Glenn Harlan Reynolds: It's the follow-through that matters in New York's special race
By: Glenn Harlan Reynolds
Sunday Reflections Contributor
October 31, 2009
Next week's special congressional election in New York's 23rd Congressional District seems to have the entire political class in an uproar. Mainstream Republican pols like former House Speaker Newt Gingrich are afraid it portends a grass-roots revolt, or, worse, a third party for 2012.
Surging tea partiers hope it represents an opportunity to make mainstream Republican pols take them seriously. Democrats are afraid it means a lost seat, and perhaps a tidal wave of popular energy on the right. And all of this has a lot of people focusing on what happens on Tuesday.
But, in fact, what happens Tuesday is the least important thing about NY-23.
Whether it's the official Republican candidate, Dede Scozzafava (whom many Republicans find too liberal), the insurgent Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman, or the Democrat, Bill Owens, Tuesday's victor will have to face another election in just a year. A Democrat won't expand Nancy Pelosi's majority significantly, and a Republican or Conservative won't diminish it enough to matter. For all practical purposes, it won't change Congress.
The real game changer, if any, will be what comes after the election.
The GOP establishment is worried -- rightly -- about the risk of a Perot-style insurgency in 2012. Ross Perot's 1992 candidacy tapped authentic populist dissatisfaction and anger, even as it doomed the Republicans and handed the White House to Bill Clinton. Nobody in the GOP wants to go down that road again.
On the other hand, the populist dissatisfaction and anger is out there again, and it has been for a while. Unhappy over immigration and spending, key parts of the GOP base stayed home in 2006 and 2008. They're even unhappier with Obama, but that unhappiness hasn't translated into a lot of enthusiasm for a Republican Party that many see as nearly as corrupt and elitist as the Democrats.
Though the media and the Democratic Party tried to portray the Tea Party movement as Republican-organized "astroturf," the GOP only wishes that were the case. Tea Partiers are still reachable by the GOP, but if the GOP mishandles things, a Perot-style challenge is very possible.
If Hoffman wins, or even hands the election to Democrat Bill Owens, the grass-roots activists will feel that they've sent a message, and will watch to see if the GOP establishment responds. If the GOP plays its cards right, and indicates that it's received the message that people want a hard line on spending and corruption and smaller government, that energy can be harnessed and put toward the 2010 elections. If it seems, on the other hand, that the GOP still doesn't get it, and if the response is condescending or dismissive, then, well, anything can happen.
If Scozzafava manages to eke out a victory, meanwhile, GOP leaders may be tempted to dismiss the grass-roots anger altogether. This is understandable, but they'd be better off remembering how nervous it made them, and taking steps to address those concerns, rather than dismissing them.
Likewise, if Tea Partiers get too carried away and full of themselves -- like the Nader Democrats of 2000 -- they will wind up handing the elections to people they really don't want running the country. The third-party threat is a good way to get the GOP establishment's attention, but, as they say, the value of the sword of Damocles is that it hangs, not that it falls. Like a nuclear deterrent, it's a threat that's best not employed.
Washington Republicans need to recognize that their constituencies outside the Beltway have been unhappy with them for years, and they need to change their ways to re-establish trust. Ultimately, it's not enough to say that the Democrats are worse. They have to stand for something besides a simple return to power.
For the grass roots, meanwhile, my advice is this: Remember that all politics is local. Got a local Republican officeholder that you don't like? Run against 'em in the primary. Even if you lose (and you probably, but not certainly, will) you'll get their attention.
And look at your local party apparatus. Everybody focuses on national stuff, but getting involved in your state or local party is very easy -- usually, all you have to do is show up. And even a few dozen committed people can make a difference in a congressional district. Party politics at the local level doesn't get a lot of attention, especially in between presidential elections, which means that those who do pay attention can have a lot of influence.
Most importantly, the future of the Republican Party and the Tea Party grass roots will be determined by whether the response to NY-23 is mutually respectful, or mutually dismissive. To my mind, it's more important that people not divide into permanently warring camps than that anything in particular happen in this election.
The nice thing about NY-23 is that it's an opportunity to send a message at low cost, but the cost won't be low if it produces long-running enmity. Instead, it should be a spur for people to get involved in politics at the state and local level now, rather than complaining about the nominees later.
Like it or not (and my guess is that neither likes it very much) the grass roots and the party apparatus are probably better off hanging together than hanging separately. Against an entrenched Democratic Party with control of the presidency, the bureaucracy, the Congress, and the mainstream media, both are better off agreeing to disagree on some issues, while working together on others. That's what winning coalitions do.
Examiner Contributor Glenn Harlan Reynolds is a University of Tennessee College of Law professor who blogs at InstaPundit.com and hosts "InstaVision" on PJTV.com.
Follow The Examiner
