LOS ALTOS, Calif. — In the past two weeks, I have been mingling with voters from Jacksonville, Fla., to this suburb of San Francisco, with stops in between in Massachusetts, Connecticut and Minnesota. If there is one common complaint among them, it is the trivialization of important issues, both in campaigns and in government.
The people I met have a lot of serious concerns on their minds: a far-from-finished war on terrorism; a looming war with Iraq; a prolonged stall in economic growth that has boosted unemployment; a bust in the stock market that has wiped out trillions of dollars of retirement savings; a health-care system whose costs are spinning out of control, leaving more millions uninsured; an airline and passenger railroad system threatened with bankruptcy; a return to borrowing by the federal government, draining Social Security instead of bolstering it for the retirement needs of the baby boomers; shortfalls in state budgets that have cut programs and forced tax increases, and schools which in too many communities are failing children.
You might think all this would heighten interest in the elections just a month away — especially since even a slight shift in the balance of power could dramatically alter the agendas of the House and Senate and change the prospects for the balance of President Bush’s term.
Instead, what you find is galloping indifference and utter cynicism about the choices the ballot presents. Why? Listen to what people say.
One person I met here asked: "Why is it that when deeply serious things happen in Washington — for example, the vanishing of the federal surplus — it is as if a sitcom is changing one of its actors? No one notices."
Or this from Janice Morse, a retired computer specialist I met while door-knocking in Plainville, Conn. When I asked her about the coming congressional election in her area, one of the country’s most competitive races, Mrs. Morse turned her scorn on Congress. "They piddle away so much time on trivial things," she said. "They argue about killing mosquitoes in some swamp in Florida, when the country needs a new Medicare plan."
Anyone who has joined Mrs. Morse in glancing at C-SPAN coverage of Congress in recent weeks would likely agree with her. Forget about tackling the big issues. The House cannot even pass the basic spending bills to fund government agencies. The Senate is hung up on creating a new Department of Homeland Security by its inability to agree with the White House on language assuring workers their employment rights.
Until the resolution of support for the president on Iraq came forward, both the House and Senate were filling time on questions not much more important than Mrs. Morse’s mosquito bill.
As for the campaigns that will determine the makeup of the next Congress and the governors of 36 states, trivial is too kind a word for their content. The ads people are seeing are relentlessly negative: loaded words and nasty implications about the opposition candidate; often, never a hint as to why a voter should support the person paying for the TV spot.
Here are a couple examples from campaigns I’ve been covering of how serious issues are being twisted into cudgels for bloodying opponents.
A North Carolina Democratic Party ad against Senate candidate Elizabeth Dole, as transcribed by the political newsletter The Hotline:
Woman: "I say let Social Security stay just like it is. They will have to cut benefits if they put it in the stock market." Announcer: "That’s why Erskine Bowles is opposed to privatizing Social Security. But Elizabeth Dole still wants to gamble Social Security money in the stock market, even though it would reduce guaranteed benefits for retirees." Woman: "Without Social Security, I couldn’t make it; that’s for sure." Man: "I think somebody should tell Elizabeth Dole not to put our Social Security money in the stock market."
Or this Republican ad against Michigan gubernatorial candidate Jennifer Granholm, again transcribed by The Hotline:
A woman, shuffling many pills: "Imagine what all this costs. Staying well is really expensive. What if I got really sick? How will I afford my medication if Jennifer Granholm gets elected and lets my property taxes go up? I can make it work now, but with a Granholm property tax hike, I don’t know what I’d do. Granholm’s plans for taxes will hurt too many people. Granholm is just too big a risk."
Ads such as these — and there are thousands of them — not only distort, they disgust people seeing them. No wonder so many turned-off voters dread what the next month of trivialized politics will bring.
David Broder can be reached at The Washington Post Writers Group, 1150 15th St. NW, Washington, DC 20071-9200.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
