[Mb-civic] No End to the Phony Populism - E. J. Dionne - Washington Post Op-Ed

[William Swiggard]

No End to the Phony Populism

By E. J. Dionne Jr.
Friday, February 17, 2006; A19

Many people turn away from politics because so many of the players evade 
difficult questions by attacking their critics and changing the subject. 
Phony populism is the technique of choice, and it is much favored by the 
current administration.

On the same day this week, Americans were offered two examples of the 
politics of aggression and evasion. In both instances, politicians 
sought to duck hard issues by inventing an elitist enemy. In both, they 
ascribed to their adversaries views their critics don't hold, and never did.

Take, first, the case that received little attention. Campaigning at the 
Ohio headquarters of the Wendy's fast-food chain for his proposal to 
expand health savings accounts, President Bush dismissed critics who 
contend that the accounts "are not a solution for the uninsured, they're 
regressive, they favor the wealthy."

That was an accurate enough description of the opponents' criticisms, 
but then came this zinger: "It's kind of basically saying, if you're not 
making a lot of money you can't make decisions for yourself. That's kind 
of a Washington attitude, isn't it -- we'll decide for you, you can't 
figure it out yourself. I think a lot of folks here at Wendy's would 
argue that point of view is just simply backwards and not true."

But opponents of Bush's plan are not "kind of basically saying" anything 
of the sort. They want people "not making a lot of money" to have a 
chance to buy affordable health insurance. They are arguing that HSAs, 
as the accounts are known, would offer a lot of money to the most 
well-off among our fellow citizens without increasing health coverage. 
Indeed, there is good evidence, mustered this week by the liberal Center 
on Budget and Policy Priorities, that HSAs would instead lead to a net 
increase in the number of uninsured.

And, as Elisabeth Bumiller pointed out in the New York Times, a $5,000 
contribution to an HSA would have saved a couple with two children and a 
combined income of $40,000 just $630 on their 2005 federal income taxes. 
(And that assumes the couple could have afforded to put away the whole 
five grand, which is unlikely.) But a comparable couple with an income 
of $120,000 would have saved $1,500.

In other words, HSAs give the smallest benefits to those least able to 
afford health insurance. That is not exactly showing respect for those 
who are "not making a lot of money." The elitism here lies with those 
making the proposal, not with its critics.

The same phony populism was on display during Dick Cheney's more widely 
noted interview the same day on Republican State Television -- excuse 
me, Fox News -- in which the vice president tried to dismiss questions 
as to why he waited so long to tell the world he had shot Harry Whittington.

Let's let others argue about Cheney's claim that he was waiting only so 
he could put out an accurate story, and move directly to his efforts to 
change the subject.

"I had a bit of the feeling that the press corps was upset because, to 
some extent, it was about them -- they didn't like the idea that we 
called the Corpus Christi Caller-Times instead of the New York Times," 
Cheney said. "But it strikes me that the Corpus Christi Caller-Times is 
just as valid a news outlet as the New York Times is, especially for 
covering a major story in south Texas."

Now there's populist jujitsu for you. Absolutely no one is saying that 
Cheney should have leaked to the New York Times. The question is why he 
didn't make the story public, early on, for everybody, at the same time.

Cheney wanted one of his "good friends," Republican loyalist Katharine 
Armstrong, to tip off "reporters she knew" so she could put the story 
in, well, perspective. Armstrong helpfully explained to the Texas paper 
that getting shot is "a risk when any shooting sport is involved" and 
that in this instance, "Everybody behaved exactly as you would want them 
to."

By the way, the two Corpus Christi reporters who covered this, Kathryn 
Garcia and Jaime Powell, were not diverted from one of the central 
mysteries of the case: In their original story, they reported that the 
tip to their paper came "18 hours after the incident occurred."

So thank goodness there are limits to spin, but up to now, there have 
been no limits on the administration's willingness to divert attention 
from its problems through attacks on elitist straw men. The flaws in 
Bush's policy arguments will rarely make big news. But perhaps the 
reaction to an unfortunate event in south Texas's wide open spaces will 
help bring an end to phony populism by exposing it for what it is.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/16/AR2006021601554.html?nav=hcmodule
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20060217/ce6f6756/attachment-0001.htm