IT’S TIME TO PLAY “Grade the Democrats.” Four prominent Democrats–who are coincidentally all thinking of running for president–have delivered ambitious policy speeches in the past three weeks. Responsible citizens will want to know what is on their minds (without having to actually sit through the speeches themselves). Using the foolproof technology of the Pericleator, a device that measures speech quality, The Weekly Standard has evaluated the addresses. The machine divides the evaluation into four categories and gives a 1-10 rating for each: Wolf Factor: Does the speech contain at least one novel concept such as would attract the attention of Wolf Blitzer and other media gatekeepers? Bartlett’s Quotient: How good are the speech’s soundbites? Kuhnian Paradigm Points: Are there any daring policy ideas that could give the speaker a reputation for being a creative New Paradigm thinker? New-Nixon Identity Reformulation Score: Does the speech upset preconceived notions about the speaker? The Pericleator is a nonpartisan machine. It evaluates speeches for intelligence and presentation. It does not endorse or reject specific policy options. “America’s Economy: Rising To Our New Challenges” by Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle January 4, 2002 Wolf Factor: Daschle’s theme in this speech is that the Democrats are the party of fiscal responsibility, while the Republicans are fiscally reckless. Daschle argues that Democrats are happy to embrace the principle of tax cuts, just not the sort of deficit-busting tax cut the administration rammed through Congress last year. Daschle’s bold attack on the Bush tax cut earns him high Wolf points, especially since 12 Democrats supported the cuts. But in failing to call for a repeal of the tax cut, Daschle invites instant ridicule from the commentariat. Deduct points for cowardice and incoherence. On balance: 6 points. Bartlett’s Quotient: As prose, the speech is pedestrian, as befits Sen. Daschle’s modest demeanor. (Message to speechwriter: If you are going to include stirring sentences such as “The highly successful Nunn-Lugar program should be extended to India and Pakistan,” please explain what Nunn-Lugar is.) 2 points. Kuhnian Paradigm Points: Daschle tries to put the burden of coming up with new ideas on the administration: “I am asking the president today to submit to Congress not simply a one-year budget proposal, but a long-term plan to restore economic growth.” His own ideas include doubling civilian funding for R&D programs such as the National Science Foundation and supporting the idea of Trade Adjustment Assistance, which would retrain workers hurt by free trade, help them keep their health insurance, and compensate them for future wage losses–a potentially mammoth program. This is big-government daring dressed up as modest tinkering. 7 points. New-Nixon Identity Reformulation Score: Daschle underlines our preconceptions. He has the beak of a budget hawk but the blubbery heart of a big-spending liberal. A neat combination if the creature can fly. 5 points. Daschle total: 20 points. “Winning the Wider War Against Terrorism” by Sen. Joe Lieberman January 14, 2002 Wolf Factor: Lieberman calls on the country to “launch a long-term geopolitical and ideological initiative–akin to the great campaign that won the Cold War.” Lieberman says the strategy must: Complete the stabilization of Afghanistan and the destruction of al Qaeda. Force Syria and Iran to end support for Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. On the positive side, the United States should support democratic reforms and gender equality in the Arab world. Open Muslim economies with free trade pacts. Refund Radio Free Europe-type public education efforts. In short, Lieberman sketches out an ambitious global initiative. The speech did not win much press attention, though fault lies mostly with the media: 8 points. Bartlett’s Quotient: Lieberman quotes Churchill, MacArthur, and Gibbon and occasionally tries to piggyback on their eloquence: “Today, from Iraq in the Persian Gulf to terrorist camps in the mountains of Central Asia, from the sands of Somalia, Sudan and Saudi Arabia to cells in Singapore and Indonesia and Hamburg and London, the fanatical forces of Jihad are trying to build a ‘theological iron curtain’ to divide the Muslim world from the rest of the globe–a Berlin Wall made from poverty and tyranny, and cemented by the mortar of hatred and violence.” 6 points. Kuhnian Paradigm Points: Lieberman gets credit for boldness in supporting unilateral action if necessary: “Of course it is better to build coalitions and act collaboratively, . . . but in this case, the unique threat to American security [posed] by Saddam Hussein’s regime is so real, grave, and imminent that, even if no other nation were to stand with us, we must be prepared to act alone.” 8 points. New-Nixon Identity Reformulation Score: After wandering in the mushy wilderness while arm-in-arm with Al Gore, Lieberman repositions himself as the second coming of Scoop Jackson. He fixes himself as the rightward star in the Democratic firmament. 8 points. Lieberman total: 30 points. “Energy Security is American Security” by Sen. John F. Kerry January 22, 2002 Wolf Factor: Kerry attempts to lay out a realistic but bold energy strategy–one that is neither enviro-loony nor wedded to the status quo. The strategy, he says, should not reduce economic growth or diminish quality of life. It should be based on the realistic assumption that for the next 30 to 50 years, the United States will have to rely on fossil fuels. Nonetheless, Kerry believes the United States should begin the transition to cheaper, renewable, and abundant energy–a revolution akin to the computer revolution. He says America should set a goal of producing 20 percent of its energy from alternative and renewable sources by the year 2020. To do that, he supports shifting federal subsidies from oil and gas to wind, solar, and other alternatives. He supports tightening CAFE standards to force auto companies to improve fuel efficiency on SUVs. He supports federal subsidies in fuel cell research and clean coal technology. This is the sort of big approach that establishes Kerry as a serious spokesman on the issue. 8 points. Bartlett’s Quotient: John F. Kerry echoes a certain challenge the other JFK made to put a man on the moon, but doesn’t aspire to eloquence. “I say the most responsible thing we can do is tap America’s strengths, our markets, our ingenuity, our invention, our innovation and most importantly, our values to control our destiny and begin a long evolution to an energy world that benefits our security, our economy, and our environment.” He’s wordy. 4 points. Kuhnian Paradigm Points: It is a big plan. It does encompass a multi-decade vision. It does offer a plausible road map. 8 points. New-Nixon Identity Reformulation Score: Kerry goes to extraordinary lengths to show he is no New England solar-energy granola muncher: “Let me be clear. In offering these suggestions today, I am not proposing that we all drive small. I am not proposing that we mandate the use of public transit. I am not proposing that we somehow reduce our freedom to travel.” He also stirs in a nice bit of foreign policy toughness–choke off the politically toxic Gulf states–into the mix. 8 points. Kerry total: 28 points. “The Long Look Ahead” by Rep. Richard Gephardt January 24, 2002 Wolf Factor: Gephardt says it is pointless to rehash the debate about the Bush tax cuts. The cuts have passed and it is foolish to mess with them during a recession. Instead, he suggests that the president convene a bipartisan economic growth summit at the White House (call Dick Darman!). At the summit, Gephardt says, leaders could discuss an “Apollo Project” to develop renewable energy solutions. He offers less detail than Kerry, but puts more emphasis on fuel cell vehicles. He says the United States should also double its investment in information technology but doesn’t say who should do this or how. He also supports a slew of tax credits and deductions–for pension savings, for college tuition, for home purchases, for university-business partnerships, and such. He supports a homeland security trust fund to help states pay for security, and a federal program to detect nuclear weapons material. In short, Gephardt is all over the map offering a promiscuous grab bag of policy ideas. There’s no theme and little punch. 4 points. Bartlett’s Quotient: “For all the uncertainty we face today, I would bet there are few Americans who would trade living in this time and place with anybody else.” This doesn’t pass for eloquence even by floor speech standards. 2 points. Kuhnian Paradigm Points: Some of the ideas Gephardt endorses are relatively novel. He suggests merging the different private pension programs into one portable, national system. But most of his ideas are familiar or suddenly chic–such as his proposal to study ways the government can bring broadband to households at an affordable price. 4 points. New-Nixon Identity Reformulation Score: Gephardt delivered the speech in front of the Democratic Leadership Council. This clearly is meant to signal his return to the center of the party after he spent the past decade squarely in the union camp. By rejecting Teddy Kennedy’s call to freeze the Bush tax cuts, Gephardt does move in that direction. Nonetheless, the speech doesn’t offer enough intellectual substance to reposition Gephardt one way or the other. It’s the speech of a legislator, not a visionary. 5 points. Gephardt total: 15 points. David Brooks is a senior editor at The Weekly Standard.
