Sunday, May 20 , 2018, 7:21 pm | Fair 64º

 
 
 
 

Mark Shields: Heretics or Converts — Democrats Better Decide

Witch-hunters find a target in the midst of the health-care debate

What follows is a fail-safe test on whether membership in a political party is growing or shrinking: Is that party spending time, energy and effort courting and welcoming converts, or is the party hunting down heretics within its ranks to banish them for lack of purity?

Mark Shields
Mark Shields

In 1980, make no mistake about it: Republican Ronald Reagan was openly — and successfully — seeking converts who even got their own designation as “Reagan Democrats.” More recently, President Barack Obama did exactly the same as he told the nation: “There is not a liberal America and a conservative America — there is the United States of America.”

But the smashing campaign victories both Reagan and Obama won have not inhibited today’s “purists” in either party from equating dissent with disloyalty and demanding that these infidels be purged from elected office. Republicans brand the heretic who deviates from the party line a “RINO,” for a Republican in Name Only. You almost expect some conservative court-martial cross-examination of an allegedly independent Republican politician with the damning indictment: Are you now or have you ever been a maverick?

Make way for the new guys in town, the DINOs — the Democrats in Name Only. Ignoring that the Democrats largely by backing moderate (often anti-abortion and pro-gun) nominees captured 52 House seats from the Republicans in the last two elections, the witch-hunters forget the first rule of elections: Politics is a matter of addition, not subtraction.

Consider this real-life House Democrat whose culturally conservative, blue-collar district President George W. Bush twice handily carried. This Democrat voted in the House against the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, against the Bush tax-cuts, against drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, against a constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage. He earned the enmity and the campaign opposition of the National Rifle Association by voting for tighter background checks on weapons buyers at gun shows.

He was for dropping the economic embargo against Cuba and providing debt relief for beleaguered Third World countries, and against the Patriot Act and warrantless wiretapping.

Yes, he voted with his party during the past decade, according to the authoritative Congressional Quarterly, 90 percent of the time. But Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., also voted to outlaw the late-term procedure he and other opponents called “partial-birth abortion” and which the late liberal Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, D-N.Y., called “infanticide.”

But the heresy that brought down upon him the all-out opposition of Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America (formerly the National Abortion Rights Action League) and the National Organization for Women was Stupak’s successful sponsorship of the amendment to the health-care bill in the House that reinforced the prohibition of government funds to pay for abortions.

What the unequivocally pro-choice House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., understood was that without the Stupak amendment (which won the votes of 64 House Democrats), health-care reform never would have passed the House.

Stupak committed the sin of crafting a legislative compromise that eventually enabled Congress to extend health coverage to 32 million fellow Americans. But he departed from the Democratic orthodoxy.

The purist Democrats have gotten their wish. Stupak will not run for a 10th House term. Chances are good that the Democratic nominee in the enormous First District of Michigan, which includes the Upper Peninsula (the UP) and almost half the land area of the state, will be Connie Saltonstall, a pro-choice former county commissioner. Republicans are openly giddy about “flipping the seat ” to the GOP.

Stupak’s predecessor in the House was a seven-term Republican. If Republicans do win the UP seat in 2010, then the House Democratic caucus will have lost a dependable and effective ally. But the Democratic purists will have proved their purity and that hunting down heretics can be more emotionally satisfying than seeking converts.

Mark Shields is one of the most widely recognized political commentators in the United States. The former Washington Post editorial columnist appears regularly on CNN, on public television and on radio. Click here to contact him.

Support Noozhawk Today

You are an important ally in our mission to deliver clear, objective, high-quality professional news reporting for Santa Barbara, Goleta and the rest of Santa Barbara County. Join the Hawks Club today to help keep Noozhawk soaring.

We offer four membership levels: $5 a month, $10 a month, $25 a month or $1 a week. Payments can be made through PayPal below, or click here for information on recurring credit-card payments.

Thank you for your vital support.

Become a Supporter

Enter your email
Select your membership level
×

Payment Information

You are purchasing:

Payment Method

Pay by Credit Card:

Mastercard, Visa, American Express, Discover

Pay with Apple Pay or Google Pay:

Noozhawk partners with Stripe to provide secure invoicing and payments processing.

  • Ask
  • Vote
  • Investigate
  • Answer

Noozhawk Asks: What’s Your Question?

Welcome to Noozhawk Asks, a new feature in which you ask the questions, you help decide what Noozhawk investigates, and you work with us to find the answers.

Here’s how it works: You share your questions with us in the nearby box. In some cases, we may work with you to find the answers. In others, we may ask you to vote on your top choices to help us narrow the scope. And we’ll be regularly asking you for your feedback on a specific issue or topic.

We also expect to work together with the reader who asked the winning questions to find the answer together. Noozhawk’s objective is to come at questions from a place of curiosity and openness, and we believe a transparent collaboration is the key to achieve it.

The results of our investigation will be published here in this Noozhawk Asks section. Once or twice a month, we plan to do a review of what was asked and answered.

Thanks for asking!

Click Here to Get Started >

Reader Comments

Noozhawk is no longer accepting reader comments on our articles. Click here for the announcement. Readers are instead invited to submit letters to the editor by emailing them to [email protected]. Please provide your full name and community, as well as contact information for verification purposes only.

Daily Noozhawk

Subscribe to Noozhawk's A.M. Report, our free e-Bulletin sent out every day at 4:15 a.m. with Noozhawk's top stories, hand-picked by the editors.

Sign Up Now >