a Victims' Bill of Rights, will give voters something tangible to associate him with and move beyond the politics of the City vs. the Suburbs vs. Upstate.

(2) Run on His Record:
Rick Lazio has served well in the U.S. House (a missed vote here or there notwithstanding) and has an unimpressive list of legislative accomplishments. Mrs. Clinton has already demonstrated a strategy of using Lazio's voting record to paint him as a right-wing zealot; a charge which, fair or not, has the ability to scare off moderates. The best way to diffuse these attacks, and simultaneously paint a contrast with Hillary, is for Lazio to steal her thunder and talk about each issue in light of his work in Congress. He should, with reckless honesty, give an insiders' view: the role he played passing particular pieces of legislation, the work he did in conference committees, the deals he cut and what he wished to do differently. This "Real World" approach to running on one's record would have been unthinkable six years ago, but the electorate today has warmed to government experience in their candidates and voyeurism in their entertainment.

(3) Let it Go, Lazio:
As a practice, negative campaigning is tried and true. Hillary Clinton is already running ads attacking Lazio, and Lazio has shown his willingness to respond in kind. Lazio can, and surely will, question the First Lady's position on various issues, the source of her campaign funding, and her inexperience in elected office. But when it comes to the Clinton scandals and the carpetbagger charge, Lazio would be smart to leave it to the late night talk show hosts. While conventional wisdom dictates that Lazio take Hillary's biggest negative and repeat it (and repeat it) until it sticks, there is simply no one left in America who doesn't know Hillary is new to New York. These attacks carry no new information and they have the potential to get on the collective nerve of voters, most of whom must still decide whether they like this guy.

Susan Reefer is a Republican pollster and media strategist. She is based in New York City.

 



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years