As one who actually ran twice as a candidate in the other party, I was surprised to receive a mass-mailed letter from the GOP nominee for Virginia’s Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli. He asked for my “advice and financial support immediately.”
Surprised, but not amazed. Evidently both parties think they have my support. Last year I got personally autographed (?!) photographs, suitable for framing, from both Sens. Obama and McCain. And, by the way, pleas for money.
What separated Mr. Cuccinelli’s request from the rest was the rationale he used to explain why I should send in a check, preferably a big one, along with my counsel. It had nothing to do with his qualifications for being the Commonwealth’s chief legal officer, nor for heading what amounts to an entire legal firm, not even for why he can give better advice on legal issues—all of which the Attorney General is supposed to do.
No, what came through loud and clear—emphasized five times, usually in bold face underlined type—was that electing him and his fellow candidates will rebuke the President. “A clean sweep of Virginia’s statewide offices this fall would be a clear public rebuke of Obama’s left wing agenda” (page 1). “A statewide sweep by the GOP ticket would prove to the whole country that voters are quickly souring on Barack Obama’s political agenda!” (page 3). A Cuccinelli victory would mean “[t]he whole country would witness how a strong conservative could buck the tide of Barack Obama’s agenda and win a major election” (page 4).
So that’s why we should elect someone to statewide office—to stick it to the Man in Washington?
Talk about cutting off nose to spite face: then we’d have to live with this guy in Richmond for the next four years. All I can tell about him is that he’s a conservative who doesn’t like Barack Obama…which I sort of figured anyhow.
I guess I’m old-fashioned. I thought the main reason to run for office (ambition aside) was to serve the people, not make a political statement. I thought that the abilities, skills, ideas and visions that would guide the candidate if elected were the qualities that mattered, and not what he or she thought of the current White House occupant. I also thought that elections were designed primarily to choose the best candidates for public positions, rather than to serve as public opinion polls on the President.
Tip O’Neill famously observed, “All politics is local.” The late speaker must have been old-fashioned, too. Nowadays, all politics is national. That’s what I get from Sen. Cuccinelli’s letter: Whatever happens in Virginia reflects on and results from what happens in Washington; and that’s all that matters.
But the other side of that is, the heck with Virginia. And that, in turn, implies, the heck with states.
What, then, of our federalist system that once tried to divide and balance powers and responsibilities between national and state governments? If we start electing state officials on the basis of what goes on in DC, then implicitly, states just don’t matter any more except insofar as Washington is concerned.
But isn’t that an irony? Among the strongest skeptics of federal power—George W. Bush notwithstanding—have been Republican conservatives. Yet this preoccupation with national politics and policies cedes even greater power to the Feds by saying, they’re all that count. Yet the Founders, to whom conservatives so reverently appeal, saw the importance of states as a counterbalance. For states to function as such, they need to have the best elected and appointed officials that we, the people, can find. To do that job, we really must hear about the candidates’ qualifications, talents, abilities, ideas and visions for Virginia.
And what of government? If all politics is national, and the only qualification for running is a candidate’s political agenda and the (D) or (R) after the name, what then of governance itself? What about the actual job we elect the candidate to do? It would seem, it doesn’t matter.
But, I guess I’m old-fashioned.
So what would be my advice that Mr. Cuccinelli asked? Just this—sir, tell us what you will bring to the office of Attorney General, what you would like to accomplish, and how the people of Virginia in four years would be better for your contributions. If your opponent does the same, then we can decide between your merits.
I hope that’s not too old-fashioned of me to wish.
– Column by David Cox
Share
Contributors
