The sacrifice-free election strategy

Neither candidate speaks with much candor about solving the energy crisis. But the GOP will use U.S. oil drilling as a weapon against Obama.

Topics: Environment, 2008 Elections, Energy, Barack Obama, Global Warming, John McCain, R-Ariz.,

The sacrifice-free election strategy

The first thing that leaps out at you these days at John McCain’s Web site is his ballyhooed energy plan “to ensure our national security, economic prosperity and clean environment by breaking our dependence on foreign oil.” But there is a word missing in both the online summary of McCain’s “Lexington Plan” and his late June speech announcing it — the word “sacrifice.” For all of McCain’s patriotism, for all his boasting about “straight talk,” there is barely a whiff in the Arizona senator’s public comments that the wrenching transition away from Middle Eastern oil will inconvenience any American or require anything more arduous than voting Republican in November.

Barack Obama too is an honors graduate of the Political Academy of Painless Dentistry. During the Olympics, the Obama campaign has been running a gauzy ad so uplifting that it makes Ronald Reagan’s “Morning in America” seem like an Edward Hopper painting. As the TV screen glows with scenes of happy workers, the offscreen narrator buoyantly promises, “The hands that install roofs can also install solar panels. The hands that build today’s cars can also build the next generation of fuel-efficient vehicles. Barack Obama [will] … create 5 million jobs developing homegrown energy technologies.” The underlying message is that global warming and an Obama presidency will spur the biggest jobs program since Franklin Roosevelt’s WPA. As Democratic pollster Mark Mellman, who is not affiliated with the Obama campaign, explains, “One of the most important ways of positioning on global warming is to emphasize the jobs issue, since it appeals to people who you might not otherwise reach with your message.”

A major difference between Obama’s and McCain’s rhetoric on energy is that there are periodic public hints that the Democrat knows better. Delivering the commencement address at Wesleyan University in late May, Obama said with admirable candor, “On the big issues that our nation faces … some sacrifice will be required — not only from you individually, but from the nation as a whole. There is no magic bullet to our energy problems, for example, no perfect energy source.” But lines like that, oddly enough, do not seem to show up in stump speeches and TV spots.



Candor is, of course, a dangerous commodity in the middle of an election campaign. Truth-telling earns a would-be president little if it ends up costing him, say, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania — and the White House. After a Bush presidency built around the hedonistic philosophy of “damn the deficit, tax cuts ahead,” it is difficult to restore gimlet-eyed realism to political policy debates. In a speech in Harry Truman’s home town of Independence, Mo., in late June, Obama declared, “The call to sacrifice for the nation’s greater good remains an imperative of citizenship. Sadly, in recent years, in the midst of a war on two fronts, this call to service never came. After 9/11, we were asked to shop.”

Yet Obama avoids spelling out what sacrifice might entail when it comes to energy. Instead, chastened by national polls showing that roughly two-thirds of the voters favor the gimmicky nostrum of expanded offshore oil drilling, Obama backtracked from his blanket opposition. Already reeling from sticker shock at the gas pump, Americans voters are wary of, but not unalterably opposed to, further price increases for energy. An ABC News/Planet Green/Stanford University poll released last week found that 57 percent of voters would support a cap-and-trade system to limit carbon emissions by companies even if it increased the price of electricity by $10 a month. But raise the monthly cost to $25 and the constituency in favor of cap-and-trade drops to 47 percent.

The Republicans on Capitol Hill are eagerly circulating a late July memo written by pollster John McLaughlin for Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor, the deputy GOP whip. The memo, which has not previously been written about, bluntly states, “Plenty of recent media polls demonstrate that drilling for more American oil, particularly offshore drilling, has the potential to be a very effective wedge issue for Republicans as a way to reduce the price of gas.” After tapping a gusher of public polling to buttress his argument, McLaughlin concludes, “For the immediate short term, right now, forcing House Democrats to vote on drilling offshore and in wilderness areas, or exposing their refusal to hold this vote, would be a potentially strong wedge issue that would split the Democrats, win among Independents and excite the Republicans.”

Small wonder that Gene Karpinski, the president of the League of Conservation Voters, which opposes offshore drilling, says with grudging admiration, “The Republican echo chamber has done a great job on this.”

Talk of sacrifice immediately conjures up images of Jimmy Carter’s 1979 “malaise” speech, even though the president never used that foreign-sounding word. (Full disclosure: I was a Carter White House speechwriter, but I did not work on that particular address.) Reading that speech now, it seems as prescient as any Al Gore warning about global warming. “This intolerable dependence on foreign oil threatens our economic independence and the very future of our nation,” Carter said, using words that would sound contemporary coming out of Obama’s or McCain’s mouth. “The energy crisis is real. It is worldwide. It is a clear and present danger to our nation. These are the facts and we must face them.”

The mythology surrounding Carter’s speech is that his grim realism sealed his political fate. In truth, the initial reaction to the speech was positive and what doomed Carter was his follow-up gambit of purging his Cabinet, which created the image of a presidency in full Chernobyl-style meltdown. But these memories — and the political will to confront our national addiction to foreign oil — vanished amid the warm glow of the Reagan presidency. The Ten Commandments of politics now began, “Thou shalt not talk honestly to the American people about sacrifice.”

But there are hints that the American people are more sophisticated about the trade-offs over global warming and energy independence than the political handlers might believe. The recent ABC News poll found that a startling 71 percent of voters say that they are trying to personally reduce their “carbon footprint.” Granted, some respondents may have felt that this was the feel-good right answer, but still it suggests that Americans may indeed be willing to respond to energy leadership from the next president about the hard choices ahead. But any truth-telling will have to wait until after the election.

Walter Shapiro is Salon's Washington bureau chief. A complete listing of his articles is here.

More Related Stories

Featured Slide Shows

  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook
  • 1 of 11
  • Close
  • Fullscreen
  • Thumbnails
    Burger King Japan

    2014's fast food atrocities

    Burger King's black cheeseburger: Made with squid ink and bamboo charcoal, arguably a symbol of meat's destructive effect on the planet. Only available in Japan.

    Elite Daily/Twitter

    2014's fast food atrocities

    McDonald's Black Burger: Because the laws of competition say that once Burger King introduces a black cheeseburger, it's only a matter of time before McDonald's follows suit. You still don't have to eat it.

    Domino's

    2014's fast food atrocities

    Domino's Specialty Chicken: It's like regular pizza, except instead of a crust, there's fried chicken. The company's marketing officer calls it "one of the most creative, innovative menu items we have ever had” -- brain power put to good use.

    Arby's/Facebook

    2014's fast food atrocities

    Arby's Meat Mountain: The viral off-menu product containing eight different types of meat that, on second read, was probably engineered by Arby's all along. Horrific, regardless.

    KFC

    2014's fast food atrocities

    KFC'S ZINGER DOUBLE DOWN KING: A sandwich made by adding a burger patty to the infamous chicken-instead-of-buns creation can only be described using all caps. NO BUN ALL MEAT. Only available in South Korea.

    Taco Bell

    2014's fast food atrocities

    Taco Bell's Waffle Taco: It took two years for Taco Bell to develop this waffle folded in the shape of a taco, the stand-out star of its new breakfast menu.

    Michele Parente/Twitter

    2014's fast food atrocities

    Krispy Kreme Triple Cheeseburger: Only attendees at the San Diego County Fair were given the opportunity to taste the official version of this donut-hamburger-heart attack combo. The rest of America has reasonable odds of not dropping dead tomorrow.

    Taco Bell

    2014's fast food atrocities

    Taco Bell's Quesarito: A burrito wrapped in a quesadilla inside an enigma. Quarantined to one store in Oklahoma City.

    Pizzagamechangers.com

    2014's fast food atrocities

    Boston Pizza's Pizza Cake: The people's choice winner of a Canadian pizza chain's contest whose real aim, we'd imagine, is to prove that there's no such thing as "too far." Currently in development.

    7-Eleven

    2014's fast food atrocities

    7-Eleven's Doritos Loaded: "For something decadent and artificial by design," wrote one impassioned reviewer, "it only tasted of the latter."

  • Recent Slide Shows

Comments

0 Comments

Comment Preview

Your name will appear as username ( settings | log out )

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href=""> <b> <em> <strong> <i> <blockquote>