Here in Washington, it's usually the straight-talking John McCain who receives attention from the media for his valuable willingness to cross partisan lines. But in some ways his ally, Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, is more indispensable. Whatever you may think of Hagel's politics, you have to admit he speaks his mind -- and bucks the official Republican line -- at moments when it really counts.
Take the GOP's coordinated attack last week on criticism of the war on terrorism. For the first time, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle raised a few unremarkable questions about Bush's conduct of the war. His Republican counterpart, Trent Lott of Mississippi, immediately issued a vicious, bullying "Red Alert" press bulletin in which he stated, "How dare Senator Daschle criticize President Bush while we are fighting our war on terrorism, especially when we have troops in the field." Representative Tom Davis and Senator Bill Frist, chairmen of the Republican House and Senate campaign committees, respectively, echoed Lott. Davis even made the outrageous claim that Daschle's comments "have the effect of giving aid and comfort to our enemies."
The next day, while the situation still was raw, Hagel was the first leading Republican to disavow these criticisms, telling CNN's Jonathan Karl that while Daschle "may have used a bit of a blunt object in some of his language the foundational part of his question was appropriate." Hagel also said, "I don't think there's any question that Senator Daschle supports the president" and was reportedly critical of Lott's statement.
It wasn't the first time Hagel has intervened in a raw and vicious partisan battle to appeal for reason.
During the recount battle in Florida, Hagel was a strong voice for moderation at a time when many on both sides of the aisle were losing control of their rational faculties. First, in mid-November 2000, he took the lead in suggesting that a statewide hand recount might be the only solution that would achieve "legitimate finality." As things dragged on and the rhetoric became increasingly out of control, Hagel also urged his Republican colleagues to remain calm, arguing that the nation needed a final verdict that would allow the winner to govern without bitter division.
After the Florida Supreme Court ordered a statewide recount on December 8, Hagel wrote a remarkable op-ed in The Washington Post calling on his fellow politicians to be "measured in our tone, our words and our actions. Inflamed partisan rhetoric will only serve to further open the rifts that divide this nation." As Hagel put it, the election was about far more than either party -- it was about "governing this diverse land and leading the world with continued credibility and confidence." Things didn't work out quite as Hagel envisioned, but his statesmanlike focus on the best interests of the country stood in stark historical contrast to the ugly, winner-take-all mentality that consumed many in both parties.
To be sure, partisanship is not unequivocally bad; indeed, it's a key part of what makes our political system work. Achievements like Medicare and Social Security were made possible by ugly, messy partisan politics. Many partisans in Congress serve their country well today.
However, far too much partisanship these days consists of appeals to emotion or outright irrationalism. Ideologues on both sides assume every action of their opponent is taken in bad faith; viciously stereotype, caricature, and ridicule them; and try systematically to distort policy debates to their advantage. None of this is new, and much of it is inherent to politics. But it has become far more pervasive, and professionalized, in recent years.
That's why we need leaders on both sides of the aisle who can rise above the slash-and-burn partisan tactics that drag down our democracy. That's why we need more Chuck Hagels.
